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

Enter either the ID of an entry, or one or more words to find. The first match in each paragraph is shown; click on the line of text to see the full paragraph.

Currently only Chalmers’ Biographical Dictionary is indexed, terms are not stemmed, and diacritical marks are retained.

, an English writer, was a wine merchant at Wrexham, in Denbighshire, a man of learning,

, an English writer, was a wine merchant at Wrexham, in Denbighshire, a man of learning, great humanity, of an easy fortune, and much respected. He published in 1737, “Eugenio, or virtuous and happy life,” 4to, a poem inscribed to Pope, and by no means destitute of poetical merit. He submitted it in manuscript to Swift, who wrote him a long and very candid letter, now printed in his works, and Mr. Beach adopted Swift’s corrections. He is said to have entertained very blameable notions in religion, but his friends endeavoured to vindicate him from this charge, when his death took place, May 17, 1737, precipitated by his own hand.

ingly praised for having adopted the measure of Spenser, because he had the happy enthusiasm of that writer to support and render it agreeable; but objections were made

Although Mr. Beattie had apparently withdrawn his claims as a poet, by cancelling as many copies of his juvenile attempts as he could procure, he was not so inconscious of his admirable talents, as to relinquish what was an early and favourite pursuit, and in which he had probably passed some of his most delightful hours. A few months ;;fter the appearance of the “Essay on Truth,” he published the “First Book of the Minstrel,” in 4to, but without his name. By this omission, the poem was examined with all that rigour of criticism which may be expected in the case of a work, for which the author’s name can neither afford protection or apology. He was accordingly praised for having adopted the measure of Spenser, because he had the happy enthusiasm of that writer to support and render it agreeable; but objections were made to the limitation of his plan to the profession of the Minstrel, when so much superior interest might be excited by carrying him on through the practice of it. These objections appear to have coincided with the author’s re-consideration; and he not only adopted various alterations recommended by his friends, particularly Mr. Gray, but introduced others, which made the subsequent editions of this poem far more perfect than the first.

ears in every page, and, which it tie, the most agreeable and amiable very rare, we see not only the writer, writer 1 ever met with the only au-but the man and the man

* Cowper’s praise of this volume, ts his ease too, that his own character too valuable to be omitted “Beat-appears in every page, and, which it tie, the most agreeable and amiable very rare, we see not only the writer, writer 1 ever met with the only au-but the man and the man so gentle, thor I have seen whose critical and so well tempered, so happy in his rephilosophical researches are diversified ligion, and so humane in his philosoand embellished by a poetical imagi-phy, that it is necssary to love him if nation, that makes even the driest one has any sense of what is lovely.” subject, and the leanest, a feast for an Hayley’s Life of Cowper, vol. III. epicure in boks. He is Bo much at p. 247. to present to thd public, in a correct and somewhat enlarged form, the abstract which he used to dictate to his scholars. Accordingly, in 1790, he published “Elements of Moral Science,” vol. I. 8vo, including psychology, or perceptive faculties and active powers; and natural theology, with two appendices on the Incorporeal Nature and on the Immortality of the Soul. The second volume was published in 1793; containing ethics, economics, politics, and logic. All these subjects are necessarily treated in a summary manner; but it will be found sufficiently comprehensive, not only for a text-book, or book of elements, which was the professed intention of the author, but also as an excellent aid to the general reader who may not have an opportunity of attending regular lectures, and yet wishes to reap some of the advantages of regular education.

, a French miscellaneous writer, was born at Paris in 1689, and died in that metropolis in 1761.

, a French miscellaneous writer, was born at Paris in 1689, and died in that metropolis in 1761. He wrote, 1. “The Loves of Ismene & Isménias,1743, 8vo, a free translation of a Greek romance by Eustathius, or rather Eumathius, who must not be confounded with Eustathius the grammarian, and author of the commentary on Homer. It contains interesting adventures, in that species of epic poetry in prose which partakes at once of the tragic and comic vein. A beautiful edition of it was published at Paris in 1797, 4to, with illuminated prints. 2. “The loves of Rhodantes & Docicles,” another Greek romance by Theodorus Prodromus, translated into French, 1746, 12mo. 3. “Recherches sur les Theatres de France,1735, 4to, and 8vo, 3 vols. Beauchamps did not confine himself to the titles of the dramatical pieces: he has added particulars of the lives of some of the French comedians; but he has omitted a number of interesting anecdotes, with which he might have embellished his work. It were to be wished that he had developed the taste of the former ages of the French for dramatic representations, the art and the progress of tragedy and comedy from the time of Jodelle; the genius of the French poets, and their manner of imitating the ancients. But Beauchamps, in this work, is little more than a compiler, and that from well-known materials. 4. “Lettres d‘Heloise & d’Abailard,” in French verse, fluent enough, but prosaic, 1737, 8vo. 5. “Several theatrical performances.” 6. The romance of “FuDestine,1757.

wo chaplains, and three women, who appear to have been hospital nuns. It appears also, says the same writer, that he prepared himself with resignation and contrition for

, bishop of Winchester, and cardinal priest of the church of Rome, was the son of John of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster, by his third wife, Catherine S win ford. He studied for some years both at Cambridge and at Oxford, in the latter in Queen’s college, and was afterwards a benefactor to University and Lincoln colleges, but he received the principal part of his education at Aix la Chapelle, where he was instructed in civil and common law. Being of royal extraction, he was very young when advanced to the prelacy, and was made bishop of Lincoln in 1397, by an arbitrary act of Boniface IX. John Beckingham, bishop of that see, being, contrary to his wishes, translated to Lichfield, to make room for Beaufort, but Beckingham, with becoming spirit, refused the proffered diocese, and chose to become a private monk of Canterbury. In 1399 Beaufort was chancellor of the university of Oxford, and at the same time dean of Wells. He was lord high chancellor of England in 1404, and in some years afterwards. The following year, upon the death of the celebrated Wykeham, he was, at the recommendation of the king, translated to the see of Winchester. In 1414, the second of his nephew Henry V. he went to France, as one of the royal ambassadors, to demand in marriage Catherine, daughter of Charles VI. In 1417 he lent the king twenty thousand pounds (a prodigious sum in those days), towards carrying on his expedition against France, but had the crown in pawn as a security for the money. This year also he took a journey to the Holy Land and in his way, being arrived at Constance, where a general council was held, he exhorted the prelates to union and agreement in the election of a pope; and his remonstrances contributed not a little to hasten the preparations for the conclave, in which Martin III. was elected. We have no farther account of what happened to our prelate in this expedition. In 1421, he had the honour to be godfather, jointly with John duke of Bedford, and Jacqueline, countess of Holland, to prince Henry, eldest son of his nephew Henry V. and Catherine of France, afterwards Henry VI. M. Aubery pretends, that James, king of Scots, who had been several years a prisoner in England, owed his deliverance to the bishop of Winchester, who prevailed with the government to set him free, on condition of his marrying his niece, the granddaughter of Thomas Beaufort, earl of Somerset. This prelate was one of king Henry Vlth’s guardians during his minority; and in 1424, the third of the young king’s reign, he was a fourth time lord-chancellor of England. There were perpetual jealousies and quarrels, the cause of which is not very clearly explained, between the bishop of Winchester, and the protector, Humphrey duke of Gloucester, which ended in the ruin and death of the latter. Their dissensions began to appear publicly in 1425, and to such a height, that Beaufort thought it necessary to write a letter to his nephew the duke of Bedford, regent of France, which is extant in Holinshed, desiring his presence in England, to accommodate matters between them. The regent accordingly arriving in England the 20th of December, was met by the bishop of Winchester with a numerous train, and soon after convoked an assembly of the nobility at St. Alban’s, to hear and determine the affair. But the animosity on this occasion was so great on both sides, that it was thought proper to refer the decision to the parliament, which was to be held at Leicester, March 25, following. The parliament being met, the duke of Gloucester produced six articles of accusation against the bishop, who answered them severally, and a committee appointed for the purpose, having examined the allegations, he was acquitted. The duke of Bedford, however, to give some satisfaction to the protector, took away the great seal from his uncle. Two years after, the duke of Bedford, returning into France, was accompanied to Calais by the bishop of Winchester, who, on the 25th of March, received there with great solemnity, in the church of Our Lady, the cardinal’s hat, with the title of St. Eusebius, sent him by pope Martin V. In September 1428, the new cardinal returned into England, with the character of the pope’s legate lately conferred on him; and in his way to London, he was met by the lord-mayor, aldermen, and the principal citizens on horseback, who conducted him with great honour and respect to his lodgings in Southwark; but he was forced, for the present, to wave his legatine power, being forbidden the exercise of it by a proclamation published in the king’s name. Cardinal Beaufort was appointed, by the pope’s bull, bearing date March 25, 1427-8, his holiness’s legate in Germany, and general of the crusade against the Hussites, or Heretics of Bohemia. Having communicated the pope’s intentions to the parliament, he obtained a grant of money, and a considerable body of forces, under certain restrictions; but just as he was preparing to embark, the duke of Bedford having sent to demand a supply of men for the French war, it was resolved in council, that cardinal Beaufort should serve under the regent, with the troops of the crusade, to the end of the month of December, on condition that they should not be employed in any siege. The cardinal complied, though not without reluctance, and accordingly joined the duke of Bedford at Paris. After a stay of forty-five days in France, he marched into Bohemia, where he conducted the crusade till he was recalled by the pope, and cardinal Julian sent in his place with a larger army. The next year, 1430, the cardinal accompanied king Henry into France, being invested with the title of the king’s principal counsellor, and bad the honour to perform the ceremony of crowning the young monarch irt the church of Notre Dame at Paris; where he had some dispute with James du Chastellier, the archbishop, who claimed the right of officiating on that occasion. During his stay in France he was present at the congress of Arras for concluding a peace between the kings of England and France, and had a conference for that purpose with the dutchess of Burgundy, between Calais and Gravelines, which had no effect, and was remarkable only for the cardinal’s magnificence, who came thither with a most splendid train. In the mean time the duke of Gloucester took advantage in England of the cardinal’s absence to give him fresh mortification. For, first, having represented to the council, that the bishop of Winchester intended to leave the king, and come back into England to resume his seat in council, in order to excite new troubles in the kingdom, and that his intentions were the more criminal, as he made use of the pope’s authority to free himself from the obligations of assisting the king in France; he procured an order of council forbidding all the king’s subjects, of what condition soever, to accompany the cardinal, if he should leave the king, without express permission. The next step the protector took against him, was an attempt to deprive him of his bishopric, as inconsistent with the dignity of cardinal; but the affair having been a long time debated in council, it was resolved that the cardinal should be heard, and the judges consulted, before any decision. Being returned into England, he thought it necessary to take some precaution against these repeated attacks, and prevailed with the king, through the' intercession of the commons, to grant him letters of pardon for all offences by him committed contrary to the statute of provisors, and other acts of prsemunire. This pardon is dated at Westminster, July 19, 1432. Five years after, he procured another pardon under the great-seal for all sorts of crimes whatever, from the creation of the world to the 26th of July 1437. Notwithstanding these precautions, the duke of Gloucester, in 1442, drew up articles of impeachment against the cardinal, and presented them with his own hands to the king, but the council appointed to examine them deferred their report so long that rhe protector discontinued the prosecution. The cardinal died June 14, 1447, having survived the duke of Gloucester not above a mouth, of whose murder he was suspected to have been one of the contrivers, and it is said that he expressed great uneasiness at the approach of death, and died in despair; but for this there does not appear much foundation, and we suspect the commonlyreceived character of Beaufort is mostly credited by those who have considered Shakspeare as an authentic historian. We rather agree with the historian of Winchester, that there is no solid ground for representing him as that ambitious, covetous, and reprobate character which Shakspeare has represented, and who has robbed his memory, in order to enrich that of his adversary, popularly termed the “good duke Humphrey” of Gloucester. Being involved in the vortex of worldly politics, it is true, that he gave too much scope to the passions of the great, and did not allow himself sufficient leisure to attend to the spiritual concerns of his diocese. He possessed, however, that munificent spirit, which has cast a lustre on the characters of many persons of past times, whom it would be difficult otherwise to present as objects of admiration. It he was rich, it must be admitted that he did not squander away his money upon unworthy pursuits, but chiefly employed it in the public service, to the great relief of the subjects, with whom, and with the commons’ house of parliament, he was popular. He employed his wealth also in finishing the magnificent cathedral of Winchester, which was left incomplete by his predecessor, in repairing Hyde-abbey, relieving prisoners, and other works of charity. But what, Dr. Milner says, has chiefly redeemed the injured character of cardinal Beaufort, in Winchester and its neighbourhood, is the new foundation which he made of the celebrated hospital of St. Cross. Far the greater part of the present building was raised by him, and he added to the establishment of his predecessor, Henry de Blois, funds for the support of thirty-five more brethren, two chaplains, and three women, who appear to have been hospital nuns. It appears also, says the same writer, that he prepared himself with resignation and contrition for his last end; and the collected, judicious, and pious dispositions made in his testament, the codicil of which was signed but two days before his dissolution, may justly bring into discredit the opinion that he died in despair. He was buried at Winchester in the most eleg-ant and finished chantry in the kingdom.

, a French dramatic writer of modern celebrity, was born at Paris, Jan. 24, 1732. His father

, a French dramatic writer of modern celebrity, was born at Paris, Jan. 24, 1732. His father was a watchmaker, and at the age of twenty-one himself invented an improvement in watchmaking, which being contested by an eminent artist, was decided in favour of young Beaumarchais by the academy of sciences. Being passionately fond of music, and especially of the harp, he introduced some improvements in this instrument, which, with his excellent performance, gained him admittance to Mesdames, the daughters of Louis XV. to give them lessons, and this was the origin of his fortune. He lost two wives successively, and then gained three considerable law-suits. The papers which he published concerning each of these causes, excited great attention. He had also an affair of honour with a duke, in consequence of which he was sent to Fort L‘Eve’que. He was afterwards employed in some political transactions by the ministers Maurepas and Vergennes. He supported the scheme for the caisse d'escompte, or bank of discount, which he vainly thought to have made a rival to that of England: but he was more successful, although after much opposition, in procuring the adoption of a scheme for a fire-pump to supply the city of Paris with water. A plan, also, concerning poor women, was executed at Lyons, and gained him the thanks of the merchants of that city. After the death of Voltaire, he purchased the whole of his manuscripts, and not being able to print them in France, established a press at Kell, where they were printed in a very magnificent manner with Baskerville’s types.

, a French writer of some note, was born at Valleraugues, in the diocese of Allais,

, a French writer of some note, was born at Valleraugues, in the diocese of Allais, in 1727, and died at Paris Nov. 1773. Being invited to Denmark as professor of the French belles-lettres, he opened this course of literature by a discourse that was printed in 1751, and well received. Having always lived in the south of France, a residence in the north could hardly agree with him, but he was held in such esteem, that he quitted Denmark with the title of privy-counsellor and a pension. Stopping at Berlin, he was desirous of forming an intimacy with Voltaire, with whose writings he was much captivated; but, both being of irritable and impetuous characters, they had no sooner seen each other than they quarrelled, without hope of reconciliation. The history of this quarrel, which gave rise to so many personalities and invectives, is characteristic of both parties. A reflection in a publication of la Beaumelle, entitled “Mes Pensees,” was the first cause of it. This work, very studiously composed, but written with too much boldness, procured the author many enemies; and, on his arrival at Paris in 1753, he was imprisoned in the Bastille. No sooner was he let out, than he published his “Memoirs of Main ­tenon,” which drew on him a fresh detention in that royal prison. La Beaumelle, having obtained his liberty, retired into the country, where he put in practice the lessons he had given to Voltaire, in the following letter: “Well, then, we are once more at liberty; let us revenge ourselves on these misfortunes by rendering them of use to us. Let us lay aside all those literary infirmities which have spread so many clouds over the course of your life, so much bitterness over my youthful years. A little more glory, a little more opulence: What does it all signify? Let us seek the reality of happiness, and not its shadow. The most shining reputation is never worth what it costs. Charles V. sighs after retirement; Ovid wishes to be a fool. We are once more free. I am out of the Bastille; you are no longer at court. Let us make the best use of a benefit that may be snatched from us at every moment. Let us entertain a distant respect for that greatness which is so dangerous to those that come near it, and that authority, so terrible even to them that exercise it; and, if it be true that we cannot venture to think without risk, let us think no more. Do the pleasur.es of reflection counterbalance those of safety? Let us be persuaded, you, after sixty years of experience; me, after six months of annihilation. Let us be wiser, or at least more prudent; and the wrinkles of age, and the remembrance of bolts and bars, those injuries of time and power, will prove real benefits to us.

” which is inferior to that which the president de Montesquieu published himself, but for which that writer expressed his thanks. 2. “Mes Pense*es, ou, Le Qu'en dira-t-on?”

He now cultivated literature in peace, and settled himself in the comforts of domestic life by marrying the daughter of M. Lavaisse, an advocate of great practice at Thoulouse. A lady of the court called him to Paris about the year 1772, and wished to fix him there, by procuring him the place of librarian to the king; but he did not long enjoy this* promotion; a dropsy in the chest proved fatal the following yean. He left a son and a daughter. His works are: 1. “A Defence of Montesquieu’s ' Esprit des Loix,” against the author of the “Nouvelles Ecclesiastiques,” which is inferior to that which the president de Montesquieu published himself, but for which that writer expressed his thanks. 2. “Mes Pense*es, ou, Le Qu'en dira-t-on?1751, 12mo; a book which has not kept up its reputation, though containing a great deal of wit; but the author in his politics is often wide of the truth, and allows himself too decisive a style in literature and morals. The passage in this book which embroiled him with Voltaire is this: “There have been better poets than Voltaire; but none have been ever so well rewarded. The king of Prussia heaps his bounty on men of talents exactly from the same motives as induce a petty prince of Germany to heap his bounty on a buffoon or a dwarf.” 3. “The <f Memoirs of Madame de Maintenon,1756, 6 vols. 12mo. which were followed by 9 vols. of letters. In this work many facts are given on conjecture, and others disfigured; nor is Madame de Maintenon made to think and speak as she either thought or spoke. The style has neither the propriety nor the dignity that is proper to history, but the author occasionally writes with great animation and energy, discovering at times the precision and the force of Tacitus, of whose annals he left a translation in manuscript. He had bestowed much study on that philosophic historian, and sometimes is successful in the imitation of his manner. 4. “Letters to M. de Voltaire,1761, 12mo, containing sarcastic remarks on Voltaire’s “Age of Louis XIV.” Voltaire refuted these remarks in a pamphlet entitled “Supplement to the age of Louis XIV.” in which he shews it to be an odious thing to seize upon a work on purpose to disfigure it. La Beaumelle in 1754 gave out an “Answer to this Supplement,” which he re-produced in 1761, under the title of “Letters.” To this Voltaire made no reply; but shortly after stigmatized it in company with several others, in his infamous poem the “Pucelle,” where he describes la Beaumelle as mistaking the pockets of other men for his own. The writer, thus treated, endeavoured to cancel the calumny by a decree of the parliament of Thoulouse but other affairs prevented him from pursuing this. Voltaire, however, had some opinion of his talents; and the writer of this article has seen a letter of his in which he says’: “Ce pendard a bien de Pesprit.” “The rascal has a good deal of wit.” La Beaumelle, on the other hand, said: “Personne n'ecrit mieux que Voltaire.” “No one writes better than Voltaire.” Yet these mutual acknowledgments of merit did not prevent their passing a considerable part of their life in mutual abuse. The abb Irail informs us, that la Beaumelle being one day asked why he was continually attacking Voltaire in his books “Because,” returned he, “he never spares me in his and my books sell the better for it.” It is said, however, that la Beaumelle would have left off writing against the author of the Henriade; and even would have been reconciled with him, had he not imagined that it would be impossible to disarm his wrath, and therefore he preferred war to an insecure peace. 5. “Penses de Seneque,” in Latin and French, in 12mo, after the manner of the “Pensees de Ciceron,” by the abbe d'Olivet, whom he has rather imitated than equalled. 6. “Commentaire sur la Henriade,” Paris, 1775, 2 vols. 8vo. Justice and taste are sometimes discernible in this performance, but too much severity and too many minute remarks. 7. A manuscript translation of the Odes of Horace. 8. “Miscellanies,” also in ms. among which are some striking pieces. The author had a natural bent towards satire. His temper was frank and honest, but ardent and restless. Though his conversation was instructive, it had not that liveliness which we perceive in his writings.

ing in 1615, and of these at least three were poetical the master of the Charter-house, the dramatic writer, and Francis Beaumont, a Jesuit.

, third son of Francis, the judge, was born at Grace-Dieu, in Leicestershire, 1586; and in the beginning of Lent term 1596, was admitted (with his two brothers Henry and John) a gentleman commoner of Broadgate’s-hall, now Pembroke-college, Oxford. Anthony Wood, who refers his education to Cambridge, mistakes him for his cousin Francis, master of the Charterhouse, who died in 1624. It is remarkable, that there were four Francis Beaumonts of this family, all living in 1615, and of these at least three were poetical the master of the Charter-house, the dramatic writer, and Francis Beaumont, a Jesuit.

ce, which are to be experienced within the walls of a theatre, and compose the history of a dramatic writer.

How his life was spent, his works show. The production of so many plays, and the interest he took in their success, were sufficient to occupy his mind during his short span, which cannot be supposed to have been diversified by any other events than those that are incident to candidates for theatrical fame and profit. Although his ambition was confined to one object, his life probably abounded in those little varieties of hope and fear, perplexity and satisfaction, jealousy and rivalship, friendship and caprice, which are to be experienced within the walls of a theatre, and compose the history of a dramatic writer.

, a French miscellaneous writer, entitled to some notice, was born at St. Paul in Artois, July

, a French miscellaneous writer, entitled to some notice, was born at St. Paul in Artois, July 9, 1728, and became noted at Paris for hi oddities and his numerous writings. He affected great singularity in dress, and was not less remarkable for his bons mots and tart replies. When asked why he followed no profession, he said, “I have been too long enamoured of goodness and honour, to fix my affections on fortune.” He used to say that “Hfe was a continual epigram, to which death furnished the point.” There is perhaps not much in these, and probably the other witticisms we have seen attributed to him derived their principal effect from his manner, or from the person or occasion when applied. He was, however, a man of great humanity, and particularly attached to children, employing himself for many years in instructing them, and at last he procured admission to the Normal school, that he might contribute his share to the general plan of public education. His writings are, 1. “L'Heureux citoyen,1759, 12mo. 2. “Cours d'Histoire sacree et profane,1763 and 1766, 2 vols. 12mo. 3. “Abreg6 de Phistoire des Insectes,” Paris, 1764, 2 vols. 8vo. 4. “L'Heureux viellard,” a pastoral drama, 1769. 5. “Cour* d'histoire naturelle,” Paris, 1770, 7 vols. 12mo. 6. “Varletes Litteraires,1775, 12mo. 7. “De Talaitement et de la premiere Education des Enfans,1782, 12mo. 8. “L'Eleve de la Nature,” Geneva, 1790, 2 vols. 8vo, often. reprinted. It contains an ingenious sketch, but not very happily filled up. 9. “L‘Accord parfait, ou l’Equilibre physique et morale,” Paris, 1793. 10. “Le Port-feuille Francais,” &c. By all these literary labours, however, the author appears to have profited little, as he died in an hospital at Paris, Oct. 5, 1795.

, an eminent Calvinist divine and ecclesiastical writer, was born at Niort in Upper Poitou, March 8, 1659, of a family

, an eminent Calvinist divine and ecclesiastical writer, was born at Niort in Upper Poitou, March 8, 1659, of a family originally of Provence, whose name was Bossart, which one of his ancestors changed to Beausobre, on taking refuge in Swisserland from the massacre of St. Bartholomew’s day. In his youth he had some favourable opportunities for rising in the world. M. de Vieuxfournaux, cousin-german to his father, strongly solicited him not to change his religion, but to study law, because in that case he had sufficient interest with Madame de Maintenon to recommend him to her, who would have made his 1 fortune. But as he probably foresaw that the sacrifice of his religion must ultimately be the consequence, in order to secure him patronage of this kind, he withstood his relation’s solicitations, and pursued his original intention, that of qualifying himself for the church. Having finished his studies at Saumur, he was ordained, by imposition of hands, at the age of twenty-one, in the last synod of Loudon, and had a congregation intrusted to him, to whom he officiated for three or four years, during which he married Claude Louisa Arnaudeau, whose father was pastor of the church of Lusignan. The days of persecution approaching, M. de Beausobre’s church was shut up, and having been so rash, as to break it open, contrary to the orders of the court, he found it necessary to make his escape. At first he intended to have gone to England, but for some reasons, not mentioned in our authority, he preferred Holland, where he recommended himself to the favour of the princess of Orange, who appointed him chaplain to her daughter the princess of A nhalt-Dessau, and accordingly he went to Dessau in 1686. Here his situation was rendered peculiarly agreeable by the kindness of the princess, the esteem she conceived for, and the confidence she reposed in him' and here he appears to have applied himself to those studies, the produce of which appeared soon afterwards.

in the history of the church and in general literature, an implacable enemy of the Jesuits, the best writer in Berlin, a man full of fire and vivacity, which eighty years

As soon as Beausobre became settled at Berlin, he resumed his favourite studies, and particularly his “History of the Reformation,” which he carried down to the Augsburgh confession, and left it in manuscript. In this state it remained until 1784, when it was published at Berlin in 4 vols. 8v6. Its principal object is the origin and progress, of Lutheranism, in treating of which the author has availed himself of Seckendorfl’s history, but has added many vainable materials. It contains also very curious and ample details relative to the progress of the reformation in France and Swisserland; but it nevertheless is not free from objections, both on the score of impartiality and accuracy. In the mean time, the Prussian court having desired M. Beausobre and his friend M. Lenfant to prepare a translation of the New Testament, they shared the labour between them, M. Lenfant taking the Evangelists, Acts, Catholic epistles, and the Apocalypse, and M. Beausobre the epistles of St. Paul. The whole was published in 2 vols. 4to, Amst. 1718, with prefaces, notes, c. A second edition appeared in 1741, with considerable additions and corrections. Their “Introduction” was published separately at Cambridge (translated into English) in 1779; and Dr. Watson, bishop of Llandaff, who inserted it in the third volume of his “Theological Tracts,” pronounces it a work of extraordinary merit, the authors Laving left scarcely any togic untouched, on which the voting student in divinity may he supposed to wunt information. Their only opponent, at the time of publication, was a Mr. Dartis, formerly a minister at Berlin, from which he had retired, and who published a pamphlet, to which Beausobre and Lenfant made separate replies. Beausobre was one of the principal members of a society of literary men of Berlin, who called them the “Anonymi,” and this connection led 'him to be a contributor to the “Bibliothcque Gcrmanique,” of which he was editor from vol. IV. to the time of his death, excepting vol. XL. One of the pieces he wrote for this journal was translated into English, and published at London, 1735, 8vo, under the title of “St. Jatzko, or a commentary on a passage in the plea for the Jesuits of Thorn/* But hii most celebrated work was his” Histoire critique de Mauicheisme,“Amst. 1734, 1739, 2 vols. 4to. Of the merit of this work it may, perhaps, be sufficient to give the opinion of a man of no religion, Gibbon, who says that” it is a treasure of ancient philosophy and theology. The learned historian spins, with incomparable art, the systematic thread of opinion, and transforms himself by turns into the person of a saint, a sage, or an heretic. Yet his refinement is sometimes excessive: he betrays an amiable partiality in favour of the weaker side, and while he guards against calumny, he does not allow sufficient scope for superstition and fanaticism,“things, or rather words, which Gibbon js accustomed to use without much meaning. The journalists of Trevoux having attacked this work, gave Mr. IjJeausobre an opportunity of showing his superiority in ecclesiastical history, by an answer published in the BibL Germanique, which perhaps is too long. He wrote also a curious preface to the” Memoirs of Frederick-Henry, prince of Orange,“Amst. 1733. These are all the works which appeared in the life-time of our author, but he left a great many manuscripts, dissertations on points of ecclesiastical history, and sermons, none of which, we believe, have been published, except the” History of the Reformation,“already noticed. M. Beausobre reached the period of old age, without experiencing much of its influence. He preached at the age of eighty with vigour and spirit. His last illness appears to have come on in October 1737, and although it had many favourable intermissions, he died June 5, 1738, in the full possession of his faculties and recollection, and universally regretted by his Hock, as well as by the literary world. The most remarkable encomium bestowed on him, is that of the prince, afterwards Frederick king of Prussia, in a letter to Voltaire, published in the works of the latter.” We are -about to lose one of the greatest men of Germany. This is the famous M. de Beausobre, a man of honour and probity, of great genius, a taste exquisite and delicate, a great orator, learned in the history of the church and in general literature, an implacable enemy of the Jesuits, the best writer in Berlin, a man full of fire and vivacity, which eighty years of life have not chilled; has a little of the weakness of superstition, a fault common enowgh with people of his stamp, and is conscious enough of his abilities to be affected by applause. This loss is irreparable. We have no one who can replace M. de Beausobre; men of merit are rare, and when nature sows them they do not always come to maturity." The applause of such a man as Beausobre, from Frederick of Prussia to Voltaire, is a curiosity.

, a political writer of considerable note, was born at Milan in 1735, and died in

, a political writer of considerable note, was born at Milan in 1735, and died in the same place in 1793 or 1794. In his first publication, which appeared at Lucca in 1762, he pointed cut several abuses, with their remedies, in the system of coinage adopted in the state of Milan. A short time after, some literary gentlemen of Milan projected a periodical work, which was to contain essays on various subjects of philosophy, morals, and politics, calculated to enlighten the public mind. It was accordingly published in the years 1764 and 1765, under the title of “The Coffeehouse,” and when collected, the papers formed 2 vols. 4to, of which the most interesting and original were from the pen of Beccaria. It was likewise in 1764, that he published his celebrated treatise on “crimes and punishments,” “Dei Delitti e delle Pene,” 12mo, a work to which some objections may he made, and in which there are some inconsistencies, yet few works were read with more avidity, or more directly tended to introduce a humane and wise system in the criminal law. Within eighteen months of its publication, six editions of the Italian were eagerly bought up, and it is computed that it has since gone through above fifty editions and translations. The English translation published in 1766 contained also a commentary attributed to Voltaire, but contributing more to amuse than instruct the reader. Much, however, as the author was applauded by the enlightened part of the world, he was likely to have been brought into trouble by the bigotry of his countrymen, had he not met with very powerful protection. In 1768 the Austrian government founded a professorship of political economy for him, and his lectures on that subject were published in 1804, 2 vols. 8vo, under the title of “Elemens d'economie publique.” In 1770 he published the first part of his “Recherches sur la nature du style,” Milan, 8vo. There are some shrewd remarks in this, but he appears to have got into the paradoxical way of writing, and endeavours to prove that every individual has an equal degree of genius for poetry and eloquence.

by lord Lyttelton, who produces two remarkable instances in support of his assertion. The same noble writer hath brought, likewise, satisfactory evidence, to prove that

It has been said that it was with the utmost difficulty Becket could be prevailed upon to accept of this dignity, and that he even predicted it would be the cause of a breach between the king and him. But this is greatly doubted by lord Lyttelton in his History of Henry II. and it stands contradicted by the affirmation of Foliot, bishop of London, and ill agrees with the measures which were taken to procure Becket' s election. His biographers themselves acknowledge, that one reason which induced Henry to promote him to Canterbury, was, “because he hoped, that, by his means, he should manage ecclesiastical, as well as secular affairs, to his own satisfaction.” Indeed, no other reasonable motive can be found. Nothing could incline that prince to make so extraordinary and so exceptionable a choice, but a firm confidence, that he should be most usefully assisted by Becket, in the important reformation he meant to undertake, of subjecting the clergy to the authority of the civil government. Nor is it credible that he should not have revealed his intention, concerning that affair, to a favourite minister, whom he had accustomed to trust, without reserve, in his most secret counsels. But if such a declaration had been made by that minister, as is related by the historians, it is scarcely to be supposed, that a king so prudent as Henry would have forced him into a station, in which he certainly might have it in his power to be exceedingly troublesome, instead of being serviceable to his royal master. It was by a different language that the usual sagacity of this prince could have been deceived. Nor, indeed, could the most jealous and penetrating eye have discovered in Becket, after he was elected archbishop of Canterbury, any marks of an enthusiastic or bigotted zeal. That several indications of a contrary temper, and different principles, had appeared in his conduct, is shewn by lord Lyttelton, who produces two remarkable instances in support of his assertion. The same noble writer hath brought, likewise, satisfactory evidence, to prove that Becket was almost as eager for procuring the archbishopric, as his master could be to raise him to that dignity. After he had received his pall from pope Alexander III. then residing in France, he immediately sent messengers to the king in Normandy, with his resignation of the seal and office of chancellor. This displeased the king; so that upon his return to England, when he was met at his landing by the archbishop, he received him in a cold and indifferent manner.

mpanied Becket in his exile, but never countenanced his behaviour towards the king, being as sharp a writer against the encroachments of the papal see, as any man of his

On the other hand, Mr. Berington, in his “History of the reign of Henry If.” has attempted a vindication of Becket, in which he differs considerably from lord Lyttelton and other protestant historians, but for this w must refer to the book itself. Few men have had more biographers, if reliance could be placed on them, than Becket, but unfortunately the greater part of them were his panegyrists, and not his historians, and too much under the influence of the monkish principles of their days, to deserve much credit. The following list, however, of his biographers may afford some information to the curious inquirer, taken from Leland, Bale, Pits, and others. 1. Herbert Bosenham, or Bosscham, or de Hoscham, who was this archbishop’s secretary, and also present at the slaughter of him. 2. Edward, a monk, of Canterbury, the martyr’s most intimate friend. 3. Johannes Sarisburiensis, who accompanied Becket in his exile, but never countenanced his behaviour towards the king, being as sharp a writer against the encroachments of the papal see, as any man of his time. 4. Bartholomseus Iscanus, or Exonensis, bisiiop of Exeter, where he died in 118k 5. E. a monk of Eveshatn, who dedicated his book, or wrote it by way of epistle, to Henry, abbot of Croyland. 6. William Stephens, or Fitz-Stephen, a monk of Canterbury, and, for at reason, usually called Gulielmus Cantuariensis. He said to have written three several treatises of the life, martyrdom, and miracles of St. Thomas Becket; which are now in the Cotton library: But that, which there carries his name, seems to have been penned by Johannes Carnotensis, who is the same person with Sarisburiensis above mentioned, since, in the Quadripartite History, what we have from him is often to be found, in the same words, in the life there ascribed to Fitz-Stephen. 7. Benedictus Petroburgensis, abbot of Peterborough, who died in 1200. 8. Alanus Teukesburiensis, abbot of Tewkesbury, who died about the same time. 9. Roger, a monk of Croyland, who lived about 1214. It is observed, that St. Thomas’s miracles were become so numerous in this writer’s time, that he had matter for seven large volumes, in composing of which he spent no less than fifteen years. 10. Stephen Langton, a famous successor of Becket’s in the see of Canterbury, whose work on this subject is said be in the library of Bene't college. 11. Alexander de Hales, so called from the monastery of Hales in Gloucestershire, where he was educated, one of the most eminent schoolmen of his age, and master to Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, &c. 12. John Grandison, or Graunston, who died in 1369. 13. Quadrilogus, or the author of a book, entitled “De vita et processu S.Thomae Cantuariensiset Martyris super Libertate Ecclesiastica.” It is collected out of four historians, who were contemporary and conversant with Becket, viz. Herbert de Hoscham, Johannes Carnotensis, Gulielmus Canterburiensis, and Alanus Teukesburiensis, who are introduced as so many relaters of facts interchangeably. This book was first printed at Paris in 1495, and is often quoted by our historians, in the reign of Henry II. by the name of Quadripartita Historia. 14. Thomas Stapleton, the translator of Bede, in whose book De tribus Thomis, or Of the three Thomas’s, our saint makes as considerable a figure as either Thomas the Apostle, or Thomas Aquinas. 15. Laurence Vade, or Wade, a Benedictine monk of Canterbury, who lived and died we know not when, or where; unless perhaps he be the same person with 16. An anonymous writer of Becket’s life, who appears to have been a monk of that church, and whose book is said to be in the library at Lambeth. 17. Richard James, nephew of Dr. Thomas James, some time keeper of the Bodleian library; a very industrious and eminent antiquary, who endeavoured to overthrow the great design of all the above-mentioned authors, in his “Decanonizatio Thomse Cantuariensis et suorum,” which, with other manuscript pieces by the same hand, is in the public library at Oxford. These are the principal writers of our archbishop’s life besides whom, several other historians have spoken largely of him as John Bromton, Matthew Paris, Gervase, &c.

, a dramatic writer, born in 1699, was the son of a linen-draper in Fleet-street,

, a dramatic writer, born in 1699, was the son of a linen-draper in Fleet-street, London, and educated at Merchant Taylors’ school, under the rev. Dr. Smith, where he made very great proficiency in all his studies, and gave proofs of extraordinary talents. To dramatic poetry he appears to have been very early attached, two pieces of his, “Scipio Afriaanus,” and “Henry IV. of France,” both tragedies, being represented on the stage before he had completed his twentieth year. He wrote several other poems, but his genius was limited to a short career, as he died Feb. 19, 1730-1, in the thirty-second year of his age.

. Whoever looks for digestion of materials, disposition of parts, and accuracy of narration, in this writer’s historical works, expects what could not exist at that time.

Mr. Warton justly observes, that Beda’s knowledge, if we consider his age, was extensive and profound: and it is amazing, in so rude a period, and during a life of no considerable length, he should have made so successful a progress, and such rapid improvements, in scientifical and philological studies, and have composed so many elaborate treatises on different subjects. It is diverting to see the French critics censuring Be da for credulity: they might as well have accused him of superstition. There is much perspicuity and facility in his Latin style: but it is void of elegance, and often of purity; it shews with what grace and propriety he would have written, had his mind been formed on better models. Whoever looks for digestion of materials, disposition of parts, and accuracy of narration, in this writer’s historical works, expects what could not exist at that time. He has recorded but few civil transactions: but, besides that his history professedly considers ecclesiastical affairs, we should remember, that the building of a church, the preferment of an abbot, the canoniza T tion of a martyr, and the importation into England of the shin-bone of an apostle, were necessarily matters qf m,uch more importance in Bede’s conceptions than victories or revolutions. He is fond of minute description; but particularities are the fault and often the merit of early historians. The first catalogue of Beda’s works, as vye liare before observed, we have from himself, at the end of his Ecclesiastical history, which contains all he had written before the year 731. This we find copied by Leland, who also mentions some other pieces he had met with of Beda’s, and points out likewise several that passed under his name, though in his judgment spurious. John Bale, in the first edition of his book, which he finished in 1548, mentions ninety-six treatises written by Beda; and in his last edition he swells these* to one hundred and forty-five tracts; and declares at the close of both his catalogues, that there were numberless pieces of our author’s besides, which he had not seen. Pits, according to his usual custom, has much enlarged even this catalogue; though, to do him justice, he appears to have taken great pains in drawing up this article, and mentions the libraries in which many of these treatises were to be found. The catalogues given by Trithemius, Dempster, and others, are much inferior to these. Several of Beda’s books were printed very early, and, for the most part, very incorrectly; but the first general coU lection of his works appeared at Paris in 1544, in three volumes in folio. They were printed again in 1554, at the same place, in eight volumes. They were published in the same size and number of volumes, at Basil, in 1563, reprinted at Cologne in 1612, and lastly at the same place in 1688. A very clear and distinct account of the contents of these volumes, the reader may find in the very learned and useful collection of Casimir Otidin. But the most exact and satisfactory detail of Beda’s life and writings, we owe to that accurate, judicious, and candid Benedictine, John Mabillon. Neither has any critic exerted his skill more effectually than he, though largely, and with copious extracts interspersed. But, perhaps, the easiest, plainest, and most concise representation of Beda’s writings, occurs in the learned Dr. Cave’s “Hist. Literaria,” which has been followed by the editors of the Biog. Britannica.

, a writer of the fourteenth century, of the ancient family of the Belgraves

, a writer of the fourteenth century, of the ancient family of the Belgraves in Leicestershire, was born at the town of Belgrave, about a mile from Leicester, and educated in the university of Cambridge, where he applied himself with great diligence and success to his studies, and afterwards took the degree of D.D. He entered himself into the order of Carmelite friars, and distinguished himself by his great skill in the Aristotelian philosophy and school-divinity, hut he was more remarkable for the strength and subtilty of his lectures, than the elegance of his style, the study of polite literature being generally neglected in that age. Pits gives him the character of a man of eminent integrity and piety. He flourished in 1320, under the reign of king Edward II. and wrote, among other works, “Theological Determinations, in one book;” the subject of which was, Utrum Essentia Divina possit videri? Whether the Divine Essence could be seen? and “Ordinary Questions, in one book.” This single question, concerning the Divine Essence, is enough to shew the inutility of the inquiries and studies which engaged the attention of men in that age.

, an English miscellaneous writer, was born in 1745, at Kingston in Surrey, and educated for trade.

, an English miscellaneous writer, was born in 1745, at Kingston in Surrey, and educated for trade. After serving an apprenticeship to a hosier in Newgate-street, London, he established a considerable business for himself, which he carried on successfully, until he began to pay rather too much attention to literary pursuits, and after keeping shop for twenty years, was obliged finally to relinquish his trade. He became afterwards the projector of the “Monthly Mirror,” a periodical publication principally devoted to the business of the stage, and which was carried on by him for some years with spirit and success. He published also “Sadaski, or the wandering penitent,” 2 vols. 12mo, a novel in Dr. Hawkesworth’s manner, and possessing considerable merit. For the stage he wrote, “The Friends, or the benevolent Planters,1789, a musical interlude; and for young people, “Lessons from Life, or Home scenes.” On the death of his mother he became possessed of some property, and was in the quiet pursuit of his literary schemes, when a short but severe illness carried him off, August 29, 1800.

He was also a man of learning, and gave proofs of his abilities and genius as a writer. The most remarkable of his works was the “History of his own

He was also a man of learning, and gave proofs of his abilities and genius as a writer. The most remarkable of his works was the “History of his own times,” in Latin: of this, however, nothing remains except a few fragments, sand three or four books, which Martin du Bellay, William’s brother, has inserted in his memoirs.

, an elegant Scottish writer of the sixteenth century, was descended from an ancient and

, an elegant Scottish writer of the sixteenth century, was descended from an ancient and very honourable family in that kingdom, where his father, Mr. Thomas Bellenden of Auchiiioul, was director to the chancery in 1540, and clerk of accounts in 1541. It does not appear when our author was born, or where educated but from his writings (frequently intermixed with words of Gallic derivation) it was probably in France. In his youth he served in the court, and was in great favour with king James V. as himself informs us, which he might very probahly owe to his fine vein in poetry, that prince being a great admirer, and a proficient in poetical studies. Having this interest with his prince, he attained extraordinary preferment in the church, being made canon of Ross, and archdeacon of Murray, to which last dignity perhaps he opened his passage, by taking the degree of doctor of divinity at the Sorbonne. He likewise obtained his father’s employment of clerk of accounts, which was very considerable, in the minority of the king before mentioned; but he was afterwards turned out by the struggle of factions, in the same reign. We have no direct authority to prove that he had any share in the education of king James V. but from some passages in his poems, and from his addressing many of them to that king, he appears to have been in some measure particularly attached to his person; and from one of them, we may infer that he had an interest beyond that of bare duty, in forming a right disposition, and giving wholesome instructions to that prince. But the work which has transmitted his name to posterity, is his translation of Hector Boethius, or, as his countrymen call him, Hector Boeis’s History, from the Latin into the Scottish tongue, which he performedat the command of his royal master admirably, but with a good deal of freedom, departing often from his author, although generally for the sake of truth, and sometimes also adding circumstances, which perhaps might not be known to Hector Boece. This version, as he called it, was very well received both in Scotland and England. It does not appear either from his own writings or otherwise, how he came to lose his office of clerk of accounts; but he certainly recovered it in the succeeding reign, was likewise made one of the lords of session; and had credit then at court, perhaps from his zeal in respect to his religion, for he was a very warm and inflexible Romanist, and laboured assiduously, in conjunction with Dr. Laing, to impede the progress of the reformation. It may with great probability be conjectured, that the disputes into which he plunged himself on this subject, made him so uneasy, that he chose to quit his native country, that he might reside in a place, where that disposition, instead of being an hindrance, would infallibly recommend him. This (as it is supposed) carried him to Rome, where, as Dempster tells us, he died in 1550. He was unquestionably a man of great parts, and one of the finest poets his country had to boast, and notwithstanding the obsolete language of his works, they are not slightly imbued with that enthusiasm which is the very soul of poesy. His great work appeared in folio at Edinburgh, in 1536, entitled “The History and Chronicles of Scotland, compilit and newly correctit and amendit be the reverend and noble clerk Mr. Hector Boeis, chanon of Aberdene, translated lately be Mr. John Bellenden, archdene of Murray, and chanon of Rosse, at command of James the Fyfte, king of Scottis, imprintet in Edinburgh be Thomas Davidson, dwelling fornens the Fryere-Wynde.” This translation, as has been observed, was very far from being close, our author taking to himself the liberty of augmenting and amending the history he published as he thought proper. He, likewise, distinguished it into chapters as well as books, which was the only distinction employed by Boethius; which plainly proves, that it was this translation, and not the original, that Richard Grafton made use of in penning his chronicle, which Buchanan could scarcely avoid knowing, though he never misses any opportunity of accusing Grafton, as if he had corrupted and falsified this author, in order to serve his own purposes and abuse the people of Scotland; 1 which, however, is a groundless charge. Our author’s work was afterwards taken into the largest of our British histories, of which the bishop of Carlisle has given us the following account: “R. Holinshed published it in English, but was not the translator of it himself: his friend began the work and had gone a good way in it, but did not, it seems, live to finish it. In this there are several large interpolations and additions out of Major, Lesley, and Buchanan, by Fr. Thinne, who is also the chief author of the whole story after the death of king James the First, and the only penman of it from 1571 to 1586. Towards the latter end, this learned antiquary occasionally intermixes catalogues of the chancellors, archbishops, and writers of that kingdom.

to Dr. Richardson, whose authority is a manuscript of the late Roger Gale, esq. our prelate was the writer of the “Codex niger,” or Black Book of the Exchequer.

II. bishop of London in the reign of king Stephen, was nephew to the preceding, and son of Walter de Belmeis. Before he came of age, he was appointed by his uncle archdeacon of Middlesex: but the bishop was prevailed upon by William, dean of London, his nephew by his sister Adelina, and by the prior of Chich, to commit the administration of the archdeaconry, during Richard’s minority, to Hugh, one of his chaplains. It was with no small difficulty that Richard afterwards recovered his archdeaconry out of the hands of this faithless guardian. In the beginning of October 1151, he was advanced to the see of London, in the room of Robert de Sigillo, and consecrated at Canterbury by archbishop Theobald, in the presence of all the bishops of England, excepting Henry of Winchester, who excused his absence, but warmly approved the choice of Richard, in a letter to the archbishop. This prelate died 4th May, 1162, leaving behind him a reputation for singular eloquence. According to Dr. Richardson, whose authority is a manuscript of the late Roger Gale, esq. our prelate was the writer of the “Codex niger,” or Black Book of the Exchequer.

, an Italian writer, was born in 1728, the last branch of a noble and ancient family

, an Italian writer, was born in 1728, the last branch of a noble and ancient family in Tuscany. He rendered himself eminent in the literary and political world, and filled some situations of importance; and among others, more connected with his favourite pursuits, he was director of the once magnificent gallery of Florence, of which he wrote “Saggio Historico,” &c. “An historical essay concerning the Gallery,” vol. I. and II. 1779, 8vo, and which, we believe, was continued in more volumes, but we find these only noticed in the Monthly Review, vol. LXII. He wrote also the eloges of many eminent characters, a “life of Dante,” which is much esteemed, some “academical dissertations,” and other works without his name. He died July 31, 1808. His mind was a library open to all his friends, and his heart a hospitable asylum for the unhappy. He was learned without pedantry, pious without superstition, benevolent without ostentation, the friend of virtue wherever he found it, and his death, it is added, was as placid and calm as his life had been.

, or Benedetti, a very eminent physician and medical writer of the fifteenth century, was born at Legnano in the territory

, or Benedetti, a very eminent physician and medical writer of the fifteenth century, was born at Legnano in the territory of Verona. When he had completed his studies, he went to Greece and the isle of Candy, as army surgeon, and on his return, he was made professor of medicine at Padua, where he remained until 1495, when he settled at Venice. The time of his death is not ascertained, but it appears that he was alive in 1511. Haller mentions him as at the head of the original medical writers, and says his style was far preferable to that of his predecessors. His works are, 1. “De observatione in Pestilentia,” Venice, 1493, 4to, Bonon, 1516, fol. Basil, 1538, 8vo, &c. 2. “Collectiones medicinæ, sive, aphorismi de medici et ægri officio,” Leyden, 1506. 3. “Anatomiae, sive de historia corporis humani, lib. v.” Venice, 1493, often reprinted. 4. “De omnium a capite ad calcem morborum causis, signis, differentiis, indicationibus, et remediis, lib. triginta,” Venice, 1500, foh also often reprinted. There are some remains of medical superstition in this work, but many excellent observations and useful cases. 5. “Opera omnia in unum collecta,” Venice, 1533, fol. Basil, 1539, 4to, and 1549 and 1572, fol.

he Greek Testament, was born June 24, 1687, at Winneden in the duchy of Wirtemberg. He was, says the writer of the meagre account in the Diet. Hist, the first of the Lutheran

, a learned German divine, principally known in this country for his excellent edition of the Greek Testament, was born June 24, 1687, at Winneden in the duchy of Wirtemberg. He was, says the writer of the meagre account in the Diet. Hist, the first of the Lutheran divines who published a learned, profound, and complete criticism on the New Testament, or rather an accurate edition. He became a critic from motives purely conscientious. The various and anxious doubts which he entertained, from the deviations exhibited in preceding editions, induced him to examine the sacred text with great care and attention, and the result of his labours was, 1. his “Novi Testarmenti Graeci recte cauteque adornandi prodromus,” Stutgard, 1725, 8vo. 2. “Notitia Nov. Test. Grrcc. recte cauteque adornati,” ibid. 1731, 8vo, and 3. his edition entitled “Novum Test. Grace, cum introdnctione in Crisin N. T. Apparatu Critico, et Epilogo,” ibid. 1734, 4to. He afterwards published, 4. “Gnomon Nov. Test, in quo ex nativa verborum vi simplicitas, profunditas, concinnitas sensuum ccelestium indicatur,” ibid. 1742, and 1759, and lastly in 1763, at Ulm, in which same year, a new edition of his “Apparatus Criticus” was published, with many additions, by Phil. D, Burkius, 4to. Bengal’s most formidable enemies were Ernesti and Wet stein, neither of whom treated him with the courtesy that becomes men of letters. His edition of the New Testament is unquestionably a lasting monument of the author’s profound learning and solid piety, and has often been reprinted to gratify the public demand. In 1745, Bengel published “Cyclus, sive de anno magno solis, luna?, stellarum consideratio, ad incrementum doctrinse propheticre atque astronomies accommodata,” Ulm, 8vo, and after his death, which took place in 1752, appeared his “Ordo temporifm, a principio per periodos ceconomise divinoe historicas atque propheticas, at finem usque ita deductus, ut tota series et quarumvis partium analogia sempiternae virtutis ac sapientiae cultoribus ex script. Vet. et Nov. Test, tanquam uno revera documento proponatur,” Stutgard, 1753. Bengel maintained the doctrine of the millenium, or second appearance of Christ upon earth to reign with his saints a thousand years. His “Introduction to his Exposition to the Apocalypse,” was translated and published by John Robertson, M. D. London, 1757.

, an eminent physician of the seventeenth century, and a medical writer, was the son of John Ben net of Raynton in Somersetshire, and

, an eminent physician of the seventeenth century, and a medical writer, was the son of John Ben net of Raynton in Somersetshire, and became a commoner of Lincoln college in Qxford, in Michaelmasterm, 1632, being then fifteen years of age. After he had taken the degrees of bachelor and master of arts, he entered upon the study of physic, but was created doctor in that faculty elsewhere. He was afterwards chosen a fellow of the college of physicians in London, where he practised with great success. Dr. Beunet died in April, 1655, and was buried on the 2d of May, in St. Gregory’s church, near St. Paul’s, in London. He gave the public a treatise on Consumptions, entitled “Theatri Tabidorum Vestibuhun, &c.” Lond. lt>54, 8vo. Also “Exercitationes Diagnosticir, cum hisioriis demonstratives, quibus alinientorum et sanguinis vitia deteguntur in plerisque morbis, &c.” Our author corrected and enlarged a book written originally by Dr. Thomas MotFet, and entitled “Health’s Improvement, or rules comprising or discovering the nature, method, and manner of preparing all sorts of food used in this nation,” Lond. 1655, 4to. Dr. Bennet had one or two more pieces ready for the press at the time of his death. It may be necessary to add that in his Latin works, he assumed the Latinized name of Benedictus.

, or Benno, a writer of the eleventh century, was created a cardinal by the anti-pope

, or Benno, a writer of the eleventh century, was created a cardinal by the anti-pope Guibert, who assumed the name of Clement III. Benno, who was one of his most zealous partisans, made many attacks on the popes, accusing Sylvester II. of magic, Gregory VI. of simony, &c. and wrote, under the title of a “Life of Gregory VII.” a bitter satire against that pontiff. He died about the close of the eleventh century. His life of Gregory was printed in the “Fasciculus rerum Expetendarum et Fugiendarum,1535, by Gratius, and in a collection of pieces, in favour of tUe emperor Henry IV. against Gregory, published by Goldastus.

n Ireland, and father, by this lady, of Richard Cumberland, esq. the late dramatic and miscellaneous writer.

Dr. Bentley married a daughter of sir John Bernard, of Branapton, in Huntingdonshire, by whom he had one son, Richard, of whom in the next article, and two daughters, Elizabeth and Joanna. Elizabeth first married Humphrey Ridge, esq. and after his decease the rev. Dr, Favell, rector of Witton, near Huntingdon. Joanna, the Phebe of Dr. Byron’s celebrated pastoral (first published in the Spectator), married the rev. Denison Cumberland, afterward bishop of Kilmore, in Ireland, and father, by this lady, of Richard Cumberland, esq. the late dramatic and miscellaneous writer.

, a French miscellaneous writer, was born at Geneva in 1740, and in early life quitted the mechanical

, a French miscellaneous writer, was born at Geneva in 1740, and in early life quitted the mechanical employment to which he had been deslined by his parents, for those studies to which he was invited by the political troubles of his country. As by birth he was classed among those who are at Geneva called natives, but who do not acquire the rank of citizens, because born of foreign parents, his first effort was to establish, in some of his writings, the necessity of equal political rights. This dispute being referred to arms, Berenger, after his party was defeated, was banished, along with many others, by a decree of the sovereign power, February 10, 1770. On this he retired to Lausanne, and employed his time in various literary undertakings, until his return to Geneva, where he died in June, 1807. He published, 1. An edition of the works of Abauzit. 2. “Histoire de Geneve, depuis son origine jusqu'a nos jours,1772 75, 6 vols. 12 mo. In this, the more distant ages are given in a summary manner, having been sufficiently detailed by Spon, but much light is thrown upon the political history of the last century, which he brings down to 1761, and to which sir F. D'Yvernois’ work, “Tableau historiquede revolutions de Geneve,” may be considered as a sequel. 3. “Geographic de Busching abregee, &c.” Busching’s work is here abridged in some parts and enlarged in others, Lausanne, 1776 79, 12 vols. 8vo. 4. “Collection de tous les voyages faits autour de monde,1788 90, 9 vols. 8vo, reprinted in 1795. 5. “Amants Republicains, ou Lettrea de Nicias et Cynire,1782, 2 vols. 8vo, a political romance relating to the troubles of Geneva. 6. “Cours de geographic historique, ancienne et moderne de feu Ostervald,1803 and 1805, 2 vols. 12mo. 7. An edition of the “Dictionnaire geographique” of Vosgien (Ladvocat), 1805, 8vo. 8. Translations from the English of “Laura and Augustus,” and of“Cook’s Voyages.” 9. “J. J. Rousseau justifie envers sa patrie” and some lesser pieces mentioned in Ersch’s “France Litteraire.” M. Bourrit attributes to him a translation of Howard’s history of Prisons, but this, it is thought, was executed by mademoiselle Keralio.

f Worlds,” and Voltaire, in his “Micromegas,” have taken many hints and sketches from this eccentric writer. There have been various editions of his works at Paris, Amsterdam,

The earl of.Orrery, in his “Remarks on the life and writings of Swift,” has taken occasion to speak of him in the following manner “Cyrano de Bergerac is a French author of a singular character, who had a very peculiar turn of wit and humour, in many respects resembling that of Swift. He wanted the advantages of learning and a regular education; his imagination was less guarded and correct, but more agreeably extravagant. He has introduced into his philosophical romance the system of des Cartes, which was then much admired, intermixed with several fine strokes of just satire on the wild and immechanical inquiries of the philosophers and astronomers of that age; and in many parts he has evidently directed the plan which the dean of St. Patrick’s has pursued.” This opinion was first quoted in the Monthly Review (vol. X), when Derrick translated a. id published Bergerac’s “Voyage to tha Moon,1753, 12mo. But Swift is not the only person indebted to Bergerac. His countrymen allow that Moliere, in several of his characters, Fontenelie, in his “Plurality of Worlds,” and Voltaire, in his “Micromegas,” have taken many hints and sketches from this eccentric writer. There have been various editions of his works at Paris, Amsterdam, Trevoux, &c. the last was printed at Paris, 1741, 3 vols. 12 mo.

, a French writer of considerable note, was born at Darnay in Lorraine, December

, a French writer of considerable note, was born at Darnay in Lorraine, December 31, 1718. In the career of promotion he was first curate of Flangebouche, a small village in Frunche-Comte, then professor of theology, principal of the college of Besai^on, a canon of the church of Paris, and confessor to the king’s aunts. Throughout life he was one of the most strenuous opponents of the modern philosophers of France. He acquired an early name by some essays on various literary subjects, to which the prizes were adjudged at Besanon and his reputation was considerably heightened by his very ingenious and plausible work, entitled “Elements primitifs des Langues, &c.” Paris, 1764, 12mo. Soon after he published another, which was favourably received by the learned world, “Origine des Dieux du Pagunisme et les sens des Fables decouvert, par une explication suivie des Poesies d'Hesiode,” Paris, 1767, 2 vols. 12mo. When about the same time he found religion attacked in every quarter by a combination of men of talents in France, he determined to endeavour to counteract their schemes. With this view he wrote “La Certitude des Preuves du Christianisme,1768, 12mo, particularly directed against the “Examen critique des Apologistes de la religion Chretienne,” improperly attributed to Freret; and it was allowed to have been written with much sense, precision, and moderation. This work, which occasioned more friends and more enemies to Bergier than any other, passed through three editions in the same year, besides being translated into Italian and Spanish. Voltaire, to whom the popularity of any writings of this tendency must have been peculiarly unpleasant, affected to answer it in his “Conseils raisonables,” written with his usual art, but more remarkable for wit than argument. Bergier answered the “Conseils,” the only instance in which he noticed any of his adversaries in public. He had another more contemptible antagonist, the noted Anacharsis Cloots, who published what he, and perhaps no man else, would have called “Certitude des Preuves du Mahometisme.” About this time the clergy of France, sensible of Bergier’s services, gave him a pension of two thousand livres, and offered him some valuable benefices, but he would only accept of a canonry in Notre Dame, and it was even against his inclination that he was afterwards appointed confessor to the mesdames, the last king’s aunts. Free from ambition, modest and simple in dress and manners, he was desirous only of a retired life, and at Paris he lived as he had done in the country, in the midst of his books. This study produced, successively, 1. “Le Deisme refute par lui-meme,” Paris, 1765, 1766, 1768, 2 vols. 12mo, an examination of the religious principle of Rousseau. 2. “Apologie de la Religion Chretienne contre l'auteur du Christianisme devoid,” (the baron Holbach) Paris, 1769, 2 vols. 12mo. 3. “Examen du Materialisme, ou refutation du systeme de la Nature,” Paris, 1771, 2 vols. 12mo. 4. “Traite historique et dogmatique de la vraie Religion, &c.” Paris, 1780, 12 vols. 12mo. This is, in some respect, a collection of the sentiments of the ablest writers against infidelity. 5. “Discours sur le Manage des Protestants,1787, 8vo. 6. “Observations surle Divorce,” ibid. 1790, 8vo. He also compiled a thelogical dictionary, which makes a part of the “Encyclopedic methodique,” 3 vols. 4to. The abbé“Barruel says, that when this work was first undertaken, some deference was still paid to religion, and Bergier thought it incumbent on him to yield to the pressing solicitations of his friends, lest the part treating of religion should fall into the hands of its enemies, but in this they were deceived. Bergier, indeed, performed his task as might have been expected but in other parts of the work the compilers exceeded their predecessors in licentious sentiments, and at the same time availed themselves of the name of Bergier as a cloak. M. Barbier attributes to our author the sketch of Metaphysics inserted in the” Cours d‘etude de l’usage de l'Ecole militaire." In all his works there is a logical arrangement and precision, and the only objection the French critics have is to his style, which is sometimes rather diffuse. He died at Paris, April 9, 1790. He was a member of the academy of Besangon, and an associate of that of inscriptions and belleslettres.

, a German writer, was born at Laaspa in 1718, and died in 1781. He published,

, a German writer, was born at Laaspa in 1718, and died in 1781. He published, 1. “Cameralisten Bibliothek,” a complete catalogue of all books, pamphlets, &c. on the subjects of political economy, police, finances, &c. Nuremberg, 1765, 8vo. 2. “A Magazine of Police and Administration, in alphabetical order,” Francfort, 1767, 1773, 8 vols. 4to. 3. I“New Magazine of Police, &c.” Leipsic, 1775 80, 6 vols. 4to. 4. “A collection of the principal German laws, relative to police and administration,” Francfort, 4 vols. 1780 81. This last was continued by professor Beckmann of Gottingen.

ember this year he is said to have accumulated the degrees of bachelor and doctor in divinity; but a writer in the Gent. Mag. 1776 asserts that he never went to Ireland

His way was open now into the very first company. Mr. Pope introduced him to lord Burlington, and lord Burlington recommended him to the duke of Grafton who, being lord-lieutenant of Ireland, took him over as one of his chaplains in 1721, and November this year he is said to have accumulated the degrees of bachelor and doctor in divinity; but a writer in the Gent. Mag. 1776 asserts that he never went to Ireland as chaplain to any lieutenant, and that he was created D. D. by his college in 1717, when he was in Italy. The year following he had a very unexpected increase of fortune from Mrs. Vanhomrigh, the celebrated Vanessa, to whom he had been introduced by Swift this lady had intended Swift for her heir, but, perceiving herself to be slighted by him, she left near 8000l. between her two executors, of whom Berkeley was one. In his life in the Biog. Brit, it is said that Swift had often taken him to dine at this lady’s house, but Mrs. Berkeley, his widow, asserts that he never dined there but once, and that by chance. Dr. Berkeley, as executor, destroyed as much of Vanessa’s correspondence as he could find. Mr. Marshal, the other executor, published the “Cadenus and Vanessa,” which, according to Dr. Delany, proved fatal to Stella. May 18, 1724, he was promoted to the deanery of Derry, worth 1100l. per annum, and resigned his fellowship.

, an English miscellaneous writer, was born, about 1730, at Leeds in Yorkshire, and educated at

, an English miscellaneous writer, was born, about 1730, at Leeds in Yorkshire, and educated at the grammar-school in that town. His father, Xvho was a merchant, and a native of Holland, intended him for trade and with that view sent him at an early age to Germany, in order to learn foreign languages. After continuing a few years in that country, he made the tour of Europe in company with one or more English noblemen. On their return to Germany they visited Berlin, where Mr. Berkenhout met with a near relation of his father’s, the baron de Bielfeldt, a nobleman then in high estimation with the late king of Prussia; distinguished as one of the founders of the royal academy of sciences at Berlin, and universally known as a politician and a man of letters. With this relation our young traveller fixed his abode for some time; and, regardless of his original. destination, became a cadet in a Prussian regiment of foot. He soon obtained an ensign’s commission; and, in the space of a few years, was advanced to the rank of captain. He quitted the Prussian service on the declaration of war between England and France in 1756, and was honoured with the command of a company in the service of his native country. When peace was concluded in 1760, he went to Edinburgh, and commenced student of physic. During his residence at that university he compiled his “Clavis Anglica Lingux Botanicæ” a book of singular utility to all students of botany, and at that time the only botanical lexicon in our language, and particularly expletive of the Linnsean system. It was not, however, published until 1765.

manner, then touches the heart with force and vehemence. The Holy Scripture was so familiar to this writer, that he adopts its words and expressions in almost every period

Bernard has had the fate of most of the eminent characters during the early ages of the church, to be excessively applauded by one party, and. as much and as unjustly depreciated by the other. Of his austerities and his miracles, little notice need be now taken. The former he was himself willing to allow were unjustifiable, and the latter are probably the forgeries of a period later than his own. In his conduct as well as his writings we see many intolerant prejudices and much superstition a strong predilection for the Roman hierarchy, and particularly for the monastic character. On the other hand, although his learning was but moderate, he could have been no ordinary man who attained such influence, not only over public opinion, but over men of the highest rank and power and he has been praised by the protestant writers for deviating in many respects from the dogmas of the popish religion, and maintaining some of those essential doctrines which afterwards occasioned a separation between the two churches. He denied transubstantiation, allowed of only two sacraments, and placed salvation on the imputation of Christ’s righteousness, denying all works of supererogation, &c. As to his talents, one of his modern biographers allows that his style was lively and florid, his thoughts noble and ingenious, his imagination brilliant^ and fertile in allegories. He is full of sensibility and tenderness, first gains the mind by a delicate and insinuating manner, then touches the heart with force and vehemence. The Holy Scripture was so familiar to this writer, that he adopts its words and expressions in almost every period and every phrase. St. Bernard’s sermons are considered as master-pieces of sentiment and force. Henry de Valois preferred them to all those of the ancients, whether Greek or Latin. It appears that he preached in French that monks who were not learned assisted at his conferences, and that Latin was then not understood by the people. His Sermons are to be seen in old French at the library of the fathers Fuillautines, rue St. Honore at Paris, in a ms. which is very near St. Bernard’s time; and the council of Tours, held in the year 813, ordered the bishops when they delivered the homilies of the fathers, to translate them from Latin into Langue romance, that the people might understand them. This proves that it was the custom to preach in French long before the time of St. Bernard. The best edition of the works of St. Bernard, who is regarded as the last of the fathers, is that of Mabillon, 2 vots. 1690, fol. the first of which contains such pieces as are undoubtedly Bernard’s. Those in the second volume are not of equal authority. Besides the lives prefixed to this edition by various writers, there are three separate lives, one by Lemaistre, Paris, 1649, 8vo; another by Villefore, 1704, 4to and a third by Clemencet, 1773, 4to, which is usually considered as the thirteenth volume of the literary history of France.

by means of strict parsimony, to make a decent figure at the houses to which he was invited. Being a writer of verses, and consequently a dealer in compliments, he was

, count of Lyons, and a cardinal and statesman of France, was born at MarceJ de l'Ardeche, May 22, 1715, of a noble and ancient family, but not very rich which circumstance induced his friends to bring him up to the church, as the most likely profession in which he might rise. In this they were not disappointed, as he gradually attained the highest ecclesiastical dignities. When young he was placed at the seminary of St. Sulpice in Paris, and after remaining there some years, he appeared in the world with every personal accomplishment that could introduce him into notice; but his morals appear to have been for some time an obstruction to promotion. The cardinal de Fleury, then prime-minister, who had the patronage of all favours, and who had promised him his countenance, thinking him of a spirit too worldly for the church, sent for him and gave him a lecture on his dissipated conduct, concluding with these words “You can have no expectations of promotion, while I live,” to which the young abbé“Bernis, making a profound bow, replied,” Sir, I can wait" Some think this bon mot, which became very current, was not original but it is certain that Bernis remained for a long while in a state not far removed from poverty, and yet contrived, by means of strict parsimony, to make a decent figure at the houses to which he was invited. Being a writer of verses, and consequently a dealer in compliments, he was always acceptable, and at length by madame Pompadour’s interest, was introduced to Louis XV. The good effects of this, at first, were only an apartment in the Tuileries, to which his patroness added the furniture, and a pension of fifteen hundred livres yet it soon led to greater matters. Having been appointed ambassador to Venice, he was remarked to have acquired the good opinion and confidence of a state rather difficult to please in appointments of this description, and of this they gave him a strong proof, in a contest they had with pope Benedict XIV. who appointed Bernis as his negociator. On this occasion the state of Venice approved the choice, the consequence of which was, that Bernis effected a reconciliation to the entire satisfaction of both parties. On his return, he became a great favourite at court, acquired considerable influence, and at length, being admitted into the council, was appointed foreign minister. But in this situation he was either unskilful or unfortunate the disasters of the seven years war, and the peace of 1763, were laid to his charge but according to Duclos, he was less to blame than his colleagues, and it is certain that in some instances he has been unjustly censured. It was said, in particular, that he argued for a declaration of war against Prussia, because Frederick the Great had ridiculed his poetry in the following line,

m, and of the royal society of London. Like all the other branches of his family, he was a laborious writer. The following are the principal productions of his pen, 1.

, the grandson of the preceding John, was born at Basil Nov. 4, 1744, and died at Berlin July 13, 1807. He studied at Basil and Neufchatel, attaching himself chiefly to philosophy, mathematics, and astronomy. At the age of nineteen, he was invited to the place of astronomer in the academy of Berlin, and some years after, having obtained permission to travel, he visited Germany, England, and France, and in his subsequent travels, Italy, Russia, Poland, &c. From the year 1779, he resided at Berlin, where he was appointed head of the mathematical class of the academy. He was also a member of the academies of Petersburg^ and Stockholm, and of the royal society of London. Like all the other branches of his family, he was a laborious writer. The following are the principal productions of his pen, 1. “Recueil pour les Astronomes,1772 76, 3 vols. 8vo. 2. “Lettres sur diflPerents sujets, ecrites pendant le cours d‘un voyage par PAllemagne, la Suisse, la France meridionale, et I’ltalie,in 1774 and 1775,” 3 vols. 8vo. 1777—79. 3. “Description d'un Voyage en Prusse, en Russie, et en Pologne, en 1777 et 1778,” first published in German, 1779, 6 vols. but afterwards in French, Warsaw, 1782. 4. “Lettres Astronomiques,1781, according to our authority but he published a work under this title about 1772, after he had made a literary excursion in 1768 to England, France, and Germany, containing his observations on the actual state of practical astronomy at Gottingen, Cassel, and other parts of Germany, and at Greenwich, Oxford, Cambridge, London, and Paris. 5. “A collection of voyages,” in German, 16 vols. 1781—1785. 6. “The Archives, or records of History and Geography,” in German, 8 vols. 1783 1788. 7. “De la reforme politique des Juifs,” translated from the German of Dohm, 1782, 12mo. 8. “Elemens d‘Algebre d’Euler,” from the German, Lyons, 1785, 2 vols. 8vo. 9. “Nouvelles litteraires de divers pais,” Berlin, 1776 79, 8vo. He edited also, in conjunction with professor Hindenburg, for three years, the “Mathematical Magazine,” and wrote many papers in the Memoirs of the Berlin Academy, and the Astronomical Ephemerides, published in Berlin.

, a miscellaneous French writer, whose principal works are well-known in this country, was born

, a miscellaneous French writer, whose principal works are well-known in this country, was born at Bourdeaux, about 1749, and made his first appearance in the literary world in 1774, as the author of some Idyls, admired for their delicacy and sensibility. The same year he versified the “Pygmalion” of Rousseau and after publishing in 1775, 8vo, “Tableaux Anglais,” a translation of several English essays, he wrote some romances, of which his “Genevieve de Brabant” was reckoned the best. He afterwards applied himself to the composition of books for children, particularly his “Ami des Enfans,” which has been translated into English, his “Lectures pour les Enfans, &c.” and published translations of “Sandford and Merton,” and some other English books calculated for the same purpose. All these are included in the edition of his works published by M. Renouard, Paris, 1803, 20 vols. 18mo, except his “Tableaux Anglais.” The “Ami des Enfans,” the most celebrated and popular of all his works, was honoured with the prize given by the French academy for the most useful book that appeared in 1784. He was for some time editor of the Monitcur and, in conjunction with Messrs. Ginguene“and Grouvelle, conducted the” Feuille villageoise." In 1791, he was proposed as a candidate for tutor to the Dauphin, but died the same year at Paris, Dec. 21.

, a celebrated French writer, of the order of Jesus, was born at Rouen in Normandy, Nov.

, a celebrated French writer, of the order of Jesus, was born at Rouen in Normandy, Nov. 7, 1681. He was designed for the pulpit, but the weakness of his frame not allowing him to declaim, he gave himself up to the quiet but severe studies of the closet, and produced some critical works of importance, which his countrymen in their spirit of intolerance thought fit to suppress and the reading of his “Histoire du peuple de Dieu” was forbid by the archbishop of Paris, which the Sorbonne were six years reviewing. The first part of this work made its appearance in 8 vols. 4to, with a supplement, 1728, reprinted in 1733, 8 vols. 4to, and 10 vols. 12mo; this ends with the times of the Messiah: the second part came out in 1753 in 4 vols. 4to, and 8 vols. 12mo; and the third part in 2 vols. 4to, or 5 vols. in 12mo, containing a literal paraphrase of the epistles, was printed in 1758, notwithstanding it was censured and condemned by the pope and clergy as containing abominable errors. Abominable absurdities it certainly contained, the history of the Jews being detailed with all the affectation of sentimental romance. The author died at Pans, Feb. 18, 1758.

was necessarily spent in bringing works of such superior excellence to perfection. He often told the writer of this account, that though some gentlemen pressed him very

, an ingenious Scotch artist, was one of those who owe more to nature than to instruction of his parentage we have no account, but he appears to have been born about 1730, and at the usual time bound apprentice to Mr. Proctor, a seal engraver in Edinburgh. How long he remained with him is uncertain, but for some years after he began business for himself, he pursued the same branch with his teacher. At this time, however, his designs were so elegant, and his mode of cutting so clean and sharp, as soon to make' him be taken notice of as a superior artist. At length by constantly studying and admiring the style of the antique entaglios, he resolved to attempt something of that sort himself; and the subject he chose was a head of sir Isaac Newton, which he executed in a style of such superior excellence, as astonished all who had an opportunity of observing it. But as he was a man of the most unaffected modesty, and as this head was given to a friend in a retired situation in life, it was known only to a few in the private circle of his acquaintance; and for many years was scarcely ever seen by any one who could justly appreciate its merit. Owing to these circumstances, Mr. Berry was permitted to waste his time, during the best part of his life, in cutting heraldic seals, for which he found a much greater demand than for fine heads, at such a price as could indemnify him for the time that was necessarily spent in bringing works of such superior excellence to perfection. He often told the writer of this account, that though some gentlemen pressed him very much to make fine heads for them, yet he always found that, when he gave in his bill for an article of that kind, though he had charged perhaps not more than half the money that he could have earned in the same time at his ordinary work, they always seemed to think the price too high, which made him exceedingly averse to employment of that sort.

, a French writer of considerable note, was born at Issoudun en Berri April 7,

, a French writer of considerable note, was born at Issoudun en Berri April 7, 1704, and entered among the Jesuits in 1722. He was professor of humanity at Blois, of philosophy at Rennes and Rouen, and of divinity at Paris. The talents he displayed in these offices made him be chosen in 1742 to succeed father Brumoy, in the continuation of his “History of the Gallican Church.” This he executed with general approbation. In 1745 his superiors employed him on the Journal de Trevoux, which he conducted for seventeen years, to the satisfaction of the learned and the public in general. This employment, says the abbé de Fontenay, procured him a high reputation, by the care and accuracy evident in the analysis of the works that came before him, and by the style of a masterly, impartial, and intrepid critic. But this exact impartiality was displeasing to several writers, and especially to Voltaire. When that poet published, without his name, his panegyric on Louis XV. pere Berthier saw it in no other light than as the attempt of a young man who was hunting after antitheses, though not destitute of ingenuity. So humiliating a critique was sensibly felt by Voltaire, who made no hesitation to declare himself the author of the work so severely handled. His mortification was increased when pere Berthier having given an account of a publication, wherein the poet was characterised under the title of “the worthy rival of Homer and Sophocles,” the journalist put coldly in a note, “We are not acquainted with him.” But what raised the anger of Voltaire to its utmost pitch, was a very just censure of several reprehensible passages in his essay on general history. The irritated poet declared openly in 1759 against the Jesuit in a sort of diatribe, which he placed after his ode on the death of the margravine of Bareith. The Jesuit repelled his shafts with a liberal and manly spirit in the Journal de Trevoux. Upon this the poet, instead of a serious answer, brought out in 1760 a piece of humour, entitled “An account of the sickness, confession, and death of the Jesuit Berthier.” The learned Jesuit did not think proper to make any reply to an adversary who substituted ridicule for argument, and continued the Journal de Trevoux till the dissolution of the society in France. He then quitted his literary occupations for retirement. At the close of 1762 the dauphin appointed him keeper of the royal library, and adjunct in the education of Louis XVI. and of monsieur. But eighteen months afterwards, when certain events occasioned the dismission, of all ex-jesuits from the court, he settled at Ossenbourg, from which the empress queen invited him to Vienna and he was also offered the place of librarian at Milan, but he refused all and after residing here for ten years, obtained permission to go to Bourges, where he had a brother and a nephew in the church. Here he died of a fall, Dec. 15, 1782, just after being informed that the French clergy had decreed him a pension of a thousand livres. The chapter of the metropolitan church gave him distinguished honours at his interment; a testimony due to a man of such eminent piety, extensive erudition, and excellent judgment.

, an ingenious Swiss writer, long known by his labours in various branches of philosophy

, an ingenious Swiss writer, long known by his labours in various branches of philosophy and literature, and especially in natural history and political and rural economy, was born at Orbe in Swisserland, in 1712. In 1739 he was pastor of that village, and in 1744 preacher at Bern, whence he was called by the late king of Poland, to preside at a board of commerce, agriculture, and useful arts, the operations of which (and, if we are not mistaken, its very existence) were suppressed by the subsequent troubles of that unhappy country. He was also a member of the academies of Stockholm, Berlin, Florence, Lyons, &c. His principal works are, 1. “Sermons prononcés a Berne a l‘occasion de la decouverte d’une CoiTspiration centre Petat,1749, 8vo. Two of these are by Bertrand, the third by J. J. Altmann. 2. “Memoires sur la Structure interieure de la Terre,1752, 8vo. 3. “Essais sur les usages des montagnes, avec un lettre sur la Nil,1754, 4to a work which Denina styles excellent. His object is to prove that divine wisdom is strongly manifested in the creation of mountains and that they are not, as many authors have asserted, imperfections of the terrestrial globe, much less the effects of a ruined world. This he proves with considerable skill, but in some respects is rather fanciful. 4. “Memoires pour servir a s’instruire des tremblements de terre de la Suisse, principalement pour l'annee 1755, avec quatre Sermons prononcées a cette occasion,” 1756, 8vo. 5. The same “Memoires,” published separately, 1757, 8vo, and much enlarged, a work embracing all that was known before on the subject, and enriched with many candid and able illustrations by the author. 6. “Le Philanthrope,1758, 2 vols. 12mo, 7. “Recherches sur les langues anciennes et modernes de la Suisse, et principalement du pays de Vaud,1758, 8vo. 8. A translation of Derham’s Astro-theology and of Bullinger’s Confession of Faith, both in 1760. 9. “Museum,1763. 10. “Dictionnaire Universel des Fossiles propres, etdes Fossils accidentels,1763, 2 vols. 8vo. 11.“Recueil de divers traités sur l'histoire naturelle de la Terre etdes Fossiles,1766, 4to. 12. “Morale de l'Evangile,1775, 7 vols. 8vo. 13. “Le Thevenon, ou les Journees de la Montagne, 1777, 12mo, 1780, 2 vols. 8vo. 14.” Essai philosophique et moral sur le Plaisir,“1778, 12mo, an excellent work, which, from the account given of it in the Monthly Review, seems highly deserving of a translation. 15.” Le solitaire du Mont-Jure, recreations d'un philosophe," 1782, 12mo. The time of this writer’s death is not ascertained, but he was considerably advanced in years at the period of this last publication.

ies. The time of his death is not ascertained, but according to a letter of Goselini, a contemporary writer, he was living in 1565. His works are, 1. “Dialogo amoroso e

, an Italian scholar of considerable celebrity, was born about the beginning of the sixteenth century, at Bassano. In his early years he shewed a taste for polite literature, and published some poems that were read as very extraordinary productions, but unfortunately he took for his guide the famous, or rather infamous, Peter Aretin, both in his studies and his morals. Under such an instructor, we are not to wonder that his irregularities obstructed his advancement in life. For some time he earned a subsistence at Venice in the printing-office of Giolito, and afterwards wandered over Italy and even France, in quest of better employment, which his misconduct always prevented. At length he was recommended as secretary to a person of rank, and is said to have gone to Spain in 1562, in this character, but on his return to Italy, he resumed his irregularities, and lived as usual on precarious supplies. The time of his death is not ascertained, but according to a letter of Goselini, a contemporary writer, he was living in 1565. His works are, 1. “Dialogo amoroso e rime di Giuseppe Betussi e d'altri autori,” Venice, 1545, 8vo. This dialogue is in prose and verse; and the speakers are Pigna, Sansovino, and Baffa, a poetess of his time. 2. “II Raverta, dialogo, &c.” Venice, 1544, 1545, &c. 8vo. 3. Italian translations of Boccaccio’s three Latin works, “De casibus Virorum etFoerninarum illustrium” “De claris Mulieribus;” and “De Genealogia deorum” the first, Venice, 1545^, 8vo the second, with the addition of illustrious ladies from the time of Boccaccio to his own, ibid. 1S47, 8vo; and the third, same year, 4to. Of this last there have been at least thirteen editions, and many of the others. 4. “An Italian translation of the” Seventh book of the Eneid,“Venice, 154G, 8vo, which afterwards made part of an entire translation of that poem by different hands. 5. li La Leonora, Ragionamento sopra la vera bellezza,” Lucca, 1557, 8vo, noticed by Mazzuchelli and Fontanini among the rarest books. 6. “Ragionamento sopra il Catajo, luogo del signor Pio Enea Obizzi,” Padua, 1573, 4to, Ferrara, 1669, with additions. If this description of a magnificent villa was published by Betussi himself, it proves that he was alive much later than we have before conjectured. 7. “L‘Immagine del tempio di Dorina Giovanna d’Aragona, dialogo,” Venice, 1557, 8vo. 8. “Letters” and “Poems” in various collections.

he sequel of this work to the flames in his last illness. He adds that “he was a better scholar than writer, and a better writer than pleader.” His private character is

, LL. D. an eminent scholar and civilian, was born at Mortimer in Berkshire in 1725, and educated at All Souls’ college, Oxford, where he took the degree of bachelor of law, July 3, 1753, and that of doctor, April 5, 1758, and was also a fellow of his college. In 1762, with the permission of the vice-chancellor, and with the approbation of the regius professor of civil law, whose ill state of health had at that time deprived the university of the fruits of his abilities, he gave a course of lectures in the same school where Blackstone had delivered his celebrated commentaries, and sometimes, when the class ef pupils was small, at his own chambers in All Souls’ college. In 1760, he published “A discourse on the study of Jurisprudence and the Civil Law, being an introduction to (the above) course of lectures,” 4to, but we presume had not sufficient encouragement to publish the whole. He was admitted into Doctors’ Commons, Nov. 21, 1758, and was afterwards promoted to be judge of the Cinque Ports, and chancellor of Lincoln and Bangor. In 1751, he published “The history of the Legal Polity of the Roman state and of the rise, progress, and extent of the 'Roman Laws,” Lond. 4to, a work in which he has made deep researches into the constitution of the Roman state, and displays an extensive fund of learning, connected with the investigation of the civil law. It is much to be lamented that he did not live to complete his plan: but by his will he expressly forbade any part of his Mss. to be printed, as not being in a fit state for the public eye. Dr. Coote says he committed the sequel of this work to the flames in his last illness. He adds that “he was a better scholar than writer, and a better writer than pleader.” His private character is represented as truly amiable. As a relation he was affectionate and attentive and as a friend active and disinterested. His patronage of unprotected genius was a constant mark of the benevolence of his heart. The late Mr. Hindle, and other adepts in music, of which Dr. Bever was a devoted amateur, attracted his esteem. Sherwin, the celebrated engraver, owed also the greatest obligations to him his grateful sense of which he testified by his valuable present of an unique painting (the only one Sherwin ever executed), of Leonidas taking leave of his wife and infant son, now or lately in possession of Sam. Bever, esq. of Mortimer in Berkshire, the doctor’s younger brother. Dr. Bever died at his house in Doctors’ Commons, Nov. 8, 1791, of an asthma, which probably would not then have been fatal, if he had suffered himself to be removed from London to a less turbid air, but in what concerned his health, he was reluctant to take advice. He was interred in Mortimer church, Berkshire, and a mural monument erected, in the chancel, to his memory.

rks continue to be held to this day, prove how little he was injured by the captious quibblings of a writer who was determined to find fault with' that, into the spirit

, a learned divine in the seventeenth century, and bishop of St. Asaph, was born at Barrow in Leicestershire (where his grandfather, father, and brother, were vicars) in 1636-7. On the 24th of May, 1653, he was admitted of St. John’s college, Cambridge, and took his degrees of bachelor of arts in 1656, master of arts in 1660, and of doctor of divinity in 1679. At his coming to the university, he closely applied himself to the study of the learned languages and, by his great diligence and application, soon became so well skilled, particularly in all Oriental learning, that when he was not above eighteen years of age, he wrote a treatise of the excellency and use of the Oriental tongues, especially the Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac, Arabic, and Samaritan, with a Syriac Grammar, in three books; which he published when he was about twenty years of age. He also distinguished himself, at the same time, by his early piety and seriousness of mind, and by his exemplary sobriety and integrity of life, all which procured him great esteem and veneration. January 3, 1660-1, he was ordained deacon in the church of St. Botolph, Aldersgate, by Robert, bishop of Lincoln and priest, in the same place, the 31st of that month. About this time, Dr. Sheldon, bishop of London, collated him to the vicarage of Ealing in Middlesex. On the 22d of November, 1672, he was chosen, by the lord-mayor and aldermen of London, rector of St. Peter’s, Cornhill, London, and then he resigned the vicarage of Ealing. He now applied himself, with the utmost labour and zeal, to the discharge of his ministry, and so instructive was he in his discourses from the pulpit, so warm and affectionate in his private exhortations, so regular and uniform in the public worship of the church, and in every part of his pastoral function, and so remarkably were his labours crowned with success, that as he himself was justly styled “the great reviver and restorer of primitive piety,” so his parish was deservedly proposed, as the best model and pattern, for the rest of its neighbours to copy after. His singular merit having recommended him to the favour of his diocesan, bishop Henchman, he was collated by him, on the 22d of December, 1674, to the prebend of Chiswick, in the cathedral of St. Paul’s, London and, by his successor bishop Compton, he was also, on the 3d of November, 1681, collated to the archdeaconry of Colchester. In this dignity he behaved, as he had done before in every station of life, In a most regular, watchful, and exemplary manner and not satisfied with the false, or at least imperfect, reports given in by church-wardens at visitations, he visited everjr parish within his archdeaconry in person. November the 5th, 1684, he was installed prebendary of Canterbury, and became also chaplain to king William and queen Mary. In 1691, he was offered, but refused the see of Bath and Wells, then vacant by the deprivation of Dr. Thomas Kenn, for not taking the oaths to king William and queen Mary. liut though he refused that see, because, probably, being a man of a tender conscience, he would not eat Dr. Kenn’s tread, adtording to the language of those times, he afterwards accepted of that of St. Asaph, vacant by the translation of Dr. George Hooper to Bath and Wells, and was consecrated July 16, 1704. Being placed in this eminent station, his care and diligence increased in proportion as his power in the church was enlarged and now when his authority was extended to larger districts, he still pursued the same pious and laborious methods of advancing the honour and interest of religion, by watching over both clergy and laity, and giving them all necessary direction and assistance, for the effectual performance of their respective duties. Accoruingly, he was no sooner advanced to the episcopal chair, but in a pathetic letter to the clergy of his diocese, he recommended to them the “duty of catechising and instructing the people committed to their charge, in the principles of the Christian religion to the end they might know what they were to believe and do in order to salvation” and told them, “he thought it necessary to begin with that, without which, whatever else he or they should do, would turn to little or no account, as to the main end of the ministry.” And to enable them to do this the more effectually, he sent them a plain and easy “Exposition upon the Church Catechism.” This good man did not enjoy his episcopal dignity above three years seven months and twenty days for he died at his lodgings in the cloisters in Westminster- abbey, March 5, 1707-8, in the seventy-first year of his age, and was buried in St. Paul’s cathedral. He left the greatest part of liis estate to the societies for propagating the gospel, and promoting Christian knowledge. To the curacy of MountSorrel in particular, and vicarage of Barrow in the county of Leicester, in a thankful remembrance of God’s mercies vouchsafed to him thereabouts, he bequeathed twenty pounds a year for ever, on condition that prayers be read morning and evening every day, according to the Liturgy of the church of England, in the chapel, and parish church aforesaid; with the sum of forty shillings yearly, to be divided equally upon Christmas-eve, among- eight poor housekeepers of Barrow, as the minister and churchwardens should agree, regard being had especially to those who had been most constantly at prayers, and at the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, the foregoing year. And if it should so happen, that the Common- Prayer could not be read in the church or chapel aforesaid, his will then was, that what should have been given in either place for that, be in each place allowed to one chosen by the vk-ar of Barrow to teach school, and instruct the youth in the principles of the Christian religion, according to the doctrine of the church of England. His works were many, and full of great variety of learning. Those published by himself were a? follows: 1. “De Linguarum Orientalium, praesertim HeIpraicce, Chaldaica?, Syriacae, Arabicae, et Samaritans, praestantia et usu,” &c. mentioned above. Loud. 1658, 8vo. 2- “Institutionum Chronologicarum libri duo, una cum totidem Arithmetices Chronoiogicae libellis,” Loud. 1669, 4to. 3. “Swvo'&Kov, sive Pandectse Canonum Ss. Apostolorum, et Conciliorum ab Ecclesia Graeca receptoium necnon Canonicarum Ss. Patrum Epistolarum una cum Scholiis antiquorum singulis eorurn annexis, et scriptis aliis hue spectantibus quorum plurima e Bibliothecae Bodleianae aliarumque Mss. Codicibus nunc primum edita reliqua cum iisdem Mss. summa fide et diligentia collata,” Oxonii, 1672, 2 vols. fol. 4. “Codex Canonum Ecclesiae Primitivae vindicatus et illustratus,” Lond. 1679, 4to. 5. “The Church Catechism explained, for the use of the diocese of St. Asaph,” Lond. J 704, 4to, reprinted several times since. Next follow bishop Beveridge’s works, published after his decease by his executor Mr. Timothy Gregory 1. “Private Thoughts upon Religion, digested into twelve articles, with practical resolutions formed thereupon.” Written in his younger years (when he was about twenty-three years old), for the settling of his principles and conduct of life, Lond. 1709. 2. “Private Thoughts upon a Christian Life or, necessary directions for its beginning and progress upon earth, in order to its final perfection in the Beatific Vision,” part II. Lond. 1709. 3. “The great necessity and advantage of Public Prayer and frequent Communion. Designed to revive primitive piety with, meditations, ejaculations, and prayers, before, at, and after the sacrament,” Lond. 1710, These have been reprinted several times in 8vo and 12mo. 4. “One hundred and fifty Sermons and Discourses on several subjects,” Lond. 170S, &c. in 12 vols. 8vo, reprinted at London, 17iy, in 2 vols. fol. 5. “Thesaurus Theologians or, a complete system of Divinity, summed up in brief notes upon select places of the Old and New Testament; wherein the sacred text is reduced under proper heads; explained and illustrated with the opinions and authorities of the ancient fathers, councils, &c.” Lond. 1711, 4 vols. 8vo. 6. “A defence of the book of Psalms, collected into English metre by Thomas Sternhold, John Hopkins, and others with critical Observations on the New Version, compared with the Old,” Lond. 1710, 8vo. In this book he gives the old version the preference to the new. 7. “Exposition of the XXXIX Articles,” Lond. 1710, 1716, fol. Bishop Beveridge’s character is in general represented in a most advantageous light. He was a person of the strictest integrity, of true and sincere piety, of exemplary charity, and of great zeal for religion, and so highly esteemed, that when he was dying, one of the chief of his order deservedly said of him, “There goes one of the greatest and of the best men that ever England bred.” He is also celebrated as a man of extensive and almost universal learning; furnished, to a very eminent degree, with all useful knowledge; and much to be admired for his readiness in the scriptures, which he had thoroughly studied, so that he was able to produce suitable passages from them on all occasions, and happy in explaining them to others. Mr. Nelson says, that he cannot forbear acknowledging the favourable dispensation of Providence to the present age, in blessing it with so many of those pious discourses, which our truly primitive prelate delivered from the pulpit; and that he the rather takes the liberty to call it a favourable dispensation of Providence, because the bishop gave no orders himself that they should be printed, but humbly neglected them, as not being composed for the press. But that this circumstance is so far from abating the worth of the sermons, or diminishing the character of the author, that it raises the excellency of both, because it shews at once the true nature of a popular discourse which is to improve the generality of hearers, and for that purpose to speak to them in a plain and intelligible style. Dr. Henry Felton says, that our learned and venerable bishop delivered himself with those ornaments alone, which his subject suggested to him, and wrote in that plainness and solemnity of style, that gravity and simplicity, which gave authority to the sacred truths he taught, and unanswerable evidence to the doctrines he defended. That there is something so great, primitive, and apostolical, in his writings, that it creates an awe and veneration in our mind that the importance of his subjects is above the decoration of words and what is great and majestic in itself looketh most like itself, the less it is adorned. The author of one of the Guardians, having made an extract out of one of the bishop’s sermons, tells us, that it may for acuteness of judgment, ornament of speech, and true sublime, compare with any of the choicest writings of the ancients, who lived nearest to the apostles’ times. But the author of a pamphlet published in 1711, entitled “A short view of Dr. Bevericlge’s Writings,” passes a very different judgment upon bishop Beveridge’s works, in order to stop, as he says, the mischief they are doing, and that which the publication of his Articles may do. With regard to the bishop’s language, he observes, that he delights in jingle and quibbling; affects a tune and rhyme in all he says, and rests arguments upon nothing but words and sounds, &c. &c. But perhaps this animadverter will “by some be ranked among the persons, of whom Dr. Lupton gives the following character” Those who are censorious enough to reflect with severity upon the pious strains, which are to be found in bishop Beveridge, &c. may possibly be good judges of an ode or essay, but do not seem to criticise justly upon sermons, or express a just value for spiritual things.“After all, whatever faults may be found in bishop Beveridge’s posthumous works, must be charged to the injudiciousness of his executor. He must himself have been an extraordinary man who, with all the faults pointed out by the author of” The short view," could have conciliated the good opinion and favour of men of all principles, and the most eminent patrons of the church and the estimation in which his works continue to be held to this day, prove how little he was injured by the captious quibblings of a writer who was determined to find fault with' that, into the spirit of which he could not enter. The life of bishop Beveridge, prefixed to the folio edition of his works, was written by Mr. Kimber, a dissenting minister of the Baptist persuasion, in London.

, a learned German writer, was born at Carlostadt, Oct. 18, 1522, and studied at Marpurg,

, a learned German writer, was born at Carlostadt, Oct. 18, 1522, and studied at Marpurg, and afterwards at Wittemberg, where, being introduced by Melancthon, to Luther, the latter received him into his house, and both superintended his studies. In 1542, when the contest took place between John Frederic, the elector, and prince Maurice, he served under the former, but the war being over, he returned to Wittemberg. In 1546 he was appointed professor of history, poetry, and mathematics at Grieswald; and in 1549 he visited Paris, and some other celebrated academies, studied civil law, and published his “Ephemeris Historica,” Paris, 1550. In 1.552 he had a considerable hand in the treaty of Passaw, by which the exercise of the Protestant religion throughout Germany was secured. In 1553 we find him at Padua, where, by Melancthon’s advice, he studied me.dicine, and became acquainted with the celebrated Fallopius he next visited Rome, and some of the Italian schools, and at Ferrara was created LL. D. About the year 1555 he appears to have excited some enemies, on account of his religious principles; but in 1559, the elector Palatine, Otto Henry, appointed him his ecclesiastical counsellor and librarian. On the death, however, of this patron, he removed to Oppenheim, and took his final leave of public affairs. In 1563 he visited the principal cities and academies of Saxony, for the purpose of inquiring into their origin, history, and antiquities, and two years after was appointed historical professor at Strasburgh. He died of a decline, Oct. 27, 1S87. He was accounted a man of great learning in divinity, law, and physic, and eminently skilled in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, French, Italian, Spanish, and English. He published several works, among which are: 1. “Animadversiones historic et chronographicae.” 2. “Opus fastorum antiquitatis Romanae,” Spire, 1600, 4to. 3. “Fasti Hebraeorum, Atheniensium, et Romanorum.” 4. “Animadversiones in Taciti Germaniam.” 5. “Commentarii in Livium, Sallustium, Velleium Paterculum, &c.

, a French miscellaneous writer, was born at Remiremont, in the month of March 1748, and died

, a French miscellaneous writer, was born at Remiremont, in the month of March 1748, and died at Paris, Feb. 15, 1784. He was first canon, and afterwards grand -chanter of St. Chapelle, at Paris. From his infancy he had a turn for the study of natural history, and assisted Buffon in the latter volumes of his great work on that subject. He published 1. “Systeme de la Fermentation,1773, 8vo. 2. “Catechisme d'Agriculture, ou Bibliotheque des gens de la campagne,1773, 12mo. 3. “Oraison funebre d'Anne Charlotte de Lorraine, abbesse de Remiremont,1773, 4to. 4. “Histoire de Lorraine,1777, 8vo, a work to which he is said to have been indebted for his ecclesiastical promotions. One volume only appeared, giving an account of the earliest state of Lorraine, its antiquities, &c. with its literary history, and the lives of the eminent men that add a lustre to its annals. He wrote also, “Observation particuliere sur le Myriade,” and “Materiaux pour l'histoire naturelle des Salines de Lorraine,” both which were printed in Neufchateau’s “Conservateur,” vol. II. In the same collection are twenty-five letters from Buffon to the abbé Bexon. It remains to be noticed, that as he called himself in his first publication Scipio Bexon, by way of concealment, some biographers have supposed that to be his real name.

bears the same sentiments, with much expression of regret for his early errors. Beza was an elegant writer, and a man of great learning. His long life, and the enthusiasm

Beza’s zeal was much tempered in his latter days and when, during an interview with Henry IV. in 1599, in a Tillage of Savoy near Geneva, that prince asked him what he could do for him, Beza expressed no wish but to see peace restored in France. His last will bears the same sentiments, with much expression of regret for his early errors. Beza was an elegant writer, and a man of great learning. His long life, and the enthusiasm with which he inspired his followers, made him be called the Phenix of his age. As a divine, controversialist, and on many occasions, as a negociator, he displayed great abilities, and a faithful adherence to his principles. His numerous writings are now perhaps but little consulted, and his translation of the Psalms into French verse, which was begun by Marot, are no longer in use in the reformed churches but as a promoter of literature, he still deserves high praise, on account of the great diligence and success with which he superintended the college of Geneva for forty years of his life. When on one occasion the misfortunes of the times rendered it necessary to dismiss two of the professors, for whose maintenance there were no longer any funds, Beza, then at the age of seventy, supplied both their places, and gave lectures for more than two years. He was in fact the founder of that college which for the last two centuries has produced so many eminent men; he prescribed its statutes, and left his successors an example which may be said to have descended to our own times. Bayle’s account of Beza, in his usual rambling style, is principally taken from the Latin life published in 1606 by Antonius Fayus, or La Faye. Noel Taillepied, Bolsec, and a doctor of the Sorbonne, named Lainge, or Laingeus, have also written lives of this reformer. Other authorities will be subjoined in the note.

, a noted Socinian writer, was born in 1615, at Wotton-under-Edge, in Gloucestershire.

, a noted Socinian writer, was born in 1615, at Wotton-under-Edge, in Gloucestershire. He was educated at the free-school in that town and, being a promising youth, was noticed by George lord Berkeley, who made him an allowance of 10l. a year. While at this school, he translated Virgil’s eclogues, and the two first satires of Juvenal, into English verse, both which were printed at London in 1634, in 8vo. In 1634 he was sent to Oxford, and entered at Magdalen-hall. June 23, 1683, he took the degree of bachelor of arts, and soon after was invited to be master of the school of his native place, but declined it. May 20, 1691, he took his degree of master of arts; and the magistrates of Gloucester having chosen him master of the free-school of St. Mary de Crypt in that city, he went and settled there, and was much esteemed for his diligence. Falling, however, into some opinions concerning the Trinity, different from those commonly received, and having expressed his thoughts with too much freedom, he was accused of heresy: and being summoned before the magistrates, he exhibited in writing a confession, which not being thought satisfactory, he was obliged to make another more explicit than the former. When ha had fully considered this doctrine, he comprised it in twelve arguments drawn, as he pretended, froai the Scripture wherein the commonly-received opinion, touching the deity of the Holy Spirit, is attempted to be refuted . An acquaintance who had a copy of them, having shewed them, to the magistrates of Gloucester, and to the parliament committee then residing there, he was committed, Dec. 2, 1645, to the common gaol, till the parliament should take cognizance of the matter. However, an eminent person in Gloucester procured his enlargement, by giving security for his appearance when the parliament should send for him. June 1616, archbishop Usher, passing through Gloucester in his way to London, had a conference with our author, and endeavoured, but in vain, to convince him of his errors. Six months after he had been set at liberty he was summoned to appear at Westminster, and the parliament appointed a committee to examine him before whom he freely confessed, that he did not acknowledge the commonly-received notion of the divinity of the Holy Ghost, but, however, was ready to hear what could be opposed to him, and, if he could not make out his opinion to be true, honestly to own his error. But being wearied with tedious and expensive delays, he wrote a letter to sir Henry Vane, a member of the committee, requesting him either to procure his discharge, or to make a report of his case to the house of commons. The result of this was, his being committed to the custody of one of their officers, which restraint continued the five years following. He was at length referred to the assembly of divines then sitting at Westminster, before whom he often appeared, and gave them in writing his twelve arguments, which were published the same year. Upon their publication, he was summoned to appear at the bar of the house of commons; where being asked, “Whether he owned this treatise, and the opinions therein” he answered in the affirmative. Upon which he was committed to prison, and the house ordered, Sept. 6, 1747, that the book should be called in and burnt by the hangman, and the author be examined by the committee of plundered ministers. But Mr. Biddle drew a greater storm upon himself by two tracts he published in 1648, “A confession of faith touching the Holy Trinity according to the Scripture” and “The testimonies of Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Novatianusy Theophilus, Origen, also of Arnobius, Lactantius, Eusebius, Hilary, and Brightman, concerning that one God, and the persons of the Holy Trinity, together with observations on the same.” As soon as they were published, the assembly of divines solicited the parliament, and procured an ordinance, inflicting death upon those that held opinions contrary to the received doctrine about the Trinity, and severe penalties upon those who differed in lesser matters. Biddle, however, escaped by a dissension in the parliament, part of which was joined by the army; many of whom, both officers and soldiers, being liable to the severities of the ordinance above-mentioned, it therefore from that time lay unregarded for several years. Biddle had now more liberty allowed him by his keepers who suffered him, upon security given, to go into Staffordshire, where he lived some time with a justice of peace, who entertained him with great hospitality, and at his death left him a legacy. Serjeant John Bradshaw, president of the council of state, having got intelligence of this indulgence granted him, caused him to be recalled, and more strictly confined. In this confinement he spent his whole substance, and was reduced to great indigence, till he was employed by Roger Daniel of London, to correct an impression of the Septuagint Bible, which that printer was about to publish and this gained him for some time a comfortable subsistence.

, a very learned and voluminous German writer, was born at Naumberg, April 5, 1705, and studied at Wittemberg,

, a very learned and voluminous German writer, was born at Naumberg, April 5, 1705, and studied at Wittemberg, where he was admitted to his master’s degree in 1717, and soon after made librarian to the city. In 1732 he returned to Naumberg, ancl was appointed co-rector of the public school, in which office he continued for nine years, and in 1741, on the death of John George Scutz, was promoted to be rector. In 1747, the place of rector of the school of Friedburg becoming vacant, he was invited to fill it, and accordingly, with the coiTsent of his patrons at Nauinberg, he removed thither, and added greatly to the reputation of' the school. He died there in 1772, leaving a vast number of works in Latin and German, published during his literary career, some of which involved him in controversies with his contemporaries, carried on in the German journals with a considerable degree of animosity. Harles enumerates above an hundred and fifty articles of his publication, separately, or in the literary journals, on subjects of sacred criticism, philology, the arts, poetical criticism, and some works of whim and imagination; the following selection will probably afford a sufficient specimen 1. “De insolentia titulorum librariorum,” Naumberg, 1743. 2. “De religione eruditorum,” ibid. 1744. 3. “Metelemata philologica,” ibid. 1746, with a continuation, 1748 50. 4. “Cur homines montani male audiant?” ibid. 1748. 5. “De Latinitate maccaronica,” ibid. 6. “De Isopsephis,” ibid. 7. “Fabulosa de septem dormientibus historia,” ibid. 1752. 8.“DearteObliviscendi,”ibid. 1752. 9.“De primis rei metallicae inventoribus,” ibid. 1763. 10. “De antiquitate sodinarum metallicarum,” ibid. 1764. 11.“Acta scholastica,1741, &c. 8 vols. a collection of programmes and academical dissertations, continued afterwards under the title of “Nova acta scholastica.” 12. “Selecta scholastica,1744 46, 2 vols. 13. “Otia litteraria,” Freiburgh, 1751. In a dissertation which he published in 1749, “De vita musica ad Plauti Mostellarium,” act III. sc. 2. v. 40, he has collected all that the ancients and moderns have advanced against music and musicians but, as this was founded on mistaking the sense of Plautus, it ocsasioned a long literary contest, in which Bidermann did not appear to the best advantage. Harles, indeed, allows that his judgment did not always keep pace with his learning.

, a famous anatomical writer, was born at Amsterdam March 12, 1649. After he had passed through

, a famous anatomical writer, was born at Amsterdam March 12, 1649. After he had passed through his academical studies, he applied himself to physic and anatomy, and took his degree of M. D. He soon acquired considerable practice; in 1688 was made professor of anatomy at the Hague, which he quitted in 1694 for the professorship of anatomy and chirurgery at Leyden; and afterwards William III. of England appointed him his physician, which he accepted on condition of holding his professorship. The king died in 1702, and Bidloo returned to his former employments, in which he had been interrupted by his constant attendance upon that prince. He died at Ley den, April 1713, being 64 years of age. His chief work was his “Anatomia humani corporis,” in 105 plates drawn by Lairesse, Amst. 1685, fol. very beautiful, but not entirely correct, a circumstance which being pointed out by the celebrated Ruysch, drew from Bidloo a reply not very temperate, entitled “Vindiciae quorundam Delineationum Anatomicarum contra ineptasAnimadversionesF. Ruyschii, &c.1697,4to. Bidloo also published 1. “A letter to Anthony Leeuvvenhoek concerning the animals which are sometimes found in the liver of sheep or some other animals.” This was published in Low Dutch, Delft, 1698, 4to. 2. “Gulielmus Cowper criminis Literarii citatus coram tribunali nobiliss. ampliss. Societatis Britanno-Regiae,” Leyden, 1700, 4to, pagg. 4. This piece contains a very severe accusation against Mr. Cowper, a surgeon of London, and fellow of the royal society. Dr. Bidloo being informed that Mr. Cowper was engaged in translating his anatomy into English, had a conversation with him while he was at London, and offered him that in case he had such a design, he would communicate several additions and remarks, which he had made since the publication of that work. Mr. Cowper assured him, that he had no intention of that kind, as he did not understand Latin sufficiently to execute such a task. In the mean while he procured three hundred copies of the cuts of Dr. Bidloo’s book to be bought for him in Holland, upon which he caused the references to be written very artfully, in order to change, and add to, and frequently to spoil the doctor’s explication of the cuts. He had, likewise, an English title-page pasted upon the Latin one, in which, instead of the real author’s name his own was inserted, and he placed his own picture in the room of Dr. Bidloo’s. And although he occasionally mentioned our author in the preface, and added a few cuts at the end, Bidloo affirms, that the preface was inserted afterwards, when Mr. Cowper found that this piece of plagiarism would be resented. He observes, also, that the figures in the appendix were not drawn from the life, since there was no proportion observed in them, as is evident to those who understand the first principles of anatomy. Mr. Cowper wrote an answer to this piece, wherein he charged Dr. Bidloo likewise with plagiarism, and several mistakes, which he had committed; and this affair gave occasion to his publishing afterwards his great work upon the muscles. 3. “Exercitationum Anatomico-Chirurgicarum Decades dua”,“Leyden, 1708, 4to. 4. He published likewise a small piece upon the disease of which king William III. of England died. 5.” Letters of the Apostles who were martyred,“Amsterdam, 1698, 4to, in Low Dutch verse, of which, as well as of Latin, he was very fond, and was thought to have succeeded. He supposes jn this book, that the apostles wrote these letters before they suffered, martyrdom, and addressed them to their disciples, in order to inform them of their last desires, and to instruct them in what manner they ought to act after themselves were removed from this world. There was published at Leyden, 1719, a miscellaneous collection of our author’s poems in Low Dutch. His brother, Lambert Bidloo, an apothecary at Amsterdam, was the author of some Dutch poetry, and of a work” De re herbaria,“printed at the end of the” Catalogue of the Garden of Amsterdam," by Commelin, Leyden, 1709, 12mo. Lambert’s son, Nicholas, became first physician to the Czar Peter I., and inspector of the hospital of St. Petersburgh.

, a French writer, was born at Paris Aug. 24, 1589. His father took the care of

, a French writer, was born at Paris Aug. 24, 1589. His father took the care of his education upon himself, and taught him the languages, philosophy, mathematics, civil law, and divinity. Jerome acquired so much knowledge in a very short time, that at ten years of age he published his description of the Holy Land, entitled “Chorographie, ou Description de la TerreSainte,” Paris, 1600, 12mo; and three years after, two other works, which gained him great reputation in France. The first was, “Discours de la ville de Rome, principales antiquitez & singularitez d'icelle,1601-, 8vo; the other work is “Traite sommaire de Pelection des papes,1605, 8vo, in which piece he gives an account of the different manner of electingthe popes formerly. Henry IV. appointed him page of honour to the dauphin, afterwards Lewis XIII. He wrote also a treatise on the precedency of the kings of France, entitled “De l‘excellence des rois & du royaume de France, traitant de la preseance& des prerogatives des rois des France par dessus tous les antres, & de causes d’icelles.” This book was written in order to confute what Diego Valdes, counsellor of the royal chamber of Granada, had published in favour of the precedency of the kings of Spain, under the title of “De dignitate re gum Hispania?,” Granada, 1602, fol. This he dedicated to the king, who ordered him to continue his researches upon the subject; but the death of this prince interrupted his design, and made him leave the court; whither he was soon recalled at the solicitation of Mr. le Fevre, preceptor to Lewis XIII. and continued there till the death of his friend. In 1613 he published an edition of the Formulae of Marculphus and the year following took a journey to Italy, where he received many marks of esteem from Paul V. Father Paul likewise being pleased w with. his conversation, detained him some time at Venice.

ts, 12mo. His grandson, John Paul Bignon, was librarian to the king, a man of great erudition, and a writer of great powers of invention, if he could compose, as we are

Upon his return from his travels, he applied himself to the practice of the bar with great success. His father procured for him the post of advocate general in the grand council; which office he discharged with such reputation, that the king nominated him some time after counsellor of state, and at last advocate general in the parliament. In 1641 he resolved to confine himself entirely to his business in the council of state, and therefore resigned his place of advocate-general to Mr. Briquet his son -in- law,. The year following he was appointed the king’s librarian. His sonin-law dying in 1645, he was obliged to resume his post of advocate- general, in order to preserve it for his son. He had also a considerable share in the ordinance of the year 1639; and he discharged with great integrity various commissions with which he was intrusted at different times. Queen Anne of Austria, during her regency, sent for him to council upon the most important occasions. He adjusted the differences between Mr. d‘Avaux and Mr. Servien, plenipotentiaries at Minister and he had a share, with M. de Brienne and d’ Emery, in making the treaty of alliance with the states of Holland in 1649. He was appointed, in 1651, to regulate the great affair of the succession of Mantua; and in 1654, to conclude the treaty with the Hans Towns. Mr. Bignon died, aged 66, on the 7th of April, 1656, of an asthma, with which he waa seized the autumn before. In 1757, the abbé Perau published Bignon’s life, two parts, 12mo. His grandson, John Paul Bignon, was librarian to the king, a man of great erudition, and a writer of great powers of invention, if he could compose, as we are told he did, four panegyrics on St. Louis, all different, two of which were pronounced the same day, one at the French academy, and the other at the academy of inscriptions. He wrote also “Vie de Francois Levesque,1684, 12mo; and “Les Aventures d‘Abdalla, fils d’Hanif.1713, 2 vols. 12mo. often reprinted. He had also a hand in the medallic history of the jreign of Louis XIV. and the Journal des Savans. He warmly patronized Tournefort, who named a plant after him Bignonia. He died May 14, 1743.

n mathematics in the works of Wolf, he imbibed likewise a taste for the sceptical philosophy of that writer, and for the system of Leibnitz, which for a time took off his

, an eminent German philosopher and statesman, was born at Camstadt in Wirtemberg, Jan. 23, 1693; his father was a Lutheran minister. By a singular hereditary constitution in this family, Biliinger was born with twelve fingers and eleven toes, which, in his case, is said to have been remedied by amputation when he was an infant. From his earliest years, he showed an uncommon capacity for study, joined to a retired and thinking turn of mind. Happening, when studying at Tubingen, to learn mathematics in the works of Wolf, he imbibed likewise a taste for the sceptical philosophy of that writer, and for the system of Leibnitz, which for a time took off his attention from his other studies. When entered on his theological course, he found himself disposed to connect it with his new ideas on philosophy, and with that view wrote a treatise, “De Deo, anima, et mundo,” which procured him considerable fame, and was the cause of his being chosen preacher at the castle of Tubingen, and repeater in the school of divinity. But fancying Tubingen a theatre too contracted, he obtained of one of his friends a supply of money, in 1719, which enabled him to go to Halle to study more particularly under Wolf himself. This, however, did not produce all the good consequences expected. When after two years he returned to Tubingen, the Wolfian philosophy was no longer in favour, his patrons were cold, his lessons deserted; himself unable to propagate his new doctrines, and his promotion in the church was likely to suffer. In this unpleasant state he remained about four years, when, by Wolf’s recommendation, he received an invitation from Peter I. to accept the professorship of logic and metaphysics in the new academy at St. Petersburgh. Thither accordingly he went in 1725, and was received with great respect, and the academical memoirs which he had occasion to publish increased his reputation in no small degree. The academy of sciences of Paris having about that time proposed for solution the famous problem, on the cause of gravity, Bilfinger carried off the prize, which was one thousand crowns. This made his name be known in every part of Europe, and the duke Charles of Wirtemberg having been reminded that he was one of his subjects, immediately recalled him home. The court of Russia, after in vain endeavouring to retain him, granted him a pension of four hundred florins, and two thousand as the reward of a discovery he had made in the art of fortification. He quitted Petersburgh accordingly in 1731, and being re-established at Tubingen, revived the reputation of that school not only by his lectures, but by many salutary changes introduced in the theological class, which he effected without introducing any new opinions. His greatest reputation, however, rests on his improvements in natural philosophy and mathematics, and his talents as an engineer seem to have recommended him to the promotion which the duke Charles Alexander conferred upon him. He had held many conversations with Bilfinger on the subject of fortifications, and wished to attach him to government by appointing him a privy-councillor in 1735, with unlimited credit. For some time he refused a situation which he thought himself not qualified to fill, but when he accepted it, his first care was to acquire the knowledge necessary for a member of administration, endeavouring to procure the most correct information respecting the political relations, constitution, and true interests of the country. By these means, he was enabled very essentially to promote the commerce and agriculture of his country, and in other respects to improve her natural resources, as well as her political connections, and he is still remembered as one of the ablest statesmen of Germany. The system of fortification which he invented is yet known by his name, and is now the chief means of preserving it, as he died unmarried, at Stuttgard, Feb. 18, 1750. He is said to have been warm in his friendships, but somewhat irascible; his whole time during his latter years was occupied in his official engagements, except an hour in the evening, when he received visits, and his only enjoyment, when he could find leisure, was in the cultivation of his garden. To his parents he was particularly affectionate, and gratefully rewarded all those who had assisted him in his dependent state. His principal works are 1. “Disputatio de harmonia praestabilita,” Tubinguen, 1721, 4to. 2. “De harmonia animi et corporis humani maxime prsestabilita commentatio hypothetica,” Francfort, 1723, 8vo. This was inserted among the prohibited books by the court of Rome in 1734. 3. “De origine et permissione Mali, &c.” ibid. 1724, 8vo. 4. “Specimen doctrinae veterum Sinarum moralis et politicae,” ibid. 1724, 8vo. 5. “Dissertatio historico-catoptrica de speculo Archimedis,” Tubingen, 1725, 4to. 6. “Dilucidationes philosophies; de Deo, anima, &c.” before mentioned, ibid. 1725, 4to. 7. “Bilfingeri et Holmanni epistolae de barmonia praestabilita,1728, 4to. 8. “Disputatio de natura et legibus studii in theologica Thetici,” ibid. 1731, 4to. 9. “Disputatio de cuku Dei rationali,” ibid. 1731. 10. “Notae breves in Spinosae methodum. explicandi scripturas,” ibid. 1732, 4to. 11. “De mysteriis Christianae fidei generatim spectatis sermo,” ibid. 1732, 4to. 12. “La Citadelle coupee,” Leipsic, 1756, 4to. 13. “Elementa physices,” Leipsic, 1742, 8vo; besides many papers in the memoirs of the Petersburgh academy, of which, as well as of that of Berlin, he was a member.

, a learned writer, and bishop, in the end of the sixteenth and beginning of the

, a learned writer, and bishop, in the end of the sixteenth and beginning of the seventeenth century, was born in the city of Winchester, being the son of Harman Bilson, the same probably who was fellow of Merton-college in 1536, and derived his descent by his grandmother, or great-grandmother, from the duke of t>avaria. He was educated in Winchester school and in 1565 admitted perpetual fellow of New-college, after he had served two years of probation. October 10, 1566, he took his degree of bachelor, and April 25, 1570, that of master of arts; that of bachelor of divinity, June 24, 1579; and the degree of doctor of divinity on the 24th of January 1580. In his younger years, he was a great lover of, and extremely studious in, poetry, philosophy, and physic. But when he entered into holy orders, and applied himself to the study of divinity, which his genius chiefly led him to, he became a most solid and constant preacher, and one of the most accomplished scholars of his time. The first preferment he had was that of master of Winchester-school he was then made prebendary of Winchester, and afterwards warden of the college there. To this college he did a very important service, about the year 1584, by preserving the revenues of it when they were in danger of being swallowed up by a notorious forgery, of which, however, we have only an obscure account. In 1585, he published his book of “The true difference betweene Christian Subjection and unchristian Rebellion,” and dedicated it to queen Elizabeth a work, which, although it might answer her immediate purpose, was of fatal tendency to Charles I. few books being more frequently quoted by the mal-contents to justify their resistance to that prince. In 1593, he published a very able defence of episcopacy, entitled, “The perpetuall Government of Christes Church: wherein are handled, the fatherly superioritie which God first established in the patriarkes for the guiding of his Church, and after continued in the tribe of Levi and the Prophetes and lastlie confirmed in the New Testament to the apostles and their successors: as also the points in question at this day, touching the Jewish Synedrion: the true kingdome of Christ: the Apostles’ commission: the laie presbyterie: the distinction of bishops from presbyters, and their succession from the apostles times and hands: the calling and moderating of provinciall synods by primates and metropolitanes the allotting of dioceses, and the popular electing of such as must feede and watch the flock and divers other points concerning the pastoral regiment of the house of God.” On the 20th of April, 15y6, he was elected v confirmed June the llth, and the 13th of the same month consecrated bishop of Worcester and translated in May following to the bishopric of Winchester, and made a privy-counsellor. In 1599, he published “The effect of certaine Sermons touching the full Redemption of Mankind by the death and bloud of Christ Jesus wherein, besides the merite of Christ’s suffering, the manner of his offering, the power of his death, the comfort of his crosse, the glorie of his resurrection, are handled, what paines Christ suffered in his soule on the crosse together with the place and purpose of his descent to hel after death” &c. Lond. 4to. These sermons being preached at Paul’s Cross in Lent 1597, by the encouragement of archbishop Whitgift, greatly alarmed most of the Puritans, because they contradicted some of their tenets, but they are not now thought consonant to the articles of the church of England. The Puritans, however, uniting their forces, and making their observations, sent them to Henry Jacob, a learned puritan, who published them under his own name. The queen being at Farnham-castle, and, to use the bishop’s words, “taking knowledge of the things questioned between him and his opponents, directly commanded him neither to desert the doctrine, nor to let the calling which he bore in the church of God, to be trampled under foot by such unquiet refusers of trueth and authoritie.” Upon this royal command, he wrote a learned treatise, chiefly delivered in sermons, which was published in 1604, under the title of “The survey^of Christ’s sufferings for Man’s Redemption and of his descent to hades or hel for our deliverance,” Lond. fol. He also preached the sermon at Westminster before king James I. and his queen, at their coronation on St. James’s day, July 28, 1603, from Rom. xiii. L. London, 1603, 8vo. In January 1603-4, he was one of the speakers and managers at the Hampton-Court conference, in which he spoke much, and, according to Mr. Fuller, most learnedly, and, in general, was one of the chief maintainers and supports of the church of England. The care of revising, and putting the last hand to, the new translation of the English Bible in king James Ist’s reign, was committed to our author, and to Dr. Miles Smith, afterwards bishop of Gloucester. His last public act, recorded in history, was the being one of the delegates that pronounced and signed the sentence of divorce between Robert Devereux, earl of Essex, and the lady Frances Howard, in the year 1613 and his son being knighted soon after upon this very account, as was imagined, the world was so malicious as to give him the title of sir Nullity Bilson. This learned bishop, after having gone through many employments, departed this life on the 18th of June, 1616, and was buried in Westminsterabbey, near the entrance into St. Edmund’s chapel, on the south side of the monument of king Richard II. His character is represented to the utmost advantage by several persons. Sir Anthony Weldon calls him “an excellent civilian, and a very great scholler” Fuller, “a deep and profound scholar, excellently well read in the fathers” Bishop Godwin, “a very grave iman and how great a divine (adds he), if any one knows not, let him consult his learned writings” Sir John Harrington, “I find but foure lines (in bishop Godwin’s book) concerning him and if I should give him his due, in proportion to the rest, I should spend foure leaves. Not that I need make him better known, being one of the most eminent of his ranck, and a man that carried prelature in his very aspect. His rising was meerly by his learning, as true prelates should rise. Sint non modo labe mali sed suspicione carentes, not onely free from the spot, but from the speech of corruption.” He wrote in a more elegant style, and in fuller and betterturned periods, than was usual in the times wherein he lived. It is related of our prelate, that once, when he was preaching a sermon* at St. Paul’s Cross, a sudden panic, occasioned by the folly or caprice of one of the audience, seized the multitude there assembled, who thought that the church was falling on their heads. The good bishop, who sympathized with the people more from pity than from fear, after a sufficient pause, reassumed and went through his sermon with great composure.

, the writer of several tracts on theological subjects, and author of that

, the writer of several tracts on theological subjects, and author of that laborious performance, “Origines ecclesiastic, or the Antiquities of the Christian church,” was the son of Mr. Francis Bingham, a respectable inhabitant of Wakefield in Yorkshire, where our author was born in September, 1668. He learned the first rudiments of grammar at a school in the same town, and on the 26th of May 1684, was admitted a member of University college in Oxford. There he applied with persevering industry to those studies which are generally considered as most laborious. Though he by no means neglected the writers of Greece or Rome, yet he employed most of his time in studying the writings of the fathers. How earnestly he devoted himself to these abstruse inquiries, he had an early opportunity of giving an honourable testimony, which will presently be mentioned more at large. He took the degree of B. A. in 1688, and on the 1st of July 1689 was elected fellow of the above-mentioned college. His election to this fellowship was attended with some flattering marks of honour and distinction. On the 23d of June, 1691, he was created M. A. about four years after which a circumstance occurred which eventually occasioned him to leave the university. Being called on to preach before that learned body, he would not let slip the opportunity it gave him of evincing publicly his intimate acquaintance with the opinions and doctrines of the fathers, and at the same time of displaying the zeal with which he was resolved to defend their tenets concerning the Trinity, in opposition to the attacks of men in much more conspicuous stations than himself. Having heard what he conceived to be a very erroneous statement of that subject delivered by a leading man from the pulpit at St. Mary’s, he thought it his duty on this occasion to point out to his hearers what the fathers had asserted to be the ecclesiastical notion of the term person. In pursuance of this determination he delivered a very long discourse on the 28th of October, 1695, from the famous words of the apostle, “There are three that bear record in heaven, &c.” This sermon, though containing nothing more than an elaborate defence of the term person, in opposition to the explanation which he had lately heard, drew a heavy censure on the preacher from the ruling members of the university, charging him with having asserted doctrines false, impious, and heretical, contrary to those of the catholic church. This censure was followed by other charges in the public prints, viz. those of Arianism, Tritheism and the heresy of Valentinus Gentilis. These matters ran so high, that he found himself under the necessity of resigning his fellowship, and of withdrawing from the university the former of which took place on the 23d of November 1695. How wholly unmerited these accusations were, not only appears from the sermon itself, now in the possession of the writer of this article, but also from the whole tenor of his life and writings, constantly shewing himself in both a zealous defender of what- is called the orthodox notion of the Trinity. However, that such a censure was passed, is most certain, as well from domestic tradition, as from the mention which is repeatedly made of it in the manuscript papers of our author but we are assured that no traces thereof are now to be found in the books of the university.

Of such importance have the works of this eminent writer been esteemed in foreign countries, that they have all been

Of such importance have the works of this eminent writer been esteemed in foreign countries, that they have all been correctly translated into Latin by Grichow, a divine of Halle in Germany, 11 vols. 4to, 1724 38, and were reprinted in 1751—61. But he did not live to receive this flattering mark of approbation, for he died in 1723. Here it may not be amiss to observe how frequently it occurs that the merits of an eminent ancestor derive honour and emolument on their posterity. It is presumed that the character of the person whose life we have been writing, was the means of procuring the living of Havant for his eldest son, and the late learned and excellent bishop of London, Dr. Lowth, expressly assigns that reason for bestowing a comfortable living on his grandson. “I venerate (says he in a letter which conveyed the presentation) the memory of your excellent grandfather, my father’s particular and most intimate friend. He was not rewarded as he ought to have been I therefore give you this living as a small recompense for his great and inestimable merits.” We shall conclude this article by giving the general character of this divine As a writer his learning was extensive and acute his style zealous and persuasive, and his application uncommonly persevering. His temper, on all common and indifferent occasions, was mild and benevolent and to these he united great zeal in the cause in which he was engaged. Though his passions were so wholly subject to the guidance of religion and virtue, that no worldly losses were sufficient to discompose him, yet whenever he believed the important interests of the church to be in danger, he was always eager to step forth in its defence.

, the second son of the eminent writer before mentioned, was the last of his numerous family, and

, the second son of the eminent writer before mentioned, was the last of his numerous family, and consequently extremely young at the time of his father’s death. Though he died in very early life, yet during the short period of his existence, he pursued his studies with such unremitting 'perseverance, and gave such early proofs of genius and sound understanding, and so strongly evinced his determination to tread in the footsteps of his father, as fully entitle him to a few lines from the pen of the biographer. This young man received his education on the foundation at the Charter-house, from whence he was at the usual age removed to Corpus college in Oxford. In the university he was a most exemplary and persevering student, and was preparing to give public proofs of his diligence, having actually printed every part, except the title-pruge and preface, of a very valuable edition of the Theban story, which was completed and published after his death by a gentleman, into whose hands his papers had fallen, as a security for a sum of money which had been borrowed to facilitate the publication. Whilst he was thus usefully employed, and just as he was on the point of being ordained, with every prospect of promotion from the patronage of archbishop Potter, he was suddenly brought to his grave, at the immature age of 22, by an illness wholly occasioned by -too sedentary a life, and too close an application to his studies. He lies buried in the cloisters of Corpus college, without either monument, inscription, or stone erected to his memory, though it might most truly be said of him, that he fell a martyr to application, industry, and learning.

, a late valuable historical and biographical writer, was born in the parish of St. John’s Clerkenwell, on the 23d

, a late valuable historical and biographical writer, was born in the parish of St. John’s Clerkenwell, on the 23d of November, 1705. His parents were both of them quakers, and his father, Joseph Birch, was a coffee-mill maker by trade. Mr. Joseph Birch endeavoured to bring up his son Thomas to his own business; but so ardent was the youth’s passion for reading, that he solicited his father to be indulged in his inclination, promising, in that case, to provide for himself. The first school he went to was at Hemel-hempsted in Hertfordshire, kept by John Owen, a rigid quaker, for whom Mr. Birch afterwards officiated, some little while, as an usher, but at present he made very little progress. The next school in which he received his education was taught by one Welby, who lived near Turnbull-street, Clerkenwell, a man who never had above eight or ten scholars at a time, whom he professed to instruct in the Latin tongue in the short space of a year and a half, and had great success with Mr. Birch, who afterwards lived with him as an usher; as he also afterwards was to Mr. Besse, the famous quaker in George’s court near St. John’s lane, who published the posthumous works of Claridge. It is farther said, that he went to Ireland with dean Smedley; but in what year he passed over to that country, and how long he resided with the dean, cannot now be ascertained. In his removals as an usher, he always took care to get into a still better school, and where he might have the greatest opportunity of studying the most valuable books, in which he was indefatigable, and stole many hours from sleep to increase his stock of knowledge. By this unremitting diligence, though he had not the happiness of an university education, he soon became qualified to take holy orders in the church of England; and as his early connections were of a different kind, his being ordained was a matter of no small surprise to his old acquaintance. In 1728, he married the daughter of one Mr. Cox, a clergyman to whom he was afterwards curate and in this union he was singularly happy but his felicity was of a short duration, Mrs. Birch dying in less than twelve months after their marriage. The disorder which carried her off was a consumption accelerated by childbearing, and almost in the very article of her death she wrote to her husband the following letter:

quarto edition, in two volumes, of Milton’s prose works, and added a new life of that great poet and writer. Dr. Birch gave to the world', in the following year, his “Memoirs

Having related the more personal and private circumstances of Dr. Birch’s history, we proceed to his various publications. The first great work he engaged in, was “The General Dictionary, historical and critical” wherein a new translation of that of the celebrated Mr. Bayle was included and which was interspersed with several thousand lives never before published. It was on the 29th of April, 1734, that Dr. Birch, in conjunction with the rev. Mr. John Peter Bernard, and Mr. John Lockman, agreed with the booksellers to carry on this important undertaking; and Mr. George Sale was employed to draw up the articles relating to oriental history. The whole design was completed in ten volumes, folio; the first of which appeared in 1734, and the last in 1741. It is universally allowed, that this work contains a very extensive and useful body of biographical knowledge. We are not told what were the particular articles written by Dr. Birch but there is no doubt of his having executed a great part of the dictionary neither is it, we suppose, any disparagement to his coadjutors, to say, that he was superior to them in abilities and reputation, with the exception of Mr. George Sale, who was, without controversy, eminently qualified for the department he had undertaken. The next great design in which Dr. Birch engaged, was the publication of “Thurloe’s State Papers.” This collection, which comprised seven volumes in folio, came out in 1742. It is dedicated to the late lord chancellor Hardwicke, and there is prefixed to it a life of Thurloe but whether it was written or not by our author, does not appear. The same life had been separately published not long before. The letters and papers in this collection throw the greatest light on the pe'riod to which they relate, and are accompanied with proper references, and a complete index to each volume, yet was a work by which the proprietors were great losers. In 1744, Dr. Birch published, in octavo, a “Life of the honourable Robert Boyle, esq” which hath since been prefixed to the quarto edition of the works of that philosopher. In the same year, our author began his assistance to Houbraken and Vertue, in their design of publishing, in folio, the “Heads of illustrious persons of Great Britain,” engraved by those two artists, but chiefly by Mr. Houbraken. To each head was annexed, by Dr, Birch, the life and character of the person represented. The first volume of this work, which came out in numbers, was completed in 1747, and the second in 1752. Our author’s concern in this undertaking did not hinder his prosecuting, at the same time, other historical disquisitions: for, in 1747, appeared, in octavo,“His inquiry into the share which king Charles the First had in the transactions of the earl of Glamorgan.” A second edition ef the Inquiry was published in 1756, and it was a work that excited no small degree of attention. In 1751, Dr. Birch was editor of the “Miscellaneous works of sir Walter Raleigh” to which was prefixed the life of that unfortunate and injured man. Previously to this, Dr. Birch published “An historical view of the negociations between the courts of England, France, and Brussels, from 1592 to 1617; extracted chiefly from the ms State Papers of sir Thomas Edmondes, knight, embassador in France, and at Brussels, and treasurer of the household to the kings James I. and Charles I. and of Anthony Bacon, esq. brother to the lord chancellor Bacon. To which is added, a relation of the state of France, with the character of Henry IV. and the principal persons of that court, drawn up by sir George Carew, upon his return from his embassy there in 1609, and addressed to king James I. never before printed.” This work, which consists of one volume, in octavo, appeared in 1749; and, in an introductory discourse to the honourable Philip Yorke, esq. (the late earl of Hardwicke), Dr. Birch makes some reflections on the utility of deducing history from its only true and unerring sources, the original letters and papers of those eminent men, who were the principal actors in the administration of affairs; after which he gives some account of the lives of sir Thomas Edmondes, sir George Carew, and Mr. Anthorry Bacon. The “Historical View” is undoubtedly a valuable performance, and hath brought to light a variety of particulars relative to the subjects and the period treated of, which before were either not at all, or not so fully known. In 17.51, was published by our author, an edition, in two volumes, 8vo, of the “Theological, moral, dramatic, and poetical works of Mrs. Catherine Cockburn” with an account of her life. In the next year came out his “Life of the most reverend Dr. John Tillotson, lord archbishop of Canterbury. Compiled chiefly from his original papers and letters.” A second edition, corrected and enlarged, appeared in 1753. This work, which was dedicated to archbishop Herring, is one of the most pleasing and popular of Dr. Birch’s performances; and he has done great justice to Dr. Tillotsou’s memory, character, and virtues. Our biographer hath likewise intermixed with his narrative of the good prelate’s transactions, short accounts of the persons occasionally mentioned; a method which he has pursued in some of his other publications. In 1753, he revised. the quarto edition, in two volumes, of Milton’s prose works, and added a new life of that great poet and writer. Dr. Birch gave to the world', in the following year, his “Memoirs of the reign of queen Elizabeth, from the year 1581, till her death. In which the secret intrigues of her court, and the conduct of her favourite, Robert earl of Essex, both at home and abroad, are particularly illustrated. From the original papers of his intimate friend, Anthony Bacon, esq. and other manuscripts never before published.” These memoirs, which are inscribed to the earl of Hardwicke, give a minute account of the letters and materials from which they are taken and the whole work undoubtedly forms a very valuable collection in which our author has shewn himself (as in his other writings) to be a faithfnl and accurate compiler and in which, besides a full display of the temper and actions of the earl of Essex, much light is thrown on the characters of the Cecils, Bacons, and many eminent persons of that period. The book is now becoming scarce, and, as it may not speedily be republished, is rising in its value. This is the case, likewise, with regard to the edition of sir Walter Raleigh’s miscellaneous works. Dr. Birch’s next publication was “The history of the Royal Society of London, for improving of natural knowledge, from its first rise. In which the most considerable of those papers, communicated to the society, which have hitherto not been published, are inserted in their proper order, as a supplement to the Philosophical Transactions.” The twq first volumes of this performance, which was dedicated to his late majesty, appeared in 1756, and the two other volumes in 1757. The history is carried on to the end of the year 1687 and if the work had been continued, and had been conducted with the same extent and minuteness, it would have been a very voluminous undertaking. But, though it may, perhaps, be justly blamed in this respect, it certainly contains many curious and entertaining anecdotes concerning the manner of the society’s proceedings at their first establishment. It is enriched, likewise, with a number of personal circumstances relative to the members, and with biographical accounts of such of the more considerable of them as died in the course of each year. In 1760, came out, in one volume, 8vo, our author’s “Life of Henry prince of Wales, eldest son of king James I. Compiled chiefly from his own papers, and other manuscripts, never before published.” It is dedicated to his present majesty, then prince of Wales. Some have objected to this work, that it abounds too much with trifling details, and that Dr. Birch has not given sufficient scope to such reflections and disquisitions as arose from his subject. It must, nevertheless, be acknowledged, that it affords a more exact and copious account than had hitherto appeared of a prince whose memory has always been remarkably popular; and that various facts, respecting several other eminent characters, are occasionally introduced. Another of his publications was, “Letters, speeches, charges, advices, &c. of Francis Bacon, lord viscount St. AJban, lord chancellor of England.” This collection, which is comprised in one volume, 8vo, and is dedicated to the honourable Charles Yorke, esq. appeared in 1763. It is taken from some papers which had been originally in the possession of Dr. Rawley, lord Bacon’s chaplain, whose executor, Mr. John Rawley, having put them into the hands of Dr. Tenison, they were, at length, deposited in the manuscript library at Lambeth. Dr. Birch, speaking of these papers of lord Bacon, says, that it can scarcely be imagined, but that the bringing to light, from obscurity and oblivion, the remains of so eminent a person, will be thought an acquisition not inferior to the discovery (if the ruins of Herculaneum should afford such a treasure) of a new set of the epistles of Cicero, whom our immortal countryman most remarkably resembled as an orator, a philosopher, a writer, a lawyer, and a statesman. Though this, perhaps, is speaking too highly of a collection, which contains many things in it seemingly not very material, it must, at the same time, be allowed, that nothing can be totally uninteresting which relates to so illustrious a man, or tends, in any degree, to give a farther insight into his character. To this catalogue we have still to add “Professor Greaves’s miscellaneous works,1737, in two vols. 8vo. Dr. Cud worth’s “Intellectual System,” (improved from the Latin edition of Mosheim) his discourse on the true notion of the Lord’s Supper, and two sermons, with an account of his life and writings, 1743, in two vols. 4to. An edition of Spenser’s “Fairy Queen,1751, in three Vols. 4to, with prints from designs by Kent. “Letters between col. Robert Hammond, governor of the Isle of Wight, and the committee of lords and commons at Derbyhouse, general Fairfax, lieut.-general Cromwell, commissary general Ireton, &c. relating to king Charles I. while he was confined in Carisbrooke-castle in that island. Now first published. To which is prefixed a letter from John Ashburnham, esq. to a friend, concerning his deportment towards the king, in his attendance on his majesty at Hampton-court, and in the Isle of Wight,1764, 8vo. Dr. Birch’s last essay, “The life of Dr. Ward,” which was finished but a week before his death, was published by Dr. Maty, in 1766.

royalists gave the name of “foul-mouthed Nedham” who, finding himself somewhat unequal to the Oxford writer, thought fit to ascribe the “Mercurius Aulicus” to several persons,

Sir John’s newspaper which he wrote at Oxford, was entitled “Mercurius Aulicus, communicating the intelligence and affairs of the court to the rest of the kingdom.” It was printed weekly in one sheet, and sometimes more, in 4to and was chiefly calculated to raise the reputation of the king’s friends and commanders, and ridicule those who sided with the parliament. They came out regularly from the beginning of 1642, to the latter end of 1645, and afterwards, occasionally. When Birkenhead was otherwise engaged, Dr. Peter Heylyn supplied his place, but was not thought so capable of that species of writing, as he did not excel in popular wit, which is necessary to render such kind of pieces acceptable to the public. The parliament thought fit to oppose this court -journal by another on their side of the question, under the title of “Mercurius Britannicus,” written by Marchmont Nedham, to whom the royalists gave the name of “foul-mouthed Nedham” who, finding himself somewhat unequal to the Oxford writer, thought fit to ascribe the “Mercurius Aulicus” to several persons, that his deficiency might do the less prejudice to his party. Jacob blunderingly calls the ^ Mercurius Aulicus,“a poem. Sir John’s other satirical works were 1.” The Assembly-man,“written in 1647, but printed, as Wood tells us, 1662-3. 2.” News from Pembroke and Montgomery or, Oxford Manchestered,“c. 1648. 3.” St. Paul’s church-yard libri theologici, politici, historic!, nundinis Paulinis (una cum templo) prostant venales, &c.“printed in three sheets, 1649, 4to. These sheets were published separately, as if they had been parts of one general catalogue. An account of them is in the Cens. Lit. vol. IV. 4.” The four-legged Quaker, a ballad, to the tune of the dog and elder’s maid,“5.” A new ballad of a famous German prince, without date," &c.

, a French poet and miscellaneous writer, was born at Konigsberg, Nov. 24, 1732, of a family of French

, a French poet and miscellaneous writer, was born at Konigsberg, Nov. 24, 1732, of a family of French refugees, of the protestant religion. After completing his education, he became a clergyman of that communion, and appears to have formed his taste for oratory and poetry from a frequent perusal of the Bible, the style of the historical part of which he much admired. He was a no less warm admirer of Homer. Although a Prussian by birth, he was a Frenchman at heart, and having accustomed himself to the language of his family, he felt a strong desire to reside in what he considered as properly his native country, conceiving at the same time that the best way to procure his naturalization would be through the medium of literary merit. As early as 1762, he published at Berlin a translation of the Iliad, which he called a free translation, and was in fact an abridgment and this served to introduce him to D'Alembert, who recommended him so strongly to the king, Frederick II. that he was admitted into the Berlin academy, received a pension, and afterwards visited France in order to complete his translation of Homer. A first edition had been printed in 1764, 2 vols. 8vo, but the most complete did not appear until 1780, and was followed by the Odyssey in 1785. Such was the reputation of both among his countrymen, that the academy of inscriptions admitted his name on their list of foreign members. Modern French critics, however, have distinguished more correctly between the beauties and defects of this translation. They allow him to have been more successful in his “Joseph,” a poem published first in 1767, and with additions in 1786, and now become almost a classic in France. It was translated into English in 1783, 2 vols. 12mo, but is certainly not likely to become a classic in this country, or where a taste prevails for simplicity and elegance. His “Joseph” was followed by “Les Bataves,” a poem of which some detached parts had appeared in 1773, under the title of “Guillaume de Nassau,” Amsterdam. This was reprinted in 1775, and again in 1796. During the war in 1793, as he attached himself to the French interest, he was struck off the list of the academy of Berlin, and his pension withdrawn but on the peace of Bale, his honours and his pension were restored. If his sovereign punished him thus for acting the Frenchman, he was not more fortunate with his new friends, who imprisoned him because he was a Prussian. On the establishment of the institute, however, Bitaube was chosen of the class of literature and the fine arts but gave a very bad specimen of his taste in translating the “Herman and Dorothea” of Goethe, and comparing that author with Homer, whose works, from this opinion, we should suppose he had studied to very little purpose. Some time before his death, which happened Nov. 22, 1808, he was admitted a member of the legion of honour. His other works were 1. “Examen de la Confession de Foi du Vicaire Savoyard,1763, a very liberal expostulation with Rousseau on account of his scepticism. 2. “De l'influence cles Belles-lettres sur la Philosophic,” Berlin, 1767, 8vo; and 3. “Eloge de Corneille,1769, 8vo none of which are in the collection of his works published at Paris in 1804, 9 vols. 8vo. Bitaub cannot be ranked among writers eminent for genius, nor is his taste, even in the opinion of his countrymen, of the purest standard; but his works procured him a considerable name, and many of the papers he wrote in the memoirs of the Paris academy discover extensive reading and critical talents. His private character appears to have been irreproachable, and his amiable manners and temper procured him many friends during the revolutionary successions.

being one of the best preachers of his time.” Felton, in his Classics, commends him as an excellent writer. M. de la Roche, in his memoirs of literature, tells us, that

, an eminent English divine, was born in London, 1654, and educated at Catherine-hail, Cambridge. In 1690, he was inducted into the living of South Okenden, Essex, and four years afterwards to the rectory of St. Mary Aldermary, London and was successively chosen lecturer of St. Olave’s, and of St. Dunstan’s in the West. He was likewise appointed chaplain to king William. He preached before the house of commons Jan. 30, 1699, and in his sermon animadverted on Mr. Toland for his asserting in his life of Milton, that Charles I. was not the author of “Icon Basilike,” and for some insinuations against the authenticity' of the holy scriptures which drew him into a controversy with that author. In 1700, he preached a course of sermons at Boyle’s lecture, in the cathedral church of St. Paul, which were afterwards published. In 1707, he was consecrated to the bishopric of Exeter. Burnet, having mentioned him and sir William Dawes as raised to bishoprics, tells us, “that these divines were in themselves men of value and worth; but their notions were all on the other side. They had submitted to the government but they, at least Blackall, seemed to condemn the revolution, and all that had been done pursuant to it.” And it is asserted in an anonymous pamphlet, published in 1705, that he had refused for two years to take the oath of allegiance to king William. But what contributed most to his fame in his life- time was a controversy he had with Mr. (afterwards bishop) Hoadly, which was occasioned by his sermon upon Rom. xiii. 3, 4, entitled, “The Divine Institution of Magistracy, and the gracious design of its institution,” preached before the queen at St. James’s on Tuesday, March 8, 1708, being the anniversary of her majesty’s happy accession to the throne, and published by her majesty’s special command. The next year, 1709, Mr. Hoadly animadverted upon the bishop’s sermon, in a piece, entitled “Some Considerations humbly offered to the right reverend the lord bishop of Exeter, occasioned by his lordship’s sermon before her majesty, March 8, 1708.” Upon this the bishop published “An Answer to Mr. Hoadly’s Letter,” dated from Bath, May the 10th, 1709. Mr. Hoadly endeavoured to vindicate himself, in “An humble Reply to the right reverend the lord bishop of Exeter’s answer; in which the Considerations offered to his lordship are vindicated, and an apology is added for defending the foundation of the present government,” London, 1709, in 8vo. In this controversy, bishop Blackall defends the High-church, Tory, principles (as they usually are called), of the divine institution of magistracy, and unlimited passive obedience and non-resistance; which Mr. Hoadly opposes. There were several pamphlets written on the side of the bishop against Mr. Hoadly particularly one, entitled, “The best Answer that ever was made, and to which no answer will be made” supposed to be wi'itten by Mr. Lesley, a nonjuring clergyman, and which Mr. Hoadly animadverts upon in the postscript to his humble reply. The wits in the Tatler engaged in this controversy on the side of Hoadly, and with an illiberality not usual in the writers of that paper. He died at Exeter, Nov. 29, 1716, and was interred in the cathedral there. Archbp. Dawes, who had a long and intimate friendship with him, declares, that in his whole conversation he never met with a more perfect pattern of a true Christian life, in all its parts, than in him: so much primitive simplicity and integrity; such constant evenness of mind, and uniform conduct of behaviour; such unaffected and yet most ardent piety towards God such orthodox and steadfast faith in Christ such disinterested and fervent charity to all mankind such profound modesty, humility, and sobriety such an equal mixture of meekness and courage, of cheerfulness and gravity such an exact discharge of all relative duties and in one word, such an indifferency to this lower world and the things of it and such an entire affection and joyous hope and expectation of things above. He says also, that his “manner of preaching was so excellent, easy, clear, judicious, substantial, pious, affecting, and upon all accounts truly useful and edifying, that he universally acquired the reputation of being one of the best preachers of his time.” Felton, in his Classics, commends him as an excellent writer. M. de la Roche, in his memoirs of literature, tells us, that our prelate was one of those English divines, who, when they undertake to treat a subject, dive into the bottom of it, and exhaust the matter. His works were published by archbishop Dawes, in 2 vols. fol. 1723, consisting of Practical discourses on our Saviour’s Sermon on the mount, and on the Lord’s Prayer, together with his sermons preached at Boyle’s lecture, with several others upon particular occasions.

ition, or to give an imposing air to the encroachments of human authority in matters of religion, no writer ever more intrepidly encountered odium, by exposing error and

Without ever taking an active part in the disputes which in his time agitated, and are still agitating, the church of England, on the article of predestination, it is certain that Mr. Blackburne was, in the general sentiments of his creed, what he more than once declared himself to be, a moderate Calvinist; and his writings place it beyond a doubt, that he believed himself so much more a Protestant for being so. His Calvinism, however, was of the largest and most liberal east. This will be easily understood from what he thought of the great work of David Hartley on Man * a book,‘ writes Mr. Blackburne to a friend, in 1750, ’ to which, if I am not exceedingly mistaken, Christianity is, or will be, more beholden than to all the books besides of the two last centuries. But he has joined necessity and religion together. What of that Ask the church of England in her articles.' ”While engaged in the controversial field, and maintaining what he believed to be the cause of truth and liberty, Mr, Blackburne, like his admired Luther, pursued his adversary often with vehemence, and sometimes with asperity of attack and when either rank or eminence in the object of his animadversions was likely to lend a sanction to prejudice and superstition, or to give an imposing air to the encroachments of human authority in matters of religion, no writer ever more intrepidly encountered odium, by exposing error and bigotry if it were even found, where many good and gentle natures will hardly allow it to be looked for, under the lawn and the mitre. Yet, doubtless, in the execution of so critical an office, the most acute and honest judgment might at times fail in discernment, or carry severity too far. To say, therefore, that Mr. Blackburne never passed an unjust censure, or harboured an unworthy dislike, as a polemic, would be to suppose that he was perfect in the most difficult of all tasks the task of inquiring uito the justness of argument, the integrity of motives, and the rectitude of conduct of other men like himself.

the gospel a zealous promoter of civil liberty a close and perspicuous reasoner a keen and energetic writer an attentive, benevolent, and venerable archdeacon an elegant

Such was Francis Blackburne y a believer of Christianity, from the deepest conviction of its truth a Protestant on the genuine principles of the reformation from popery; a strenuous adversary of superstition and intolerance, and of every corruption of the simplicity or the spirit of the gospel a zealous promoter of civil liberty a close and perspicuous reasoner a keen and energetic writer an attentive, benevolent, and venerable archdeacon an elegant and persuasive preacher; a faithful pastor and exemplary guide; of unblemished purity of life; of simple dignity of manners a sincere and cordial friend an affectionate husband, and an indulgent father in short, a just, humane, pious, temperate, and independent man.

, physician to king William III. and queen Anne, and a very voluminous writer, was son of Mr. Robert Blackmore, an attorney at law. He received

, physician to king William III. and queen Anne, and a very voluminous writer, was son of Mr. Robert Blackmore, an attorney at law. He received the first part of his education at a country school, from whence he was removed to Westminster in the thirteenth year of his age. He was afterwards sent to St. Edmund’shall, in the university of Oxford, where he continued thirteen years. He is said to have been engaged for some time in the profession of a school -master but it is probable he did not long continue in that situation and, says Dr. Johnson, to have been once a schoolmaster, is the only reproach which all the perspicacity of malice, animated by wit, has ever fixed upon his private life. It appears that he travelled afterwards into Italy, and took the degree of doctor in physic, at the university of Padua. He also visited France, Germany, and the Low Countries, and having spent about a year and a half abroad, he returned again to England. On his arrival in London, he engaged in the practice of physic there, and was chosen, fellow of the royal college of physicians. He early discovered his attachment to the principles of the revolution; and this circumstance, together with the eminence which he had attained in his profession, recommended him to the notice and favour of king William. Accordingly, in 1697, he was appointed one of his majesty’s physicians in ordinary he had also a gold medal and chain bestowed on him by that prince, and received from him the honour of knighthood. Upon the king’s death, he was one of the physicians who gave their opinions at the opening of his majesty’s body. When queen Anne ascended the throne, he was appointed one of her physicians, and continued in that station for some time. Sir Richard Blackmore was the author of a variety of pieces both in prose and verse and the generality of his productions had many admirers in his own time for the third edition of his “Prince Arthur, an heroic poem in ten books,” was published in 1696, fol. The following year he also published in folio “King Arthur, an heroic poem, in twelve books.” In 1700 he published in folio, in verse, “A Paraphrase on the book of Job as likewise on the songs of Moses, Deborah, David on four select Psalms some chapters of Isaiah and the third chapter of Habbakuk.” He appears to have been naturally of a very serious turn, and therefore took great offence at the licentious and immoral tendency of many of the productions of his contemporary authors. To pass a censure upon these was the design of his poem, entitled “A Satire upon Wit,” or rather the abuse of it, which was first published in 1700. But this piece was attacked and ridiculed by many different writers, and there seemed to be a kind of confederacy of the wits against him. How much, however, they felt his reproof, appears from the following circumstance. In Tom Brown’s works are upwards of twenty different satirical pieces in verse against Blackmore, said to be written by colonel Codrington, sir Charles Sedley, colonel Blount, sir Samuel Garth, sir Richard Steele, Dr. Smith, Mr. William Burnaby, the earl of Anglesea, the countess of Sandwich, Mr. Manning, Mr. Mildmay, Dr. Drake, colonel Johnson, Mr. Richard Norton, &c. and most of these pieces are particularly levelled at our author’s “Satire upon Wit.” One topic of abuse against Blackmore was, that he lived in Cheapside. He was sometimes called the “Cheapside Knight,” and the “City Bard;” and Garth’s verses, in the collection just cited, are addressed “to the merry Poetaster at Sadlers Hall in Cheapside.” In Gibber’s lives we are also told, that “sir Richard had, by the freedom of his censures on the libertine writers of his age, incurred the heavy displeasure of Dryden, who takes all opportunities to ridicule him, and somewhere says, that he wrote to the rumbling of his chariot-wheels. And as if to be at enmity with Blackmore had been hereditary to our greatest poets, we find Mr. Pope taking up the quarrel where Dryden left it, and persecuting this worthy man with yet a severer degree of satire. Blackmore had been informed by Curl, that Mr. Pope was the author of a Travestie on the first Psalm, which he takes occasion to reprehend in his ‘ Essay on PoJite Learning,’ vol. II. p. 270. He ever considered it as the disgrace of genius, that it should be employed to burlesque any of the sacred compositions, which, as they speak the language of inspiration, tend to awaken the soul to virtue, and inspire it with a sublime devotion.

mpartial estimate of the character and various productions of Blackmore, will acknowledge, that as a writer, with all his faults, he had considerable merit; that as a man,

On the 16th of November 1713, he began a paper, printed three times a week, called the “Lay Monk.” Only forty numbers of it were published, which, in 1714, were collected into a volume, under the title of the “Lay Monastery.” The Friday’s papers in this collection were written by Hughes, and the rest by sir Richard. In a letter to Mr. Hughes, he declared that he was not determined to the undertaking by a desire of fame or profit, hut from a regard to the public good. In 1716, he published in 2 vols. 8vo, “Essays upon several subjects,” and in 1718, “A collection of poems,” in 1 vol. 8vo. But the work which procured him the greatest reputation, was his “Creation, a philosophical poem, demonstrating the Existence and Providence of a God, in seven books.” This passed through several editions, and was greatly applauded by Mr. Addison. Mr. Locke also formed a very favourable opinion of sir Richard Blackmore; although perhaps he estimated his poetical talents too highly. In 1721, our author published in 12mo, “A new version of the Psalms of David, fitted to the tunes used in churches.” This was recommended by public authority, as proper to be used in the churches and chapels of England, but it does not appear to have been generally adopted. Towards the close of his life, his practice as a physician is said to have declined which might probably arise from the numerous attempts which were made to lessen his reputation. He died on the 8th of October, 1729, in an advanced age; and manifested in his last illness the same fervent piety, which had distinguished him in his life. He was certainly a man of considerable learning and abilities, and a most zealous advocate for the interests of religion and virtue. He wrote, indeed, too much, and was deficient in point of taste nor did he take sufficient time to polish his compositions. But he was far from being destitute of genius; and it is sufficiently manifest, that it was not his dullness, which excited so much animosity against him. Hardly any author has ever been more satirized than sir Richard Blackmore, and yet, so far as we can judge from his writings, there have been few, perhaps none, who have had better intentions. He had very just ideas of the true ends of writing and it would have been happy for the world, if such ideas had been adopted by, and really influenced, authors of more brilliant genius. And though his historical and epic poems exposed him to some degree of ridicule, yet he was far from being a proper object of the extreme contempt with which he was treated. The merit of his poem on Creation, and the excellency of his life, might have procured him better usage. And whatever were the defects of his compositions, he was justly entitled to commendation for the morality of their tendency. He who labours to reform mankind is more deserving of our esteem, than he who would corrupt them, whatever may be the powers of genius possessed by the latter, or whatever reputation his wit may have procured him. The fashion of the times, or the mutual jealousies and animosities of contemporary wits and authors, often occasion great injustice to be done to worthy men and useful writers. But time will, generally, in a great degree, remove such prejudices; and those who form an impartial estimate of the character and various productions of Blackmore, will acknowledge, that as a writer, with all his faults, he had considerable merit; that as a man, he was justly entitled to great applause. For, numerous as his enemies and opponents were, they seem to have been incapable of fixing the least imputation upon his character; and those who personally knew him spoke highly of his virtues. We think it an act of justice to endeavour to remove from a worthy man some part of that load of obloquy with which his memory has been overwhelmed. To this character, from the Biog. Britannica, we may add, that Dr. Johnson has increased the number of those liberal-minded men who have endeavoured to rescue sir Richard Blackmore’s name from the contempt with which it has been treated, and to do justice to his abilities as well as his virtues. To his “Creation” the doctor has given high praise, and has drawn the character of it with singular precision and elegance. From the inaccuracy with which Blackmore in his poems has pronounced the ancient, names of nations or places, Dr. Johnson has inferred, that the thirteen years he spent at the university, seem to have passed with very little attention to the business of the place. A strong testimony, however, to his diligence whilst at Edmund-hall, has lately been produced in the Gentleman’s Magazine, from Turner’s “Book of Providence.” “Dr. Richard Blackmore,” says Turner, “my contemporary and colleague (fellow collegian) at Oxon, now living, and one of the college in London, was, in his first years, one of the most eager and diligent students I ever knew sitting up at his book till twelve, one, two, and sometimes three o'clock in the morning, and then lying down only upon his chairs till prayer-time, till his health broke, and he was constrained by necessity to retire into the country, to repair himself by physic.

his works will only hold forth to future generations his knowledge of the law, and his talents as a writer, there was hardly any branch of literature he was unacquainted

His professional abilities need not be dwelt upon. They will be universally acknowledged and admired, as long as his works shall be read, or, in other words, as long as the municipal laws of this country shall remain an object of study and practice and though his works will only hold forth to future generations his knowledge of the law, and his talents as a writer, there was hardly any branch of literature he was unacquainted with. He ever employed much time in reading, and whatever he had read and once digested, he never forgot. He was an excellent manager of his time and although so much of it was spent in an application to books, and the employment of his pen, yet this was done without the parade or ostentation of being a hard student. It was observed of him, during his residence at college, that his studies never appeared to break in upon the common business of life, or the innocent amusements of society; for the latter of which few men were better calculated, being possessed of the happy faculty of making iis own company agreeable and instructive, whilst he enjoyed, without reserve, the society of others. Melancthon himself could not have been more rigid in observing the hour and minute of an appointment. During the years in which he read his lectures at Oxford, it could not be remembered that he had ever kept his audience waiting for him, even for a few minutes. As he valued his own time, he was extremely careful not to be instrumental in squandering or trifling away that of others, who, he hoped, might have as much regard for theirs, as he had for his. Indeed, punctuality was in his opinion so much a virtue, that he could not bring himself to think favourably of any who were notoriously defective in it.

, an ingenious and very learned writer of the last century, was born August 4, 1701, in the city of

, an ingenious and very learned writer of the last century, was born August 4, 1701, in the city of Aberdeen. His father, the rev. Mr. Thomas Blackwell, was minister of Paisley in Renfrewshire, from whence he was removed in 1700 to be one of the ministers of Aberdeen. He was afterwards elected professor of divinity in the Marischal college of that city, and in 1717 was presented by his majesty to be principal of the college, in both which offices he continued until his death in 1728. His mother’s name was Johnston, of a good family near Glasgow, and sister to Dr. Johnston, who was many years professor of medicine in the university of Glasgow. Our author received his grammatical education at the grammarschool of Aberdeen, studied Greek and philosophy in the Marischal college there, and took the degree of master of arts in 1718; which, as he was at that time only seventeen years of age, must be regarded as a considerable testimony of his early proficiency in literature. A farther proof of it was his being presented, on the 28th of November 1723, by his majesty king George the First, to the professorship of Greek, in the college in which he had been educated. He was admitted into this office on the 13th of December in the same year; and after that continued to teach the Greek language with great applause. His knowledge of that language was accurate and extensive, and his manner of communicating it perspicuous and engaging. He had a dignity of address which commanded the attention of the students, a steadiness in exacting the prescribed exercises which enforced application, and an enthusiasm for the beauties of the ancients, and utility of classical learning, which excited an ardour of study, and contributed much to diffuse a spirit for Grecian erudition far superior to what had taken place before he was called to the professorship. Together with his lessons in the Greek tongue, he gave, likewise, lessons on some of the Latin classics, chiefly with a view to infuse a relish for their beauties. To his zeal and diligence in discharging the duties of his station, it is probable that the world was, in part, indebted for such men as Campbell, Gerard, Reid, Beattie, Duncan, and the Fordyces, who have appeared with so much eminence in the republic of letters. When the celebrated Dr. Berkeley was engaged in the scheme of establishing an American university in the Summer Islands, Mr. Blackwell was in treaty with him for going out as one of his young professors; but the negociation did not take effect. In 1735 was published at London, in octavo, without the name of the bookseller, and without his own name, our author’s “Enquiry into the Life and Writings of Homer” a work, the great ingenuity and learning of which will be acknowledged by all who have perused it. It was embellished with plates, designed by Gravelot, and executed by different engravers. This we apprehend to be the most esteemed, and it is, in our opinion, the most valuable, of Mr. Blackwell’s performances. The second edition appeared in 1736; and, not long after, he published “Proofs of the Enquiry into Homer’s Life and Writings, translated into English being a key to the Enquiry with a curious frontispiece.” This was a translation of the numerous Greek, Latin, Spanish, Italian and French notes which had been subjoined to the original work. In 1748, came out, in London, “Letters concerning Mythology,” in a large octavo, but without the bookseller (Andrew Millar’s) name. On the 7th of October, in the same year, our author was appointed by his late majesty, George II. to be principal of the Marischal college in Aberdeen, and was admitted to the office on the 9th of November following. He continued, also, professor of Greek till his death. He is the only layman ever appointed principal of that college, since the patronage came to the crown, by the forfeiture of the Marischal family in 1716 all the other principals having been ministers of the established church of Scotland. When Robert and Andrew Foulis, printers at Glasgow, intended to publish an edition of Plato, Mr. Blackwell proposed to furnish them with several critical notes for it, together with an account of Plato’s Life and Philosophy but the printers not acceding to the terms which he demanded for this assistance, he promised, by a Latin advertisement in 1751, himself to give an edition of Plato. His design, however, was not carried into execution nor did it appear, from any thing found among his papers after his death, that he had made any considerable progress in the undertaking. On the 3d of March, 1752, he took the degree of doctor of Laws. In the following year, appeared the first volume of his “Memoirs of the Court of Augustus,” in 4to. The second volume came out in 1755 and the third, which was posthumous, and left incomplete by the author, was prepared for the press by John Mills, esq. and published in 1764. At the same time, was published the third edition of the two former volumes. This is a proof of the good reception the work met with from the public, though it must be acknowledged that the parade with which it was written, and the peculiarity of the language, exposed it to some severity of censure, particularly to a most acute, and in some respects humourous, criticism by Dr. Johnson, written for the Literary Magazine, and now inserted in Johnson’s works. It cannot be denied that there is a considerable degree of affectation in Dr. Blackwell’s style and manner of composition and, unhappily, this affectation increased in him as he advanced in years. His “Enquiry into the Life of Homer” was not free from it it was still more discernible in his “Letters concerning Mythology” and was most of all apparent in his “Memoirs of the Court of Augustus.” We perceive in his various productions a mixture of pedantry but it is not the sober dull pedantry of the merely recluse scholar. In Dr. Blackwell it assumes a higher form. Together with the display of his erudition, he is ambitious of talking like a man who is not a little acquainted with the world. He is often speaking of life and action, of men and manners; and aims at writing with the freedom and politeness of one who has been much conversant with the public. But; in this he is unsuccessful: for though he was not destitute of genius or fancy, and had a high relish for the beauties of the ancient authors, he never attained that simplicity of taste, which leads to true ease and elegance in composition. It is probable, also, that, like many others at that time, he might be seduced by an injudicious imitation of lord Shaftesbury; a writer, whose faults have been found more easily attainable than his excellences.

, a learned English writer of the church of Rome, in the beginning of the seventeenth century,

, a learned English writer of the church of Rome, in the beginning of the seventeenth century, was born in the county of Middlesex, and admitted a scholar of Trinity college in Oxford at seventeen years of age, May 27, 1562, probationer in 1565, being then bachelor of arts, perpetual fellow the year following, and master of arts in 1567. But being more inclined to the Roman catholic than the Protestant religion, he left his fellowship, and retired to Gloucester hall, where he continued for some time, and was highly esteemed by Edmund Rainolds and Thomas Allen, two learned seniors of that hall. He afterwards went beyond sea, and spent some time in one of the English seminaries newly erected to receive the exiled English catholics andwas at last in 1598, with the permission of pope Clement VIII. constituted by Henry cardinal Cajetan, protector of the English nation at Rome, and superior of the English clergy, with the authority and name of Archpriest of England, and was appointed by that pope notary of the apostolic see. This affair being resented by the English catholic clergy, especially as they imagined that our author was absolutely under the influence of Henry Garnet, provincial of the Jesuits of England, it occasioned a warm contest between them in England. The Jesuits wrote and spoke against the secular priests in so virulent a manner, as to detract very much from BlackwelPs authority who upon this degraded them of their faculties, so that when they afterwards appealed to the pope, he caused them to be declared in a book schismatics and heretics. They vindicated themselves from this charge, and procured the censure“of the university of Paris in their favour; which was answered by our author. He also declared his abhorrence of the Powder Plot in 1605, and wrote two letters to dissuade the Roman catholics from all violent practices against the king and government. He held the office of archpriest till 1607, when he was succeeded by George Birket. The reason of this change was, because our author having been seized at London June 24 the same year, he was committed to prison, and consequently deprived of the liberty required to act in his office. He was released soon after upon his taking the oath of allegiance. An account of this aft'air was published at London, 1607, in 4to, entitled” The examination of George Blackwell, upon occasion of his answering a letter sent by cardinal Bellarmine, who blamed him for taking the oath of allegiance." He died suddenly January 12, 1612-3, and was buried, as Mr. Wood supposes, in some church in London. He was esteemed by those of his own persuasion, and by others likewise, a man of great learning and piety, and a good preacher.

died in 1623, and was interred at Poictiers in St. Porcharius church, near his brother George. As a writer, he was chiefly known for his vindication of his royal mistress,

, professor of civil law at Poictiers, was born at Dumfermling, in Scotland, in 1539, descended of an ancient family. He was left an orphan in the tenth year of his age, and was sent by his uncle, the bishop of Orkney, to the university of Paris. On his uncle’s death, by which he seems to have lost the means of being able to remain at Paris, he returned to Scotland, but finding no encouragement there, he went again to Paris, where, by the liberality of Mary, queen of Scotland, he was enabled to pursue his studies in philosophy, mathematics, and the oriental languages. He then went to the university of Tholouse, where he studied civil law for two years and having obtained the patronage of Beaton, archbishop of Glasgow, he was chosen by the parliament of Poictiers one of their counsellors, and afterwards professor of civil law. He died in 1623, and was interred at Poictiers in St. Porcharius church, near his brother George. As a writer, he was chiefly known for his vindication of his royal mistress, when put to death by queen Elizabeth, written with all that bitterness of resentment which is natural for a man of spirit to feel, who, by an act of flagrant injustice, was deprived of his mistress and his sovereign, his friend and his benefactress. He addresses himself, in a vehement strain of passion, to all the princes of Europe, to avenge her death; declaring, that they are unworthy of royalty, if they are not roused on so interesting and pressing an occasion. He laboured hard to prove that Henry VIII.' s marriage with Anne Bolen was incestuous a calumny too gross to merit a formal refutation. This work was entitled “Martyre de Maria Stuart Reyne d'Escosse,” Antwerp, 1588, 8vo. His other works were, 1. “Adversus G. Buchanani Dialogum de Jure Ilegni apud Scotos, pro regibus apologia,” Pict. 1580, 8vo. 2. “De Vinculo Religionis et Imperii,” Paris, 1575, 8vo. 3. “Sanctarum precationum prsemia,” a manual of devotions, Pict. 1598, 8vo. 4. “Varii generis poemata,” ibid. 1609, 8vo. 5. “Jacobi I. Magnse Britanniae inauguratio,” Paris, 1606, 4to. These and some other pieces by him, were collected and published, with a life, by Gabriel Naudeus, 1644, 4to.

stribution of the several heads, and the extracts from them, it seems to be the work of an ingenious writer; one far superior to Joseph Blagrave in style and composition;

, probably a relation of the preceding, was born in the parish of St. Giles, Reading, in 1610, and was a great enthusiast in astrological studies. He published “An introduction to Astrology,1682, 8vo, to which is prefixed an engraving of him mentioned by Granger. He was the author of a large supplement to Culpepper’s Herbal; to which is added “An account of all the Drugs that were sold in the druggists and apothecaries shops, with their dangers and connexions.” To this book is subjoined “A new tract of Chirurgery,” 8vo. He was also author of “The Astrological practise of Physick, discovering the true method of curing all kinds of diseases, by such herbs and plants as grow in our nation,” 8vo. In the Biographia Britannica, is an account of a manuscript which had been seen by Dr. Campbell, the author of that article, and had been bought at the sale of the library of an eminent physician near Covent-garden. In the first leaf it was said to be written by Mr. J. Blagrave, and was dedicated to Mr. B. (Backhouse) of Swallowfield. It appeared, from some mention of the royal society, and its members, to have been written in 1669, or 1670. The title was, “A remonstrance in favour of Ancient Learning against the proud pretensions of the moderns, more especially in respect to the doctrine of the Stars.” From the distribution of the several heads, and the extracts from them, it seems to be the work of an ingenious writer; one far superior to Joseph Blagrave in style and composition; and might, possibly, as Mr. Coates conjectures, be an unpublished work of Mr. John Blagrave, the mathematician, by whose will he inherited an estate in Swallowfield, yet we know not how to reconcile this with the dates respecting the royal society, which certainly did not exist in the mathematician’s time. This Joseph Blagrave died in 1679.

noticed, related to Dr. Hugh Blair. He came to London in company with Andrew Henderson, a voluminous writer, who, in his title-pages styled himself A. M. and for some years

, was educated at Edinburgh, and was, as already noticed, related to Dr. Hugh Blair. He came to London in company with Andrew Henderson, a voluminous writer, who, in his title-pages styled himself A. M. and for some years kept a bookseller’s shop in Westminster-hall. Henderson’s first employment was that of an usher at a school in Hedge-lane, in which he was succeeded by his friend Blair, who, in 1754, obliged' the world with a valuable publication under the title of “The chronology and history of the world, from the creation to the year of Christ 1753. Illustrated in fifty-six tables; of which four are introductory, and contain the centuries prior to the first olympiad; and each of the remaining fifty-two contain in one expanded view fifty years, or half a century. By the rev. John Blair, LL. D.” This volume, which is dedicated to lord chancellor Hardwicke, was published by subscription, on account of the great expence of the plates, for which the author apologized in his preface, where he acknowledged great obligations to the earl of Bath, and announced some chronological dissertations, in which he proposed to illustrate the disputed points, to explain the prevailing systems of chronology, and to establish the authorities upon which some of the particular seras depend. In Dr. Hugh Blair’s life, it has been noticed that this work was partly projected by him. In January 1755, Dr. John Blair was elected F. R. S. and in 1761, F. A. S. In 1756 he published a second edition of his Chronological Tables. In Sept. 1757, he was appointed chaplain to the princess dowager of Wales, and mathematical tutor to the duke of York; and, on Dr. Townshend’s promotion to the deanry of Norwich, the services of Dr. Blair were rewarded, March 10, 1761, with a prebendal stall at Westminster. The vicarage of Hinckley happening to fall vacant six days after, by the death of Dr. Moires, Dr. Blair was presented to it by the dean and chapter of Westminster and in August that year he obtained a dispensation to hold with it the rectory of Burton Goggles, in Lincolnshire. In September 1763, he attended his royal pupil the duke of York in a tour to the continent; had the satisfaction of visiting Lisbon, Gibraltar, Minorca, most of the principal cities in Italy, and several parts of France and returned with the duke in August 1764. In 1768 he published an improved edition of his Chronological Tables, which he dedicated to the princess of Wales, who had expressed her early approbation of the former edition. To the edition were annexed fourteen maps of ancient and modern geography, for illustrating the tables of chronology and history. To which is prefixed a dissertation on the progress of geography. In March 1771 he was presented by the dean and chapter of Westminster to the vicarage of St. Bride’s, in the city of London which made it necessary for him to resign Hinckley, where he had never resided for any length of time. On the death of Mr. Sims, in April 1776, he resigned St. Bride’s, and was presented to the rectorjr of St. John the Evangelist in Westminster and in June that year obtained a dispensation to hold the rectory of St. John with that of Horton, near Colebrooke, Bucks. His brother, captain Blair *, falling gloriously in the service of his country in the memorable sea-fight of April 12, 1782, the shock accelerated the doctor’s death. He had at the same time the influenza in a severe degree, which put a period to his life June 24, 1782. His library was sold by auction December 1113, 1781; and a course of his “Lectures on the canons of the Old Testament,” has since appeared.

Such are the only particulars handed down to us respecting the writer of “the Grave.” It is but lately that the poem was honoured

Such are the only particulars handed down to us respecting the writer of “the Grave.” It is but lately that the poem was honoured with much attention, and appears to have made its way very slowly into general notice. The pious and congenial Hervey was among the first who praised it. Mr. Pinkerton in his “Letters of Literature,” published under the name of Heron, endeavoured to raise it far above the level of common productions, and it has of late years been frequently reprinted but it may be questioned whether it will bear a critical examination. It has no regular plan, nor are the reflections on mortality embellished bj any superior graces. It is perhaps a stronger objection that they are interrupted by strokes of feeble satire at the expence of physicians and undertakers. His expressions are often mean, and his epithets ill-chosen and degrading, “supernumerary horror;” “new-made widow;” “sooty blackbird;” “strong-lunged cherub;” “lame kindness,” c. &c. “solder of society” “by stronger arm belaboured” “great gluts of people,” &c. are vulgarisms which cannot be pardoned in so short a production.

, a German writer of some note, was born at Colberg in Pomerania, Jan. 24, 1744,

, a German writer of some note, was born at Colberg in Pomerania, Jan. 24, 1744, and entered into the Prussian service at the age of fourteen, where he distinguished himself during the seven years war. After having been in the army for twenty-one years, the bad state of his health obliged him to solicit his discharge, which was granted him with the rank of captain, and from that time he took up his resi-. dence at Leipsic, devoting his time to literary studies and pursuits. He was a man of good taste, as well as judgment, and had a very great memory. His original works were, 1. “An essay on Romance,” Leipsic, 1774, 8vo. 2. “A supplement to Sulzer’s Universal Theory of the Fine Arts,1786—87, four parts, 8vo, reprinted at Leipsic, 1792 94. 3. “On the German language and literature,” printed in Adelung’s Magazine for 1784. He was very desirous of introducing English literature into his country, and with this view published German translations, with useful notes, of Dr. Gilbert Stuart’s View of Society, Leipsic, 1779, 8vo Dr. Johnson’s Lives of the Poets, Altenburgh, 1781—1785, 8vo and Dr. Gillies’s History of Greece, Leipsic, 1787, &c. He died May 4, 1796.

, which is equally elegant and faithful. Prefixed is a Life of Tacitus, which is also worthy of this writer, and was admired for strength of sentiment and animation of

, was born at Rennes, Eeb. 25, 1696, and entered early into the congregation of the oratory, where he was a distinguished professor. The order against wigs, which seems to have raised very serious scruples, occasioned his quitting it; but he retained the friendship and esteem of his former brethren. He then went to Paris, where his talents procured him the professorship of eloquence in the collegeroyal, and a place in the academy of belles lettres. He published several works, which have been well received by the public 1. “The Life of the Emperor Julian,” Paris, 1735, 1746, 12mo, a curious performance, well written, and distinguished at once by impartiality, precision, elegance and judgment, and which was translated into English under the inspection of Mr. Bowyer in 1746. 2. “The History of the Emperor Jovian,” with translations of some works of the emperor Julian, Paris, 1748, 2 vols. 12mo, a book no less valuable than the former, by the art with which the author has selected, arranged and established facts, and by the free and varied turns of the translator. This was abridged by Mr. Duncombe in the “Select Works of the Emperor Julian,1784, 2 vols. 8vo. The life of Jovian, however, seems much inferior to that of Julian. But the difference may be owing to the character of those two persons, the one being an object of much more interest than the other. 3. A translation of some works of Tacitus, Paris, 1755, 2 vols. 12mo. The manners of the Germans, and the life of Agricola, are the two pieces comprised in this version, which is equally elegant and faithful. Prefixed is a Life of Tacitus, which is also worthy of this writer, and was admired for strength of sentiment and animation of style. For this historian the abbé cle la jSleterie had an uncommon predilection he spoke of him incessantly to his friends. “To Tacitus,” said he, “I am much indebted I ought therefore in justice to dedicate to his glory the remainder of my life.” 4. “Tiberius, or the six first books of the Annals of Tacitus, translated into French,” Paris, 1768, 3 vols. 12mo. This work was not so popular among his countrymen, who blame the affected style, and say they very seldom discover in it the elegant historian of Julian. It occasioned at the time these two lines

unger son of sir Henry Blount, and brother to sir Thomas Pope Blount hereafter mentioned, an eminent writer in the last century, was born at his grandfather’s seat at Upper

, younger son of sir Henry Blount, and brother to sir Thomas Pope Blount hereafter mentioned, an eminent writer in the last century, was born at his grandfather’s seat at Upper Holloway, in the county of Middlesex, April 27, 1654. He was endowed by nature with a great capacity, and with a strong propensity to learning; which excellent qualities were properly cultivated by the assiduous care of his father, and under so able an instructor, he quickly acquired an extraordinary skill in the arts and sciences, without any thing of that pedantry, which is too frequently the consequence of young men’s application to study in the common course. His pregnant parts and polite behaviour brought him early into the world, so that his father, who was a true judge of men, thought fit, when he was about eighteen, to marry him to Eleanora, daughter of sir Timothy Tyrrel, of Shotover in the county of Oxford, and gave him a very handsome estate, having always respected him as a friend, as well as loved him with the affection of a father. The year after his marriage, he wrote a little treatise, which he published without his name, in defence of Dryden, whose “Conquest of Granada” was attacked by Richard Leigh, a player. In 1678, or perhaps in 1679, he published his “Anima Mnndi,” in which it is said, and with great probability, that he had the assistance of his father. It had been long before handed about in manuscript among the acquaintance of its author, with several passages in it much stronger than in that which was transmitted to the press, and licensed by sir Roger L'Estrange. This, however, did not hinder its giving great offence, insomuch that complaint was made to Dr. Compton, then Lord Bishop of London, who, upon perusal, signified that he expected it should be suppressed, and intimating, that he would thereupon rest satisfied. But afterwards, when the Bishop was out of town, an opportunity was taken by some zealous person to burn the book, which however has been reprinted since. The same year he published a broad sheet under the title of “Mr. Hobbes’s last Words and dying Legacy.” It was extracted from the “Leviathan,” and was intended to weaken and expose his doctrine yet he could be no very warm antagonist, since there is still extant a letter of his to Mr. Hobbes, wherein he professes himself a great admirer of his parts, and one who would readily receive his instructions. He afterwards gave a strong testimony in favour of liberty, in a pamphlet on the Popish Plot, and the fearof a Popish successor, entitled, “An Appeal from the country to the city for the preservation of his majesty’s person, liberty, property, and the Protestant religion.” This treatise is subscribed Junius Brutus, and is the strongest invective against Popery and Papists that was published even in that age, when almost all the wit of the nation was pointed that way. There are in it likewise such express recommendations of the Duke of Monmouth, as might well hinder the author from owning it, and give it, in the eyes of the lawyers of those times, an air of sedition at least, if not of treason. In 1680, he printed that work which made him most known to the world, “The Life of Apollonius Tyaneus,” which was soon after suppressed, and only a few copies sent abroad. It was held to be the most dangerous attempt, that had been ever made against revealed religion in this country, and was justly thought so, as bringing to the eye of every English reader a multitude of facts and reasonings, plausible in themselves, and of the fallacy of which, none but men of parts and learning can be proper judges. For this reason it is still much in esteem with the Deists, and the few copies that came abroad contributed to raise its reputation, by placing it in the lists of those that are extremely rare. In the same year he published his “Diana of the Ephesians,” which, as the author foresaw, raised a new clamour, many suggesting that, under colour of exposing superstition, he struck at all Revelation, and while he avowed only a contempt of the Heathen, seemed to intimate no great affection for the Christian priesthood. The wit, learning, and zeal of our author, had, by this time, raised him to be the chief of his sect; and he took a great deal of pains to propagate and defend his opinions in his discourses and familiar letters, as well as by his books, but he had the usual inconsistency of the infidel, and we find him owning, in a letter to Dr. Sydenham, that in point of practice, Deism was less satisfactory than the Christian scheme. The noise his former pieces had made, induced him to conceal, industriously, his being the author of a book, entitled, “Religio Laici,” published in 1683, but which is little more than a translation of Lord Herbert’s treatise under the same title and one may reasonably suppose, that the same motives prevailed on him to drop a design, in which it appears he was once engaged, of writing the Life of Mahomet, the Turkish prophet, which however has been since executed, in his manner, by a French author, Boulanvilliers. That the world might perceive Mr. Blount was capable of turning his thoughts to subjects very different from those he had hitherto handled, he, in 16S4, published a kind of introduction to polite literature, which shewed the extent of his knowledge, and the acquaintance he had in the several branches of philosophy and science. This was entitled “Janus Scientiarum or an Introduction to Geography, Chronology, Government, History, philosophy, and all genteel sorts of Learning,” London, 8vo. He concurred heartily in the Revolution, and seems to have had very honest intentions of punishing those who were king James’s evil counsellors, after the government was re-settled, by declaring the prince and princess of Orange king and queen. He gave another strong testimony of his sincere attachment to his principles, and inviolable love to freedom, by a nervous defence of the liberty of the press wherein he shews that all restraints on it can have no other tendency than to establish superstition and tyranny, by abasing the spirits of mankind, and injuring the human understanding. This little piece, therefore, has been always esteemed one of the best he ever wrote; and has furnished their strongest arguments to many succeeding writers. The warmth of Mr. Blount’s temper, his great affection for king William, and his earnest desire to see certain favourite projects brought about, led him to write a pamphlet, in which, he asserted king William and queen Mary to be conquerors, which was not well relished by the house of commons. The title of this very singular and remarkable piece at large, runs thus: “King William and queen Mary conquerors; or, a discourse endeavouring to prove that their majesties have on their side, against the late king, the principal reasons that make conquest a good title; shewing also how this is consistent with that declaration of parliament, king James abdicated the government, &c. Written with an especial regard to such as have hitherto refused the oath, and yet allow of the title of conquest, when consequent to a just war,1693, 4to.

, father to the preceding, and a considerable writer in the last century, was descended from a very ancient and honourable

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

, an eminent writer towards the close of the seventeenth century, was the eldest

, an eminent writer towards the close of the seventeenth century, was the eldest “son of sir Henry Blount before mentioned, and was born at Upper Holloway in the county of Middlesex, Sept. 12, 1649. He was carefully educated under the eye of his father, who took care to acquaint him with the several branches of polite literature most worthy the notice of a person of his rank; and so great was the improvement he made under so able an instructor, that, even in his junior years, he was considered both as a judicious and learned man, and on this account, as well as for other marks of worth and genius, he was, by king Charles II. advanced to the degree of a baronet, by apatent dated Jan. 27,1679, in the thirtieth year of his majesty’s reign, and in the lifetime of sir Henry Blount his father. He was elected burgess for St. Albari’s in Hertfordshire, in the parliaments in the thirtieth and thirty-first of king Charles II. and was knight of the shire in three parliaments after the Revolution, having also the honour to be elected commissioner of accounts for the three last years of his life by the house of commons. He always distinguished himself as a lover of liberty, a sincere friend to his country, and a true patron of learning. His strong attachment for literature and criticism, and his extensive acquaintance with the best writers in all ages and sciences, appearecLfully in the” Censura," which he composed, first for his own use and satisfaction, and then published in the universal language for the benefit of others. His talents for original remark appear from his essays, which, in point of learning, judgment, and freedom of thought, are certainly no way inferior to those of the famous Montaigne. His knowledge and modesty are equally conspicuous in another piece of his, wherein he presents the public with the fruits of his reading on natural history, without depriving those from whom he drew his knowledge, of any part of their reputation. What he has written on poetry was likewise drawn together for his own information, and afterwards sent abroad for public use. Having thus satisfied in his riper years, the great expectations which his friends had of him in his youth, having been steady to one party, without violence towards others, after acquiring honour in his several public characters, esteem in private conversation, and affection in domestic life, he quietly ended his days at his seat at Tktenhanger, June 30, 1697, in the forty-eighth year of his age, and was buried the eighth of July following, in the vault of his family, at Ridge in Hertfordshire. He married Jane, daughter of sir Henry Caesar, of Benington Place in the county of Hertford, knight, and by her left issue five sons and nine daughters, but the baronetage is now extinct.

, a miscellaneous writer of the seventeenth century, was born 1618, at Bardsley in W

, a miscellaneous writer of the seventeenth century, was born 1618, at Bardsley in Worcestershire, the son of Myles Blount, of Orleton in Herefordshire, who was the fifth son of Roger Blount of Monkland in the same county. He appears to have supplied the want of an university education by diligent application, and after studying the classics, entered himself of the Inner Temple, and was in due course admitted to the bar. Being, however, a Roman catholic, he never pleaded, but after some time resided mostly at Orleton. A sedentary life having much impaired his health, and the popish plot breaking out in 1678, he was so hurried from place to place, that the fatigue brought on a palsy, of which he died at Orleton, Dec. 26, 1679. Whether by this mention of the popish plot, his biographer means that he was concerned in it, does not appear. Wood seems to insinuate that he was only alarmed, as he was known to be a zealous Roman catholic. He was, however, a man of general knowledge, and an industrious and useful writer. His works are, 1. “The Academy of Eloquence, or complete English rhetoric,1654, 12mo, often reprinted. 2. “Glossographia, or a Dictionary of hard words,” Lond. 1656, 8vo. Of this there have been at least five editions. 3. “The Lamps of the Law, and the Lights of the Gospel,” ibid. 1658, 8vo. 4. “Boscobel; or the history of his majesty’s escape after the battle of Worcester,” ibid. 1660. 5. Boscobel, the second part, with the addition of the “Claustrum regale reseratum,” or the king’s concealment at Trent in Somersetshire, published by Mrs. Anne Windham of Trent,” ibid. 1681. Both these now are among the scarce and high-priced curiosities of the seventeenth century. Extracts are given from them in the Addenda to lord Clarendon’s History. 6. “The Catholic Almanac for 1661-2-3, &c.” 7. “Booker rebuked; or animadversions on Booker’s Almanac.” 8. “A Law Dictionary,” ibid. 1671, fol. reprinted with additions. 9. “Animadversions on sir Richard Baker’s Chronicle,” Oxf. 1672, 8vo. 10. “A World of Errors, discovered in Mr. Edmund Philips’s World of Words,” London, 1673, fol. 11. “Fragmenta Antiquitatis. Ancient tenures of land, and jocular customs of some manors,” ibid. 1679, 8vo of which Josiah Beckwith of York published a new edition in 1784. 12. “Animadversions on Blome’s Britannia,” not published. 13. “The art of making Devises, treating of Hieroglyphics, Symbols, &c.” a translation from the French, 1646, 4to. 14. “A catalogue of the Catholics, who lost their lives in the king’s cause, during the civil war,” printed at the end of lord Castlemain’s “Catholic Apology.” 15. “A Chronicle of England,” left imperfect, and a history of Herefordshire, a ms. left with his heirs, but which was probably lost, or has escaped the researches of Mr. Gough. 16. “A pedigree of the Blounts,” printed in Peacham’s “Complete Gentleman,” edit. 1661.

d in France, we apprehend justly, as their first critic and bibliographer in Italian literature this writer speaks of the first edition without a date in the following

In order to appreciate these editions, it is necessary to advert to the fate of this extraordinary work in the press. For about a century, it was circulated in manuscript, and liberties of every kind were taken at every transcription. At length it was printed for the first time, as has been supposed, in 1470, and run through various editions to the end of the fifteenth, and for more than sixty years of the sixteenth century. During this period it was prohibited by the popqs Paul IV. and Pius IV. who were in this respect more scrupulous than their twenty-five or twenty-six predecessors in the papal chair. Two grand dukes of Tuscany, Cosmo I. and Francis I. applied one after the other to two other popes, Pius V. and Gregory XIII. in consequence of which the academicians were employed to reform the Decameron important corrections were made, and many passages suppressed, and in this state various editions were permitted to be printed. But with respect to the ancient editions, it is now necessary to observe that there are two opinions, which we shall state, without attempting to reconcile. We have already noticed that the first edition has been supposed to have been printed in 1470, without a date but on the other hand, it is contended that the edition of 1471, by Valdarfer, is not only the first with a date (which those who maintain the existence of the edition of 1470 are disposed to allow), but that in fact there was no previous edition. Those who are of this latter opinion very naturally ask their antagonists to produce the edition of 1470, or an edition without date that can be supposed of that period. In England it is certain that no such edition is known but the French bibliographers seem to be of a different opinion. Ginguene 1 to whom we are indebted for the greater part of this life of Boccaccio, who has written the literary history of Italy, and is considered in France, we apprehend justly, as their first critic and bibliographer in Italian literature this writer speaks of the first edition without a date in the following terms “Elle est sans date et sans nom de lieu ni d'imprimeur, in-fol. en caracteres inegaux et mal formes.” (Hist. Litt. d'ltalie, vol. III. p. 129). It remains, therefore, for the reader to determine whether this is the language of a man who has seen the book, and describes what he has seen; and if this be decided in the affirmative, the existence of the edition is proved, as far as his authority goes. But it must be confessed Ginguene goes no fa ther. He says nothing of any library which possesses this treasure, nor of its supposed value but when he comes to speak of Valdarfer’s edition of 1471, he informs us that it- has been valued by bibliomaniacs (bibliomanes) at 3000 francs, or 125l. And this brings us to notice the copy of this edition recently sold from the duke of Roxburgh’s library, to the marquis of Blandford, for the immense (and with respect to the value of books, the unprecedented) sum of Two Thousand Two Hundred And Sixty Pounds. In the catalogue of this library, it is stated that “no other perfect copy is yet known to exist, after all the fruitless researches of more than three hundred years;” but, notwithstanding this, we find that the French bibliographers set a value on the edition, as if copies, however rare, were still occasionally to be found. We cannot suppose that the French booksellers or collectors would fix a price-current on an article which had not been seen, for three hundred years, still less that our authority is speaking of imperfect copies, the value of which can only be estimated by the quantum of imperfection. It remains also to be noticed that the French bibliographers speak precisely with the same familiarity of the Junti edition of Florence, 1527, 4to, which they value at 600 francs, or 25l. and which sold at the Roxburgh sale for 29 1. no great advance upon the French price. They certainly speak both of this edition, and of the 1471, as of rare occurrence, but by no means hint that the latter is of that extreme rarity imputed to it in this country .

in the Journal des Savans. On the whole, Boccone appears to have been an industrious and intelligent writer, possessing considerable originality, and deserves to be classed

, an ingenious naturalist, was born at Palermo, in Sicily, April 24th 1633, of a wealthy and respectable family, originally from Savona in Genoa. To improve himself in natural history, particularly in botany, to which he was early attached, he travelled over Sicily, Corsica, Malta, many parts of Germany, Holland, and England, conversing with the most eminent literary characters in the places he visited, with whom he afterwards kept up a correspondence. At Paris he became acquainted with the abbé Bourdalot, to whom he communicated various observations he had made, which, were published at Amsterdam in 1674 under the title “Recherches et observations d'Histoire Naturelle.” In the course of his travels, he was admitted doctor in medicine at Padua, was elected member of the Academ. Naturae Curios, and made botanist to the grand duke of Tuscany. In 1682, he entered among the Cistertian monks at Florence, and with the habit of the order took the name of Sylvio, which he affixed to his latter works, but he was still permitted to continue his researches in natural history. Returning at length to Sicily, he retired to one of the houses of the Cistertians near Palermo, where he died, Dec. 22, 1704. As he had been indefatigable in his researches, his colleciion of plants and other natural productions was very considerable. Sherrard, who saw his hortus siccus, or specimens of dried plants, in 1697, was so struck with their number and beauty, that he engaged him to give a catalogue of them to the public, which he did in his “Musrco plante rare,” published at Venice in 4to, the same year. The catalogue was also published by itself. Several of his works appear to have been printed while he was on his travels; the first of them, “De abrotano mare monitum,” in 1668 and in the same year, “Manifesturn botanicum, de plantis Siculis,” Catatue, 4to. By an advertisement at the beginning of the work he offers to botanists the seeds of many of the curious and rare plants he had collected, at moderate prices. Morison published an edition of this work at Oxford in 1674, 4to, under the title of “Icones et descriptiones rariarum plantarum Sicilian, Melitae, Galliae, et Italioe.” Many of the plants, Haller says, were new. The figures are small, and in general not well delineated or engraved. His next production was “Recherches et observations naturelles,” published at Paris in 1671, 12mo, again at Amsterdam in 1674, and again in 1744, in 8vo. It consists of letters to his correspondents in France, Italy, England, &c. In 1684, in 16mo, “Opcrvazioni natural) ove si contengono materie medico fisiche e di botanica,” Bologna. The observations are twenty in number, and dedicated, or addressed to so many of the author’s friends and patrons, among whom are many perons of high rank. He is very profuse in his elogia on the medical virtue of many of the plants, which he praises far beyond their real value. “Tenere oportet,” Haller says, “creduium esse virum et in viribus medicis plantarum liberalem.” “Musæo di fisica e cli esperienze decorate di opervazioni naturali,” Venet. 1697, 4to. The author here assumes the name of Sylvlo. The observations are, as in the former work, dedicated to his noble patrons, and contain ample accounts of the medical virtues of various plants, much beyond what, from experience, they have been found to possess. Some smaller dissertations were printed in Miscel. Naturae Curias, and in the Journal des Savans. On the whole, Boccone appears to have been an industrious and intelligent writer, possessing considerable originality, and deserves to be classed among botanists of the third rate.

considered by his countrymen as a man of most extensive learning, but as destitute of elegance as a writer, either in Latin or German, and as unacquainted with the art

, a learned professor of the university of Helmstadt, was born in 1722, at Wernigerode. After having been educated at home, with great care, by his father, who was judge of that city, and counsellor to the count Stolberg of Wernigerode, he went in 1739 to the school of Closter-Bergen, near Magdeburgh, then superintended by Steinmez, and in 1741, took his leave of this school, in a Latin oration, “De societatibus hujus sevi notabilioribus.” He then went to Halle, and having early imbibed a taste for oriental languages and sacred philology, he attached himself particularly to the two Michaelis’s, father and son, who were then professors in that university. From Halle, he went to Leipsic, where he studied Arabic, Syriac, Chaldaic, Samaritan, Ethiopian, and rabbinical Hebrew. On his return to Halle in 1747, he maintained a thesis for his doctor’s degree, under the presidency of Michaelis the father, “On the antiquity of the Hebrew language” and then opened a course of lectures which were much admired. Notwithstanding this success, however, he left Halle, after a residence of two years, and settled at Helmstadt. Here he became a most popular teacher, his lectures being attended by an unusual number of students; and in 1754, the uniYersity secured his services by appointing him professor extraordinary of oriental languages. About this time, happening to meet with some works in which the study of the Armenian, Coptic, and Turkish languages was recommended, he had a great desire to add these to his stock, and not having been able to obtain the assistance of Jablonski for the Coptic, he determined to learn the others without a master. Having begun this task at his lisure hours, in 1756, he made such rapid progress as to be able to publish, before the conclusion of the year, the first two chapters of St. Matthew translated from the Turkish into Latin, with a critical preface on the history and utility of the Turkish language and the first four chapters of the same evangelist translated from the Armenian into Latin, with some considerations on the Armenian language. These two little works, which were published, the first at Bremen, and the other at Halle, were criticised with some severity, perhaps not unjust; but the zeal and industry of the author, although not altogether successful in these attempts, were still the subject of admiration, and were not unrewarded. In 1760 he obtained a pension and in 1763, lest he should accept of the offer of a professorship made to him by the university of Giessen, that of Helmstadt conferred on him the title of professor in ordinary of philosophy, with an augmentation of salary. His various works in the mean time amply confirmed their choice, and extended his reputation throughout Europe. Of his private life we have no further account, although it was prolonged for many years after this period, as he died of an apoplexy, March 7, 1796. His principal works are, 1. “Evangelium secundum Matthaeum ex versione Æthiopici interpretis in Bibliis polyglottis Anglicanis editum cum Graeco, c.” Halle, 1748, 4to, with a preface by Michaelis on the Ethiopian translation of the New Testament. 2. “Evangelium secundum Matthaeum ex versione Persica, &c.” Helmstadt, 17.50, 4to. 3. Persian translations of Mark, Luke, and John, 1751, 4to. published separately. 4. “Evangelium secundum Marcum ex versione Arabica, &c.” Lerngow, 1752, 4to. 5. “Novum Testamentum ex versione jEthiopica, &c. in Latinum,” Brunswick, 1753 55, 2 vols. 4to. 6. “Fragmenta Veteris Test, ex versione Æthiopici interpretis, et alia quaedam opuscula Æthiopica,” Wolfenb. 1755, 4to. 7. “Pseudo-critica Millio-Bengeliana,” Halle, 1767, 8vo, pointing out some inaccuracies in the variorum editions of the New Testament by these eminent critics. Bode is considered by his countrymen as a man of most extensive learning, but as destitute of elegance as a writer, either in Latin or German, and as unacquainted with the art of enlivening his subject.

, a French lawyer, and political writer, was born at Angers about 1530. In his youth he was supposed,

, a French lawyer, and political writer, was born at Angers about 1530. In his youth he was supposed, but not upon good foundation, to have been a monk. He studied first at Toulouse, and after taking his degrees, read lectures there with much applause, having a design to settle there as law- pro lessor, and with that view he pronounced an oration on public instruction in the schools but finding Toulouse not a sufficiently ample stage for his ambition, he removed to Pans, and began to practise at the bar, where his expectations being likewise disappointed, he determined to apply himself to literary occupations, and in this he had very considerable success. Henry III. who liked to have men of letters about him, admitted him into familiar conversation, and had such an opinion of him, that he sent to prison one John, or Michael de la Serre, who had written against Bodin, and forbid him under pain of death to publish his work but this courtly favour did not last. Thuanus ascribes the king’s withdrawing his countenance to the envy of the courtiers but others think it was occasioned by Bodin' s taking a political part in opposition to the king. He found an asylum, however, with the duke of Alene,on, who made him secretary of his commands, one of the masters of the requests of his palace, and grand master of his waters and forests. The insurgents in the Netherlands at this time intended to declare the duke their sovereign, and were said to be prompted to this by queen Elizabeth of England. Bodin, however, accompanied him into England and Flanders, but he had the misfortune to lose this patron in 1584.

, a voluminous writer, and one of the, revivers of literature in Germany, was born

, a voluminous writer, and one of the, revivers of literature in Germany, was born at Zurich, July 19, 1693, and notwithstanding his father’s design to bring him up to the church, or for trade, he seemed born for the sciences, and particularly the belles lettres. He concealed his dislike, however, for the ministry, until the time when he might have been admitted, and then declined proceeding any farther. His father then would have him pursue trade, and in 1717 sent him to Bergamo for that purpose. This being of course as disagreeable to him as the study of divinity, he returned home after two years, his predilection for poetry growing more and more upon him. Ovid’s Metamorphoses, a translation of which fell in his way, filled his head with poetical images, and the English Spectator formed his morals, while he studied his philosophy in Bayle and Montaigne. The German language was at this time in a barbarous state; literature was at a low ebb, and the pedantic studies of the schools were not to the liking of such a youth as Bodmer. Finding nothing, therefore, to read in his own language, he confined himself to the classics of antiquity, and gave up every other employment, except the study of the history and politics of Swisserland. In history, however, he looked only for men, manners, and language; and was desirous of forming from it a system of psychology.

he Boerhaavian school, and promote the salutary revolution in medical science which this illustrious writer had begun. The celebrated medical school of Edinburgh was the

Among the works attributed to him, without sufficient authority, or proceeding from his school, being compilations by his students from his lectures, are 1. “Tractatus de Peste,” published with other treatises respecting the plague at Marseilles. Boerhaave was himself infected at that melancholy period, and in this lays down a mode of cure. 2. “Consultationes medicse, sive sylloge epistolarum cum responsis,” Hague, 1743, often reprinted, and translated into English, Lond. 1745, 8vo. 3. “Prselectiones publicae de morbis oculorum,” dictated by Boerhaave in 1708, Gottingen, 1746, 8vo. Haller published two editions; one in 1750, from a bad transcript; the other from a more correct one by Heister, Venice, 1748, 8vo. 4. “Introductio in praxin clinicam,” Leyden, 1740, 8vo. 5. “Praxis medica,” London, 1716, 12mo. 6. “De viribus medicamentorum,” collected from his lectures in 1711, 1712, Paris, 1723, 8vo, &c. 7. “Experiment* et institutiones chemicaV' Paris, 1728, 2 vols. 8vo. 8.” Methodus discendi Medic-mam,“Amst. 1726, 1734, 8vo; Lend. 1744, the best edition by Haller, Amst. 1751, 2 vols. 4to, under the title of” Herman ni Boerhaave, viri summi, suique praeceptoris, methodus studii medici emendata et accessionibus locupletata.“9.” Historia plantarum quae in horto academico Lugd. Batav. crescunt,“Leyden, 1717, 2 vols. 12mo (under the name of Rome), Lond. 1731, 1738. 10.” Prselectiones de calculo,“Lond. 1748, 4to. 13.” Praelectiones academics?, de morbis Nervorum," Leyden, 1761, 2 vols. 8vo; Francfort, 1762. This was edited by James van Eeems, from various manuscript copies of Boerhaave’s lectures. In fact, all the works enumerated in this list were produced in the same manner, some in his lifetime, but mostly after his death. Such was the very extensive reputation of Boerhaave, that to be his pupil was in some degree accounted a qualification for future honours and practice, and every pupil was glad to bring away as much as he could in manuscript, to testify his diligence. The booksellers, very naturally desirous of profiting by the popularity of our author, employed many of these pupils in collating different transcripts, and publishing what was conceived to be the best text. In this way, doubtless, his reputation might occasionally suffer by the incorrectness or misapprehension of these transcribers yet even Haller and other eminent physicians were glad to avail themselves of such assistance, to extend /the Boerhaavian school, and promote the salutary revolution in medical science which this illustrious writer had begun. The celebrated medical school of Edinburgh was the first branch from it which introduced Boerhaave to this country, all the original founders and professors of that school having been his pupils.

hat in the first six books there are a great many particulars not to be found in Fordun or any other writer now extant and that, “unless the authors which he pretends to

, a celebrated Scotch historian, was born at Dundee, in the shire of Angus, about 1470. After having studied at Dundee and Aberdeen, he was sent to the university of Paris, where he applied to philosophy, and became a professor of it there. There also he contracted an acquaintance with several eminent persons, particularly with Erasmus, who kept a correspondence with him afterwards. Elphinston, bishop of Aberdeen, having founded the king’s college in that city about 1500, sent for Boeis from Paris, and appointed him principal. He took for his colleague Mr. William Hay, and by their joint labour the kingdom was furnished with several eminent scholars. Upon the death of his patron, he undertook to write his life, and those of his predecessors in that see. The work is in Latin, and entitled “Vitae Episcoporum Murthlacensium et Aberdonensium,” Paris, 1522, 4tol He begins at Beanus, the first bishop, and ends at Gawin Dunbar, who was bishop when the book xyas published. A third part of the work is spent in the life of Elphinston, for whose sake it was undertaken. He next undertook to write in the same language the history of Scotland the first edition of which was printed at Paris by Badius Ascenslus in 152G, which consisted of seventeen books, and ended with the death of James I. but the next in 1574 was much enlarged, having the addition of the 18th book and part of the 19th the work was afterwards brought down to the reign of James III. by Ferrerius, a Piedmontese. It was translated by Bellenclen. (See Bel­Lenden, John). Mackenzie observes, that of all Scots historians, next to Buchanan, Boethins has been the most censured and commended by the learned men who have mentioned him. Nicolson tells us, that in the first six books there are a great many particulars not to be found in Fordun or any other writer now extant and that, “unless the authors which he pretends to have seen be hereafter discovered, he will continue to be shrewdly suspected for the contriver of almost as many tales as Jeoffrey of Momnouth.” His 18th book, however, is highly commended by Ferrerius, who says, “that he has treated of things there in so comprehensive a manner, that he believes no one could have done it more fully or significantly on the same subject.” His stylo, says another writer, has all the purity of Caesar’s, and is so nervous both in the reflections and diction, that he seems to have absolutely entered into the spirit of Livy, and made it his own. Erasmus, who was intimately acquainted with him, says, in one of his epistles, “that he was a man of an extraordinary happy genius, and of great eloquence.” “He was certainly,” says another writer, “a great master of polite learning, well skilled in divinity, philosophy, and history; but somewhat credulous, and much addicted to the be-> lief of legendary stories. With regard to his other accomplishments, he was discreet, well-bred, attentive, generous, affable, and courteous.” Dr. Johnson in his Tour in Scotland observes that Hector Boethius may be "justly reverenced as one of the revivers of elegant learning. The style of Boethins, though, perhaps, not always rigorously pure, is formed with great diligence upon ancient models, and wholly uninfected with monastic barbarity. His history is written with elegance and vigour, but his fabulousness and credulity are justly blamed. His fabulousness, if he was the author of the fictions, is a fault for which no apology can be made; but his credulity may be excused in an age when all men were credulous. Learning was then rising on the world; but ages, so long accustomed to darkness, were too much dazzled with its light to see any thing distinctly. The first race of scholars, in the fifteenth century, and some time after, were, for the most part, learning to speak, rather than to think, and were therefore more studious of elegance than of truth. The contemporaries of Boethius thought it sufficient to know what the ancients had delivered. The examination of tenets and of facts was reserved for another generation.''

, a learned and pious writer of the seventeenth century, was the son of William Bogan, gentleman,

, a learned and pious writer of the seventeenth century, was the son of William Bogan, gentleman, and born at Little Hempston in Devonshire, about the feast of St. John the Baptist in the year 1625. He became a commoner of St. Alban hall under the tuition of Mr. Ralph Button in Michaelmas term in 1640. He was admitted a scholar of Corpus Christi college November the 26th the year following, and left the university when the city of Oxford was garrisoned for the king, and returned after the surrender of it to the parliament. October 21, 1646, he took the degree of bachelor of arts, and was elected probationer fellow of his college the year following. November 19, 1650, he took the degree of master of arts, and became a retired and religious student, and distinguished in the university for his admirable skill in the tongues. At last, having contracted an ill habit of body by his intense application to his studies, he died September 1, 1659, and was interred in the middle of the north cloister belonging to Corpus Christi college, joining to the south side of the chapel there. “At that time and before,” Wood informs us, “the nation being very unsettled, and the university expecting nothing but ruin and dissolution, it pleased Mr. Began to give by his will to the city of Oxford five hundred pounds; whereas hud the nation been otherwise, he would have given that money to his college.” An original picture of him is to be seen in the guild-hall of the city of Oxford. Mr. Wood adds, that he was an excellent tutor, but a zealous puritan and in his Hist. & Antiq. Univers. Oxon. he gives him the character of vir studiosus et lingiiarum peritissimus, a studious person, and well skilled in the languages, in which opinion some learned foreigners who have read his works concur. He wrote, 1. Additions, in four books, to Francis Rous’s “Archaeologioc Atticae,” the fifth edition of which was published at Oxford, 1658, 4to. These additions relate to the customs of the ancient Greeks in marriages, burials, feasts, &c. at the close of which, Mr. Bogan, with great simplicity of manner, gives his reasons for undertaking the work: “The cords,” he says, “which drew me to do it (and drawn I was) were three, such as, twisted together, I could by no means break; viz. l.The importunity of my friend. 2. The necessity of the knowledge of ancient rites and customs for the understanding of authors. And, 3. the hopes which I had by employment (as by an issue) to divert my humour of melancholy another way. The causes why I did it no better are as many, viz. 1. Want of years and judgment, having done the most part of it in my Tyrocinium (when I took more delight in these studies) us appears by the number of the authors which I have cited. 2. Want of health. And, 3. want of time and leisure, being called away by occasions that might not be neglected, and by friends that could not be disobeyed. If yet I have given but little light, and my labour and oil be not all lost, I have as much as I desired myself, and thou hast no more than I owed thee.” 2. “A view of the Threats and Punishments recorded in Scripture alphabetically composed, with some brief observations on sundry texts,” Oxford, 1653, 8vo. 3. “Meditations of the mirth of a Christian Life,” Oxford, 165:3, 8vo. 4. “Help to Prayer both extempore and by a set form as also to Meditation,” &c. Oxford, 1660, 12mo, published after the author’s death by Daniel Agas, fellow of Corpus Christi college. Our author also wrote a large and learned epistle to Mr. Edmund Dickenson, M. A. of Merlon college, prefixed to that gentleman’s book, emitled “Delphi Phcenicizantes, &c.” published at Oxford, 1655, in 8vo. And “Homerus Æfipo/Jw sive comparatio Homeri cum scriptoribus sacris quoad Normam loquendi.” In the preface he declares that it is not his intention to make any comparison between the sacred writers and their opinions and Homer, but only of their idioms and ways of speaking. To this book is added Hesiodus 'Opi^wv; wherein he shews how Hesiod expresses himself very much after the same manner %vith Homer, Oxford, 1658, 8vo. He designed likewise to publish a discourse concerning the Greek particles but he was prevented by sickness from completing it; and another treatise concerning the best use of the Greek and Latin poets. Freytag has bestowed an article on his treatise on Homer’s style.

apeutics. In 1700 he was dean of the faculty, and after a prosperous career, both as a physician and writer, died in 1718. His principal works are, 1. “De Alkali et Acidi

, a physician of considerable reputation in the seventeenth century, was born at Leipsic in 1640, and began his studies there, and at Jena. In 1663 he travelled in Denmark, Holland, England, and France, and returned by the way of Swisserland in 1665. The following year he took his degree of M. D. and in 1668 was promoted to the anatomical chair at Leipsic. In 1691 he was appointed city-physician, and in 1691 professor of therapeutics. In 1700 he was dean of the faculty, and after a prosperous career, both as a physician and writer, died in 1718. His principal works are, 1. “De Alkali et Acidi insuificientia pro principiorum corporum naturalium. munere gerendo,” Leipsic, 1675, 8vo. 2. “Dissertations chemico-physicic,” ibid. 1685, 4to, 1696, 8vo. 3. “Meditationes physico-cheuiicte de aerisin sublunaria infiuxu,” ibid. 1678, 8vo; 1685, 4to. 4. “De duumviratu hypocliondrioium,” ibid. 1689, 4to. 5. “Observatio atque experimenta circa usum spiritns vini externum in hainorragiis” sistendis,“Leipsic, loS.'i, 4to. 6.” Exercitatioues physiologicæ, ibid. 1680, 1686, 1697 and 1710, 4to. 7. “De officio medici duplici, clinini nimirum ac forensis,” Leipsic, 1689, 1704, 4 vols. 4to, a work of great merit. 8. “De renunciatione vulnerum lethalium examen,” ibid. 1689, 8vo, often reprinted. Bonn, although not arriving at the conclusions of more modern and scientific physicians, frequently approaches them through the medium of sound and experimental knowledge. These last mentioned works on medicine, as connected with legal evidence, are particularly valuable.

, a voluminous political and miscellaneous writer of the seventeenth century, was born at Ringsfield, in Suffolk,

, a voluminous political and miscellaneous writer of the seventeenth century, was born at Ringsfield, in Suffolk, the only son of Baxter Bohun, who with his ancestors, had been lords of the manor of Westhall, in that county, from the 25th Henry VIII. In 1663, he was admitted fellow-commoner of Queen’s college, Cambridge, and continued there till the latter end of 1666, when the plague obliged him and others to leave the university. In 1675 he was made a justice of peace for Suffolk, and continued in that office till the second of James II. when he was discharged, but was restored to that office in the first of William and Mary. The time of his death is not mentioned, but he was alive in 1700. He wrote, 1. “An Address to the Freemen and Freeholders of the nation, in three parts, being the history of three sessions of parliament in 1678, 1682,and 1683,” 4to. 2. “A Defence of the Declaration of king Charles II. against a pamphlet styled, A just and modest Vindication of the proceedings of the two last Parliaments.” This was printed with and added to the Address. 3. “A Defence of Sir Robert Filmer, against the mistakes and representations of Algernon Sydney, esq. in a paper delivered by him to the sheriffs upon the scaffold on Tower-hill, on Friday, Dec. 7, 1683, before his execution there,” Lond. 1684. 4. “The Justice of Peace’s Calling, a moral essay,” Lond. 1684, 8vo. 5. “A Preface and Conclusion to Sir Robert Filmer’s Patriarcha,” ibid. 1685, 8vo. 6. “A Geographical Dictionary,” ibid. 1688, 8vo. 7. “The History of the Desertion; or an account of all the public affairs of England, from the beginning of Sept. 1688 to Feb. 12 following,” ibid. 1689, 8vo. 8. “An Answer to a piece called The Desertion discussed (by Jeremy Collier),” printed at the end of the “History of the Desertion.” 9. “The Doctrine of Passive Obedience and Non-Resistance no way concerned in the controversies now depending between the Williamites and the Jacobites,” ibid. 1689, 4to. In page 24th is a passage respecting bishop Ken, which Mr. Bohun found to be untrue, and therefore requests that it may be cancelled. 10. “The Life of John Jewell, bishop of Salisbury,” prefixed to a translation of his Apology, 1685. 11. “Three Charges delivered at the general quarter sessions holden at Ipswich, for the county of Suffolk, in 1691, 1692, and 1693,” 4to. 12. “The great Historical, Geographical, and Poetical Dictionary,” Lond. 1694, fol. He also translated Sicurus’ origin of Atheism the Universal Bibliotheque, or account of books for Jan. Feb. and March 1687 Sleidan’s History of the Reformation Puffendorff’s Present State of Germany, and Degory Wheare’s Method of reading History, Lond. 1698, 8vo.

it is not sufficient to supply some ephemeral food to the malignity of contemporaries, but to be the writer of all times and all places. This led him to produce those works

attacked, but gave him friends, or rather readers, among that very numerous class of the public, who, through an inconstancy cruelly rooted in the human heart, love to see those humbled whom even they esteem the most. But whatever favour and encouragement so general a disposition might promise Boileau, he could not avoid meeting with censurers among men of worth. Of this number was the duke de Montausier, who valued himself upon an inflexible and rigorous virtue, and disliked satire. But, as it was of the greatest importance to Boileau to gain over to his interest one of the first persons about court, whose credit was the more formidable, as it was supported by that personal consideration which is not always joined to it, he introduced into one of his pieces a panegyrical notice of the duke de Montausier, which was neither flat nor exaggerated, and it produced the desired effect. Encouraged by this first success, Boileau lost no time in giving the final blow to the tottering austerity of his censurer, by confessing to him, with an air of contrition, how humiliated he felt himself at missing the friendship of “the worthiest man at court.” From that moment, the worthiest man at court became the protector and apologist of the most caustic of all writers. Though we attach less value to the satires of Boileau than to his other works, and think not very highly of his conduct to his patron, yet it must be allowed that he never attacks bad taste and bad writers, but with the weapons of pleasantry; and never speaks of vice and wicked men but with indignation. Boileau, however, soon became sensible that in order to reach posterity it is not sufficient to supply some ephemeral food to the malignity of contemporaries, but to be the writer of all times and all places. This led him to produce those works which will render his fame perpetual. He wrote his “Epistles,” in which, with delicate praises, he has intermixed precepts of literature and morality, delivered with the most striking truth and the happiest precision; and in 1674 his celebrated mock-heroic, the “Lutrin,” which, with so small a ground of matter, contains so much variety, action, and grace; and his “Art of Poetry,” which is in French what that of Horace is in Latin, the code of good taste. In these he expresses in harmonious verse, full of strength and elegance, the principles of reason and good taste; and was the first who discovered and developed, by the union of example to precept, the highly difficult art of French versification. Before Boileau, indeed, Malherbe had begun to detect the secret, but he had guessed it only in part, and had kept his knowledge for his own use; and Corneille, though he had written “Cinna” and “Polieucte,” had no other secret than his instinct, and when this abandoned him, was no longer Corneille. Boileau had the rare merit, which can belong only to a superior genius, of forming by his lessons and productions the first school of poetry in France; and it may be added, that of all the poets who have preceded or followed him, none was better calculated than himself to be the head of such a school. In fact, the severe and decided correctness which characterizes his works, renders them singularly fit to serve as a study for scholars in poetry. In Racine he had a disciple who would have secured him immortality, even if he had not so well earned it by his own writings. Good judges have even asserted, that the pupil surpassed the master; but Boileau, whether inferior or equal to his scholar, always preserved that ascendancy over him, which a blunt and downright self-love will ever assume over a timid and delipate self-love, such as that of Racine. The author of “Phaedra” and of “Athaliah” had always, either from deference or address, the complaisance to yield the first place to one who hoasted of having been his master. Boileau, it is true, had a merit with respect to his disciple, which in the eyes of the latter must have been of inestimable value, that of having early been sensible of Racine’s excellence, or rather of what he promised to become; for it was not easy, in the author of the “Freres Ennemis,” to discover that of “Andromache” and “Britannicus,” and doubtless perceiving in Racine’s first essays the germ of what he was one day to become, he felt how much care and culture it required to give it full expansion.

Art of Poetry” is the best composition of that kind extant. “The brevity of his precepts,” says this writer, “enlivened by proper imagery, the justness of his metaphors,

Boileau 1 s character as a poet is now generally allowed to be that of taste, judgment, and good sense, which predominate in the best of his works as they do in the most popular of Pope’s writings. The resemblance between these two poets is in many respects very striking, and in one respect continues to be so; they are, in France and England, more read and oftener quoted than any other poets. Both were accused of stealing from the ancients; but says an elegant critic of our nation, those who flattered themselves that they should diminish the reputation of Boileau, by printing, in the manner of a commentary at the bottom of each page of his works, the many lines he has borrowed from Horace and Juvenal, were grossly deceived. The verses of the ancients which he has turned into French with so much address, and which he has happily made so homogeneous, and of a piece with the rest of the work, that every thing seems to have been conceived in a continued train of thought by the very same person, confer as much honour on him, as the verses which are purely his own. The original turn which he gives to his translations, the boldness of his expressions, so little forced and unnatural, that they seem to be born, as it were, with his thoughts, display almost as much invention as the first production of a thought entirely new. The same critic, Dr. Warton, is of opinion that Boileau’s “Art of Poetry” is the best composition of that kind extant. “The brevity of his precepts,” says this writer, “enlivened by proper imagery, the justness of his metaphors, the harmony of his numbers, as far as alexandrine lines will admit, the exactness of his method, the perspicuity of his remarks, and the energy of his style, all duly considered, may render this opinion not unreasonable. It is to this work he owes his immortality, which was of the highest utility to his nation, in diffusing a just way of thinking and writing, banishing every species of false wit, and introducing a general taste for the manly simplicity of the ancients, on whose writings this poet had formed his taste.

, a celebrated French comic writer of native wit and genuine humour, was born at Vic in Auvergne

, a celebrated French comic writer of native wit and genuine humour, was born at Vic in Auvergne in 1694. He came early to Paris, and began to write for the stage. The rest of his life is a moral. As has often been the fate of extraordinary favourites of the muses, though he laboured incessantly for the public, hi* works procured him only a competency of fame he wanted bread, and while the theatres and coffee-houses of Paris were ringing with plaudits on his uncommon talents to promote their mirth, he was languishing, with a wife and child, under the pressures of the extremest poverty. Yet, melancholy as his situation was, he lost nothing of that pride, which forbid him to creep and fawn at the feet of a patron. Boissi had friends, who would readily have relieved him; but they were never made acquainted with his real condition, or had not that friendly impetuosity which forces assistance on the modest sufferer. He at length became the prey of distress, and sunk into despondency. The shortest way to rid himself at once of his load of misery seemed to him to be death, on which he speculated with the despair of a man who has none of the consolations of religion. His wife, who was no less weary of life, listened with participation as often as he declaimed, in all the warmth of poetic rapture, on the topic of deliverance from this earthly prison, and the smiling prospects of futurity; till at length she took up the resolution to accompany him in death. But she could not bear to think of leaving her beloved son, of five years old, in a world of misery and sorrow; it was therefore agreed to take the child along with them, on their passage into another and a better, and they made choice of starving. To this end, they shut themselves up in their solitary and deserted apartment, waiting their dissolution with immovable fortitude. When any one came and knocked, they fled trembling into a corner, for fear of being discovered. Tneir little boy, who had not yet learned to silence the calls of hunger by artificial reasons, whimpering and crying, asked for bread; but they always found means to quiet him.

oth to enjoy and to adorn, he diligently performed the duties of an able and orthodox divine; a good writer; an excellent preacher, and an attentive parish priest. He appears,

, a pious and useful clergyman of Leicestershire, was born at Leicester in 1679, and at the age of fifteen had made such progress in letters as to be matriculated at St. John’s college, Cambridge. Having taken the degree of B. A. in 1698, he retired to Hinckley in Leicestershire, where he engaged in teaching a small endowed school, and retained that employment until 1732, at the humble salary of 10l. per annum. At the usual age, he was admitted into holy orders to serve the curacy of Stoney Stanton near Hinckley. It appears from the parish register, that he commenced his parochial duties in May 1702; and the care of the parish was confided to him, his rector then residing on another benefice. His stipend was only 30l. a year, as the living was a small one, being then in the open-field state. Nor does it appear that he had made any saving in money from the profits of his school all the property he seems to have brought with him to his curacy was, his chamber furniture, and a library, more valuable for being select than extensive. When Mr. Bold was examined for orders, his diocesan (Dr. James Gardiner, bishop of Lincoln) was so much pleased with his proficiency in sacred learning, that he had determined to make Mr. Bold his domestic chaplain: but the good bishop’s death soon after closed his prospect of preferment as soon as it was opened in that quarter; and Mr. Bold framed his plan of life and studies upon a system of rigid ceconomy and strict attention to his professional duties, which never varied during the fifty years he passed afterwards on his curacy. Remote from polished and literary society, which he was calculated both to enjoy and to adorn, he diligently performed the duties of an able and orthodox divine; a good writer; an excellent preacher, and an attentive parish priest. He appears, from the early age of 24 years, to have formed his plan of making himself a living sacrifice for the benefit of his flock; and to have declined preferment (which was afterward offered to him) with a view of making his example and doctrine the more striking and effective, by his permanent residence and labours in one and the same place. He appears to have begun his ecclesiastical labours in a spirit of self-denial, humility, charity, and piety. He had talents that might have rendered him conspicuous any where, and an impressive and correct delivery. His life was severe (so far as respected himself); his studies incessant; his spiritual labours for the church and his flock, ever invariably the same. His salary, we have already mentioned, was only ZOl. a year, which was never increased, and of which he paid at firsts/, then J2l. and lastly 16l. a year, for his board. It needs scarcely be said that the most rigid ceconomy was requisite, and practised, to enable him to subsist; much more to save out of this pittance for beneficent purposes. Yet he continued to give away annually, 5l.; and saved 5l. more with a view to more permanent charities: upon the rest he lived. His daily fare consisted of water-gruel for his breakfast; a plate from the farmer’s table, with whom he boarded, supplied his dinner; after dinner, one half pint of ale, of his own brewing, was his only luxury; he took no tea, and his supper was upon milk-pottage. With this slender fare his frame was supported under the labour of his various parochial duties. In the winter, he read and wrote by the farmer’s fire-side; in the summer, in his own room. At Midsummer, he borrowed a horse for a day or two, to pay short visits beyond a walking distance. He visited all his parishioners, exhorting, reproving, consoling, instructing them.

, a French writer, was born at Lyons, Feb. 13, 1709, of a distinguished family,

, a French writer, was born at Lyons, Feb. 13, 1709, of a distinguished family, and died there in 1793. He wrote, 1. “De la corruption du gout dans la Musique Francaise,1745, 12mo. 2. “De la Bibliomanie,” 1761, 8vo, a subject since so ably handled by Mr. Dibdin. 3. “Discours sur l'Emulation,1763, 8vo. 4. “Essai sur la lecture,1763, 8vo. He left in manuscript a history of the academy of Lyons, of which he was secretary, and after fifty years attendance at their sittings, pronounced a discourse entitled “Renovation des voeux litteraires,” which was afterwards published.

, a writer, whose whole merit was inventing abominable lies and absurdities

, a writer, whose whole merit was inventing abominable lies and absurdities against the first reformers in the sixteenth century; and, by this means supplying popish missionaries with matter of invective against them, he was often quoted, and became respected. He was a Carmelite of Paris, who, having preached somewhat freely in St. Bartholomew’s church, forsook hiaonier, and fled into Italy, where he set up for a physician, and married; but soon after committed some crime, for which he was driven away. He set up afterwards in Geneva as a physician; but not succeeding in that protession, he studied divinity. At first he dogmatized privately on the mystery of predestination, according to the principles of Pelagius; and afterwards had the boldness to make a public discourse against the received opinion. Upon this, Calvin went to see him, and censured him mildly. Then he sent for him to his house, and endeavoured to reclaim him from his error; but this did not hinder Bolsec from delivering in public an insulting discourse against the decree of eternal predestination. Calvin was among his auditors; but, hiding himself in the crowd, was not seen by Bolsec, which made him the bolder. As soon as Bolsec had ended his sermon, Calvin stood up, and confuted all he had been saying. “He answered, overset, and confounded him,” says Beza, “with so many testimonies from the word of God, with so many passages, chiefly from St. Augustine in short, with so many solid arguments, that every body was miserably ashamed for him, except the brazen-faced monk himself.” On this, a magistrate who was present in that assembly, sent him to prison. The cause was discussed very fully, and at last, with the advice of the Swiss churches, the senate of Geneva declared Bolsec convicted of sedition and Pelagian ism; and as such, in 1551, banished him from the territory of the republic, on pain of being whipped if he should return thither. He retired into a neighbouring place, which depended on the canton of Bern, and raised a great deal of disturbance there, by accusing Calvin of making God the author of sin. Calvin, to prevent the impressions which such complaints might make upon the gentlemen of Bern, caused himself to be deputed to them, and pleaded his cause before them. He was so fortunate, that though he could not get a determination upon his doctrine, whether it was true or false, yet Bolsec was ordered to quit the country.

, an ingenious writer and antiquary, in the beginning of the seventeenth century,

, an ingenious writer and antiquary, in the beginning of the seventeenth century, was a retainer to the great George Villiers, duke of Buckingham, under whom he probably enjoyed some office. He was a Roman catholic; and distinguished Himself by the following curious writings; l.“The Life of king Henry II.” intended to be inserted in Speed’s Chronicle; but the author being too partial to Thomas Becket, another life was written by Dr. Barcham. 2. “The Elements of Armories,” Lond. 1610, 4to. 3. A poem upon the translation of the body of Mary queen of Scots, from Peterburgh to Westminster-abbey, in 1612, entitled “Prosopopoeia Basilica,” a ms. in the Cottonian library. 4. An English translation of Lucius Florus’s Roman History. 5. “Nero Cæsar, or Monarchic depraved. An historicall worke, dedicated with leave to the duke of Buckingham, lord-admiral,” Lond. 1624, fol. This book, which contains the life of the emperor Nero, is printed in a neat and elegant manner, and illustrated with several curious medals. In recapitulating the affairs of Britain, from the time of Julius Cæsar to the revolt under Nero, he relates the history of Boadicea, and endeavours to prove that Stonehenge is a monument erected to her memory. How much he differs from the conjectures of the other antiquaries who have endeavoured to trace the history of Stonehenge, it would be unnecessary to specify. He wrote also, 6. “Vindiciae Britannicae, or London righted by rescues and recoveries of antiquities of Britain in general, and of London in particular, against unwarrantable prejudices, and historical antiquations amongst the learned; for the more honour, and perpetual just uses of the noble island and the city.” It consists of seven chapters. In the first, he treats “of London before the Britann rebells sackt and fired it in hatred and defiance of Nero.” In the second he shows, that “London was more great and famous in Nero’s days, than that it should be within the description, which Julius Cæsar makes of a barbarous Britann town in his days.” In the third, he proves, “that the credit of Julius Cæsar’s writings may subsist, and yet London retain the opinion of utmost antiquity.” In the fourth, “the same fundamental assertion is upholden with other, and with all sorts of arguments or reasons.” The fifth bears this title, “The natural face of the seat of London (exactly described in this section) most sufficiently proved, that it was most antiently inhabited, always presupposing reasonable men in Britain.” The sixth contains “a copious and serious disquisition about the old book of Brute, and of the authority thereof, especially so far forth as concerns the present cause of the honour and antiquity of London, fundamentally necessary in general to our national history.” The last chapter is entitled, <; Special, as well historical, as other illustrations, for the use of the coins in my Nero Cæsar, concerning London in and before that time.“This ms. (for it never was printed) was in the possession of Hugh Howard, esq and afterwards sold among Thomas Rawiinson’s to Endymion Porter. Mr. Bolton was also author of” Hypercritica, or a rule of judgement for writing or reading our histories. Delivered in four supercensorian addresses by occasion of a censorian epistle, prefixed by sir Henry Savile, knt. to his edition of some of our oldest historians in Latin, dedicated to the late queen Elizabeth. That according thereunto, a complete body of our affairs, a Corpus Rerum Anglicarum may at last, and from among our ourselves, come happily forth in either of the tongues. A felicity wanting to our nation, now when even the name thereof is as it were at an end.“It was published by Dr. Hall, at the end of” Triveti Annales,“Oxford, 1722, 8vo. Bolton likewise intended to compose a” General History of England, or an entire and complete body of English affairs;“and there is in the Cottonian collection, the outline of a book entitled” Agon Heroicus, or concerning Arms and Armories," a copy of which is in the Biog. Britannica. The time and place of his death are unknown.

, a French antiquary and miscellaneous writer, was born at Louvres, in the district of Paris, in 1694, and

, a French antiquary and miscellaneous writer, was born at Louvres, in the district of Paris, in 1694, and educated for the ecclesiastical profession; but, devoting himself entirely to literature, he became under-librarian of St. Victor, and distinguished both by the politeness of his manners, and the variety as well as assiduity of his studies. In 1727, he was admitted a member of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres, and made many valuable contributions to its memoirs. His papers are characterised by simple but correct language, variety of erudition, clearness of argument, and solidity of criticism. At the instigation of M. Turgot, a place was created of historiographer of Paris, and Bonamy being appointed to occupy it, was led to write various memoirs relative to the history and antiquities of the city; and on occasion of the bequest of a curious library to the city, he was made librarian. From the year 174-7, he conducted the “Journal of Verdun” with the strictest propriety and decorum, and indeed in every thing displayed candour and probity, as well as learning. He died at Paris in 1770.

ssion in vocal sounds, the incarnation. Thus the multiform wisdom of God, according to this mystical writer, lies concealed through all nature; and all human knowledge

, a celebrated doctor, cardinal, and saint of the church of Rome, was born at Bagnarea in Tuscany, 1221. He was admitted into the order of St. Francis, about 1243; and studied divinity at the university of Paris under the celebrated Alexander de Hales, with so much success, that at the end of seven years he was thought worthy to read public lectures upon the Sentences. He was created doctor in 1255 along with St. Thomas Aquinas, and the year after appointed general of his order, in which office he governed with so much zeal and prudence, that he perfectly restored the discipline of it, which had been greatly neglected. Pope Clement IV. nominated him to the archbishopric of York in England; but Bonaventure disinterestedly refused it. After the death of Clement the see of Rome lay vacant almost three years, and the cardinals not being able to agree among themselves who should be pope, came at length to a most solemn engagement, to leave the choice to Bonaventure; and to elect whoever he should name, though it should be even himself, which, from his modest character, was not very probable. Accordingly, he named Theobald, archdeacon of Liege, who was at that time in the Holy land, and who took the title of Gregory X. By this pope he was made a cardinal and bishop of Albano; and appointed to assist at a general council, which was held at Lyons soon after. He died there in 1274, and was magnificently and honourably conducted to his grave; the pope and whole council attending, and the cardinal Peter of Tarantais, afterwards pope Innocent V. making his funeral oration. Sixtus IV. canonized him in 1482. He. has had the good fortune to be almost equally praised by popish and protestant writers, Bellarmine has pronounced Bonaventure a person dear to God and men; and Luther calls him “vir prtestantissimus,” a most excellent man. His works were printed at Rome in 1588, in 8 vols. folio. Excepting his commentary upon the master of the Sentences, they are chiefly on pious and mystical subjects, and have gained him the name of the Seraphic doctor. Brucker gives us the following account of his method of philosophizing, from his treatise “De reductione Artium ad Theologiam;” on the “application of Learning to Theology:” Human knowledge he divides into three branches, logical, physical and moral. Each of these he considers as the effect of supernatural illumination, and as communicated to men through the medium of the holy scriptures. The whole doctrine of scripture he reduces to three heads; that which respects the eternal generation and incarnation of Christ, the study of which is the peculiar province of the doctors of the church; that which concerns the conduct of life, which is the subject of preaching; and that which relates to the union of the soul with God, which is peculiar to the monastic and contemplative life. Physical knowledge he applies to the doctrine of scripture emblematically. For example, the production of the idea of any sensible object from its archetype, is a type of the generation of the Logos; the right exercise of the senses typifies the virtuous conduct of life; and the pleasure derived from the senses represents the union of the soul with God. In like manner, logical philosophy furnishes an emblem of the eternal generation and the incarnation of Christ: a word conceived in the mind resembling the eternal generation; its expression in vocal sounds, the incarnation. Thus the multiform wisdom of God, according to this mystical writer, lies concealed through all nature; and all human knowledge may, by the help of allegory and analogy, be spiritualised and transferred to theology. How wide a door this method of philosophising opens to the absurdities of mysticism the reader will easily perceive from this specimen.

, an eminent physician and medical writer, was born at Geneva, March 5, 1620, and following the steps

, an eminent physician and medical writer, was born at Geneva, March 5, 1620, and following the steps of his father and grandfather, early attached himself to the practice of physic. After visiting several foreign academies, he was admitted doctor in medicine at Bologna, in 1643, and was soon after made physician to the duke de Longueville. Though he soon attained to high credit in his profession, and had a large share of practice, he dedicated a considerable portion of his time to reading, and to dissecting such subjects as the hospital afforded him, with a view of discovering the seats of diseases, minuting every deviation he observed from the natural structure of the viscera, or other parts of the body, and thus opening a new road for improving the science he cultivated. He also appears to have made extracts of every thing he deemed worthy of notice, from the various works he read. His hearing from some accident becoming defective, he withdrew from practice, and employed the last ten or twelve years of his life in arranging the materials he had collected. The first fruit of his labour, which he gave to the public in 1668, was “Pharos Medicoru in,” 2 vols. 12mo. This was printed again, much improved and enlarged, in 1679, in 4to, under the title of “Labyrinthi Medici, extricati,” &c. compiled principally from Bellonius and Septalius. In 1675, “Prodromus Anatomise practicas, sive de abditis morborum causis,” fol.; the precursor of his principal work, “Sepulchretum, seu Anatome practica, ex cadaveribus morbo denatis proponens historias et observationes,” &c. Genev. 1679, 2 vols. fol. which far exceeded the expectation raised by the Prodromus. It was enlarged by nearly a third part, and republished by Manget, 1700, 2 vols. fol. and was afterwards taken by Morgagni, as the basis of his work, “De sedibus et causis Morborum,” by which the “Sepulchretum” is in a great measure superseded. The author begins with observations on the appearances of the brain and other parts of the head; then of the contents of the thorax, abdomen, and pelvis; and lastly, of the extremities; forming an immense body of dissections, which he has illustrated by many pertinent and ingenious observations. “Cours de medicine, et de la chirurgie,1679, 2 vols. 4to. An epitome of the art of surgery, with some sections relating to the practice of medicine selected from the most accredited authors of the age. “Medicina septentrionalis, collectitia,1684, 2 vols. fol. shewing how largely the practitioners of the northern parts of Europe, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Holland, and England, have contributed to the improvement of anatomy, surgery, and medicine, by extracts and accounts of the works of the principal writers of those countries. *“Mercurius compilatitius, seu index medico-practicus,1682, fol. A most useful work, shewing under the name of every disease or affection where cases or observations may be found, and what authors have written upon them. Such an index continued to the present time, though very voluminous, would be highly useful. Bonet also published “Epitome operum Sennerti,1685, fol. “J. D. Turqueti de Mayerne, de Arthritide,1671, 12mo, and “Rohaulti tractatus physicus, e Gallico in Latinam versus,1675, 8vo. He died of a dropsy, March 3, 1689.

as in some measure to redeem his time, and place him on a footing, both as a scholar, preacher, and writer, with the ablest of his brethren. He knew Greek and Latin usefully,

, a pious and popular dissenting minister of the Baptist persuasion, was born at Blackwell in Derbyshire, May 20, 1734, of poor parents, who were unable to give him any education. He spent a considerable part of his youth in the farming business, and that of the stocking frame, but appears to have during this time read much, and at length began to preach among the sect called the general baptists, throughout the towns and villages in his neighbourhood. In his twenty-third year he married; and this producing a numerous family, he opened a school at Button-Ash field. At this time he held the doctrine of universal redemption, and disliked predestination to such a degree as to ridicule it in a poem (of which he was afterwards ashamed), but he now changed his sentiments and became a zealous Calvinist in that and othei points supposed to constitute the Calvinistic system. The consequence of this change was, an avowal and defence of his new opinions in his first publication, “The Reign of Grace,” in which he was encouraged hy the late rev. Henry Venn, vicar of Huddersfield, who wrote a recommendatory preface to it. It appeared in 1768, and led to a new and important aera in his life, being so much approved by the congregation of particular baptists in Prescot-street, Goodman’s fields, whose pastor was just dead, that they invited Mr. Booth to succeed him. This invitation he accepted, and in Feb. 1769, took possession of his pulpit, after being regularly ordained for the first time. Here he appears for some years to have spent what time he could spare from his public labours in laying in a stock of knowledge; and although he always lamented the want of a regular education, his proficiency, and the extent of his reading were so great as in some measure to redeem his time, and place him on a footing, both as a scholar, preacher, and writer, with the ablest of his brethren. He knew Greek and Latin usefully, if not critically: the Greek Testament he went through nearly fifty times by the simple expedient of reading one chapter every day. General science and literature, history, civil and ecclesiastical, he investigated with acuteness in the ablest writers, English, French, Dutch, and German; and his works show that he particularly excelled in a knowledge of controversial divinity, and of those arguments, pro and con, which were connected with his opinions as a baptist. After exercising his ministry in Prescot-street for nearly thirty-seven years, he died Monday, Jan. 27, 1806, and his memory was honoured by a tablet and inscription in his meeting-house, recording his virtues and the high respect his congregation entertained for him. Besides the work already mentioned, he published, 1. “The Death of Legal Hope, the Life of Evangelical Obedience,1770, 12mo. 2. “The Deity of Jesus Christ essential to the Christian Religion,” a translation from Abbadie, and occasioned by the subscription controversy, 1770. 3. “An Apology for the Baptists in refusing communion at the Lord’s Table to Pscdobaptists,1778. 4. “Paedobaptism examined, on the principles, concessions, and reasonings of the most learned Psedobaptists,1784, and enlarged 1737, 2 vols. a work which his sect consider as unanswerable. He published also some lesser tracts and occasional sermons.

s also taken particular notice of Booth, nor has he omitted either his excellencies or defects: this writer, speaking of Wilks and him, says, “they were actors so opposite

Mr. Gibber has also taken particular notice of Booth, nor has he omitted either his excellencies or defects: this writer, speaking of Wilks and him, says, “they were actors so opposite in their manner, that if either of them could have borrowed a little of the other’s fault, they would both have been improved by it. If Wilks had sometimes too great a vivacity, Booth as often contented himself with too grave a dignity. The latter seemed too much to heave up his words, as the other to dart them to the ear with too quick and sharp a vehemence. Thus Wiiks would too frequently break into the time and measure of the harmony by too many spirited accents in one line; and Booth, by too solemn a regard to harmony, would as often lose the necessary spirit of it: so that (as I have observed) could we have sometimes raised the one and sunk the other, they had both been nearer the mark. Yet this could not be always objected to them; they had their intervals of unexceptionable excellence, that more than balanced their errors. The master-piece of Booth was Othello; then he was most in character, and seemed not more to animate and please himself in it than his spectators. It is true he owed his last and highest advancement to his acting Cato; but it was the novelty and critical appearance of that character, that chiefly swelled the torrent of his applause; for, let the sentiments of a declaiming patriot have all the sublimity of poetry, and let them be delivered with all the utmost grace and elocution, yet this is but one light wherein the excellence of an actor can shine; but in Othello we may see him in the variety of nature. In Othello, therefore, I may safely aver, that Booth shewed himself thrice the actor that he could in Cato, and yet his merit in acting Cato need not be diminished by this comparison. Wilks often regretted, that in tragedy he had not the full and strong voice of Booth, to command and grace his periods with. But Booth used to say, that if his ear had been equal to it, Wilks had voice enough to have shewn himself a much better tragedian. Now, though there might be some truth in this, yet these two actors were of so mixed a merit, that even in tragedy the superiority was not always on the same side. In sorrow, tenderness, or resignation, Wilks plainly had the advantage, and seemed more pathetically to feel, look, and express his calamity. But in the more turbulent transports of the heart, Booth again bore the palm, and left all competitors behind him.

, create more dissoluteness and misery than it was intended to remove. He also wrote a letter to the writer of the “Present state of the Republic of Letters” in, August

The son of the preceding, who, we have just mentioned, died in 1758, has obtained a place among the royal and noble authors, for having published, but without his name, “Considerations upon the institution of Marriage, with some thoughts concerning the force and obligation of the marriage contract; wherein is considered, how far divorces may or ought to be allowed. By a gentleman. Humbly submitted to the judgment of the impartial,” Lond. printed for John Whiston, 1739. Jt is an argument for divorce on disagreement of temper, which was the aim of Milton in his “Tetrachordon,” and would, if we may conjecture from the effects of the experiment in a neighbouring nation, create more dissoluteness and misery than it was intended to remove. He also wrote a letter to the writer of the “Present state of the Republic of Letters” in, August 1734, vindicating his father from some reflections cast on him in Burnett’s “History of his own times.” His only daughter married Henry earl of Stamford, in whose son, the title of Earl of Warrington was revived in 1796.

, a French historical and miscellaneous writer of considerable fame, was born at Paris in 1734, of an opulent

, a French historical and miscellaneous writer of considerable fame, was born at Paris in 1734, of an opulent family, and devoted himself in his youth to high life and the fine arts. From being first valet de chambre to Louis XV. he became his favourite > and on the death of that monarch, he obtained the place of farmer-general, the duties of which unpopular office he performed with great assiduity, employing his leisure hours in cultivating music and general literature. He became one of the most celebrated composers of songs, and his “Recueil d'airs,” 4 vols. 8vo, ornamented with fine engravings, is in high esteem. He composed also the music of the opera of “Adela de Ponthieu,” which was performed with considerable success. Happening to read in De Bure, that there had been only thirty copies published of the Collection of antient paintings of Rome, coloured after Bartoli’s designs, he made inquiry for the coppers, had them repaired, and published a second edition of that work. His other works are: 1.“Essais sur la Musique ancienne et moderne,1780, 4 vols. 4to, a vast mass of useful materials, but many parts of it are written in the spirit of system and partiality, and many valuable passages of considerable length are borrowed from Dr. Burney and other authors of eminence, without any acknowledgment. The best part is that which treats of the French lyric music and poetry. 2. “Essai sur l‘histoire chronologique de plus de quatrevingts peuples de l’antiquité,1783, 8vo. 3. “Memoires historiques, de Coucy,” 2 vols. 8vo. 4. “Pieces interessantes pour servir a l'histoire des regnes de Louis XIII. et de Louis XIV.” 12mo. 5. “Lettres sur la Suisse,1781, 2 vols. 8vo. 6. “Abregè chronologique des principaux faits arrives depuis Henoch jusqu'a. Jesus Christ,1789, 8vo. 7. “Recueil de vers dedies à Adelaide par le plus heureux des epoux,” 16 mo, a tribute to conjugal happiness, so seldom celebrated by poets. La Borde also published a translation of Swinburne’s Travels; a fine edition of the Historical Romances of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, printed by Didot, in 11 vols, 12mo.; “Tableaux topographiques et pittoresques de la Suisse,” with letter-press and beautiful engravings by Robert: and lastly, in 1792, “L'Histoire abregée de la mer du Sud,” 3 vols. 8vo, containing an analysis of all the voyages to that sea from the time of Goneville, in the fifteenth century, to that of our countryman, Capt. Riou, in 1789. In this also he urges the Spaniards to widen the passage of Nicaragua, which is only three leagues, and make it navigable, and a communication between the North and South Seas, pointing out the advantages this would be attended with in voyages from Europe to China. During the Convention, la Borde retired to Rouen where he hoped to be overlooked, but the spies of the reigning tyrants discovered him, and conducted him to Paris, where he was beheaded July 22, 1791. His wife was the authoress of some “Poems” imitated fnjm the English, and printed by Didot in 1785, 18mo.

is only promotion was that of prior of the hospital of St. Maria degh Innocenti in Florence. Another writer of the same name [IlAFAELLO Borg­Hini], was author of several

, was born at Florence in 1515 of a noble family, and became a Benedictine monk in 1531. He was one of the persons appointed to correct the Decameron of Boccace, by order of the council of Trent, and performed this curious task for the edition of Florence, 1573, 8vo. But the best known of his works, and which did him the most honour, is that entitled, “Discovsi di M. Vincenzo Borghini,” printed at Florence 1584 and 1585, in 2 vols. 4to, and reprinted at the same place in 1755, with annotations. In these dissertations he treats of the origin of Florence, and of several interesting particulars of its history, of its families, of its coins, &c. Borghini died in 1680, after having refused, through humility, the archbishopric of Pisa, which was offered to him some time before his death. His only promotion was that of prior of the hospital of St. Maria degh Innocenti in Florence. Another writer of the same name [IlAFAELLO Borg­Hini], was author of several comedies, and of a tract on painting and sculpture, in some estimation, under the title of “Riposo della Pittura, e della Scukura,” published at Florence in 1584, 8vo.

, an English miscellaneous writer, and poet of considerable merit, was nephew to the preced ng,

, an English miscellaneous writer, and poet of considerable merit, was nephew to the preced ng, being the younger son of general George Boscawen, third son of lord Falmouth. He was born August 28, 1752, and was sent to Eton school before he was seven years old, where he obtained the particular notice and favour of the celebrated Dr. Barnard. From school he was removed to Oxford, where he became a gentleman commoner of Exeter college, but left it, as is not unusual with gentlemen intended for the law, without taking a degree. He then studied the law, as a member of the Middle Temple, and the practice of special pleading under Mr. (afterwards judge) Buller: was called to the bar, and for a time went the Western circuit. Nor were his legal studies unfruitful, as he published an excellent work under the title of “A Treatise of Convictions on Penal Statutes; with approved precedents of convictions before justices of the peace, in a variety of cases; particularly under the Game Laws, the Revenue Laws, and the Statutes respecting Manufactures, &c.1792, 8vo. He was also appointed one of the commissioners of bankrupts, which situation he held till his death. On Dec. 19, 1785, he was appointed by patent to the situation of a commissioner of the victualling office, in consequence of which, and of his marriage in, April 1786, he soon after quitted the bar. He married Charlotte, second daughter of James Ibbetson, D. D. archdeacon of St. A 1 ban’s, and rector of Bushey. By Mrs. Boscawt'n, who died about seven years before him, he had a numerous family, five of whom, daughters, survived both parents.

ears before his death a constant and able assistant in the “British Critic.” He is also the supposed writer of“The Progress of Satire, an essay, in verse, with notes, containing

Being an excellent classical scholar, and warmly attached to literary pursuits, he published, in 1793, the first volume of a new translation of Horace, containing the “Odes, Epodes, and Carmen Seculare.” This being much approved, was followed, in 1798, by his translation of the “Satires, Epistles, and Art of Poetry,” thus completing a work, which, though Francis’s translation still holds its popularity, is, in the judgment of all classical men, very greatly superior to it, in many essential points of merit. In 1801 he published a small volume of original poems, in which, if he does not take a lead among his contemporaries, he at least discovers an elegant taste, a poetical mind, and a correct versification. He was for several years before his death a constant and able assistant in the “British Critic.” He is also the supposed writer of“The Progress of Satire, an essay, in verse, with notes, containing remarks on ‘The Pursuits of Literature’,1798, and “A Supplement to the same,1799, two pamphlets occasioned by some freedoms taken with eminent characters in the “Pursuits.

al accession of cold, proved fatal on the sixth of that month. The character of Mr. Boscawen, says a writer, whom we know to have been one of his intimate friends, could

Mr. Boscawen’s constitution was delicate, and probably not improved by close confinement to the duties of his commissionership. He had, consequently, for several years suffered much by asthmatic affections of the lungs, which gradually exhausted the powers of life, and in the beginning of May, 1811, from an accidental accession of cold, proved fatal on the sixth of that month. The character of Mr. Boscawen, says a writer, whom we know to have been one of his intimate friends, could it be truly drawn, would exhibit a consummate picture of every thing that is amiable and estimable in human nature, improved by knowledge and exalted by religion. In every possible relation of life, whatever was kind, whatever was affectionate, whatever was benevolent, might with certainty be expected from him. That excellent institution, the Literary Fund, he considered almost as his child; and his affection to it was testified, not only by contributions, but by annual verses in its praise, and assiduous attendance on its meetings. Within five days of his death he wrote a copy of verses for its anniversary, and even contemplated the design of attending it. A new edition of his Horace, much improved by his long continued attention, is intended to be brought forward, accompanied by the original, and by many additional notes.

is having published some pieces of Desargues on perspective, and having adopted the opinions of this writer, which were adverse to those of Le Brim and the ablest academicians.

, a French engraver, was born at Tours, and gave the first lessons of perspective in the academy of painting at Paris. He had great judgement in that branch as well as in architecture. He left, 1. Three good tract on the manner of drawing the orders of architecture, 1684, folio; on the art of engraving, 1645, 8vo; on perspective, 1682, 8vo. 2. Representation of dirers human figures, with their measures, taken from the antiques at Rome, Paris, 1656; a pocket volume all engraved. His plates in aqua fortis, but in a peculiar method, are agreeable. The work of Bosse on the art of engraving was re-published some years ago, with the remarks and augmentations of M. Cochin the younger. Bosse died in his own country about the year 1660, according to Jombert. Bosse was a turbulent character,* and created many enemies, particularly owing to his having published some pieces of Desargues on perspective, and having adopted the opinions of this writer, which were adverse to those of Le Brim and the ablest academicians. This produced a controversy, in which he so displeased the academicians that they expelled him from their society.

, an Italian scholar and writer of considerable eminence, was born at Verona in 1427, and in

, an Italian scholar and writer of considerable eminence, was born at Verona in 1427, and in 1451 entered the congregation of the regular canons of St. John of Lateran, where he bore several employments, as visitor of the order, procurator-general, and abbot of Fiesole in Tuscany. Cosmo de Medici, who had a high respect for him, spent seventy thousand crowns in the repairs of that monastery, and it was in the church belonging to it that Bosso delivered the ensigns of the cardinalship to John de Medici, afterwards pope Leo X. Sixtus VI. also employed him in many important affairs, particularly in reforming the religious houses of Genoa, and other neighbouring districts, and he thrice offered him a valuable bishopric, which he refused. He vigorously opposed the decree of pope Innocent VIII. which ordered all sorts of monks to pay part of their yearly revenues to the clerks of the apostolic chamber. Hermolaus Barbarus was his pupil and guest at Fiesole, and Picus of Mirandula, his friend. He died at Padua in 1502. Mr. Roscoe says he was a profound scholar, a close reasoner, and a convincing orator; and to these united a candid mind, an inflexible integrity, and an interesting simplicity of life and manners. His literary productions were, l.“De Instituendo Sapientia animo,” Bologna, 1495. 2. “De veris et salutaribus animi gaudiis,” Florence, 1491. 3, “Epistolar. Lib. tres,” or rather three volumes, printed 1493, 1498, 1502. Some orations of his are in the collection entitled “Recuperationes Fsesulanse,” a rare and beautiful book, said to have been printed in 1483. His whole works were published by P. Ambrosini, at Bologna, 1627, with the exception of the third book, or volume, of letterS| which, on account of its extreme rarity, was at that time unknown to the editor. His moral writings were very highly esteemed; and one of his pieces on female dress, “de vanis mulierum ornamentis,” excited a considerable interest. The editor of Fabricius throws some doubts on the date of the “Recuperationes,” and if there be letters in it dated 1492 and 1493, it is more probable that it is a typographical error for 1493.

, bishop of Meaux, an eminent French writer and preacher, was born at Dijon, 27th of September 1627. He

, bishop of Meaux, an eminent French writer and preacher, was born at Dijon, 27th of September 1627. He received the first rudiments of his education there, and in 1642 was sent to Paris to finish his studies at the college of Navarre. In 1652 he took his degrees in divinity, and soon after went to Metz, where he was made a canon. Whilst he resided here, he applied himself chiefly to the study of the scriptures, and the reading of the fathers, especially St. Augustine. In a little time he became a celebrated preacher, and was invited to Paris, where he had for his hearers many of the most learned men of his time, and several persons of the first rank at court. In 1669 he was created bishop of Condom, and the same month was appointed preceptor to the dauphin; upon which occasion, and the applause he gained in the discharge of so delicate an office, pope Innocent XI. congratulated him in a very polite letter. When he had almost finished the education of this prince, he addressed to him his “Discours surl'Histoire Universelle,” which was published in 1681, and is by far the best of his performances. About a year after he was made preceptor he gave up his bishopric, because he could not reside in his diocese, on account of his engagement at court. In 1680 the king appointed him first almoner to the dauphiness, and the year after gave him the bishopric of Meaux. In 1697 he was made counsellor of state, and the year following first almoner to the duchess of Burgundy. Nor did the learned world honour him less than the court; for he had been admitted a member of the French academy; and in 1695, at the desire of the royal college of Navarre, of which he was a member, the king constituted him their superior.

hall come nearer the truth by adopting Bossuet’s character as contrasted with that of Fenelon by the writer of the “Letters concerning Mythology,” who represents him as

In estimating the character of this celebrated prelate, we must not be guided by d'Alembert’s desultory and artful Eloge, who, however, struggles in vain to conceal the truth, that Bossuet was, with all his taste and talents, a furious bigot in favour of the Catholic religion, and while he affected to dislike persecution, either submitted to the exercise of it, or promoted it by the asperity of his writings. We shall come nearer the truth by adopting Bossuet’s character as contrasted with that of Fenelon by the writer of the “Letters concerning Mythology,” who represents him as a prelate of vast parts, learned, eloquent, artful, and aspiring. By these qualities he rose to the first dignities in the Gallican church: while another of finer fancy and better heart (Fenelon), humble, holy, and sincere, was censured at Rome, and disgraced at the French court. Both were intrusted with the education of princes, and acquitted themselves of those duties in a very different manner. The one endeavoured to make his royal pupil noble, virtuous, and just, a father to his people, ana a friend to mankind, by the maxims of his inimitable Telemaque. The other in his discourses upon universal history, is perpetually turning his prince’s eyes from mankind to the church, as the sacred object of his care, from whose everlasting stem whoever separates is lost: and for whose interests, in the extirpation of heresy, and aggrandizement of her ministers, he is, like his father Lewis XIV. to exert all the power he has received from God.

, or William Worcester, an ancient English writer, acquainted with history, antiquities, heraldry, physic, and

, or William Worcester, an ancient English writer, acquainted with history, antiquities, heraldry, physic, and astronomy, was born at Bristol about 1415; his father’s name was Worcester, and his mother’s Botoner, hence he often names himself William Wyrcester, alias Botoner; and hence the error in Pits, and others, of making two distinct persons of the two names. He studied at Hart-hall, Oxford, 1434. He had been exercised in wars above 44 years; and had so faithfully served sir John Fastolff that he left him one of his executors. He wrote many books, the first of which, that was printed, was his translation from the French, of “Cicero de Senectute,” which he addressed to William Wainfleet, bishop of Winchester. He tells us that he presented it to the bishop at Asher [JSsher] August 10, 1475, but received no reward (nullum regardum recepide episcopo). He wrote also “Antiquities of England;” “Abbreviations of the Learned;” “Medicinal collections;” a book of Astrology; another of Astronomy; besides a particular treatise, gratefully preserving the life and deeds of his master, under the title of “Acta Domini Johannis Fastolff;” “the Acts of John duke of Bedford;” “Polyandrium Oxoniensium, or memoirs of Oxford Students;” and other lesser pieces; of which see Tanner Bibl. Brit. p. 115. His “Annals of England” were printed by Hearne at the end of his “Liber Niger Scaccarii,” p. 424 451. His “Itinerary” was published from a ms. not improbably the original, in the library at Corpus Christi college, Cambridge, by Mr. James Nasmith, fellow of the said college, Cantab. 1778, 8vo. Fuller cites a book of Botoner’s, containing all the ancient gentry of the county of Norfolk, long preserved in the county, but not now extant. He also wrote something in poetry, as that htimoroirs ballad in Nasmith’s edition of his Itinerary, called " Comedia a<i Monasterium Hulme/' &c. and a long chronographical epitaph in verse, on the lady Milicent Fastoif; in the possession of Richard Poley, esq. late prothonotary of the common pleas. He is supposed to have died about 1490. The son of this Worcester, among other things, also made a collection of several authentic instruments relating to the English wars and government in France; which he dedicated to king Edward IV. containing a catalogue of the princes, dukes, earls, barons, bannerets, knights, and other persons of eminence, who were of the regent’s court. A copy of this collection, in quarto, was some time in the custody of the late Brian Fairfax, esq. one of the commissioners of the customs.

, a law-writer of great reputation in France, was born at Paris, April 16,

, a law-writer of great reputation in France, was born at Paris, April 16, 1719, of an honourable family. His father, who was also a lawyer, spared no expence in his education. From the age of sixteen he studied jurisprudence with such perseverance and success as to be admitted to a doctor’s degree in 1747. Being employed to prepare the articles on jurisprudence and canon law for the Encyclopaedia, he wrote those on council, decretals, &c. but, for what reason we are not told, they gave offence to the encyclopedists, who became on that account his enemies, and prevented him for some time from attaining the rank of professor, which wag the object of his ambition. Bouchaud, however, consoied himself by cultivating a taste for modem poetry. He translated several of the dramas of Apostolo Zeno into French, and published them in 1758, 2 vols. 12mo, and in 1764 he translated the English novel of “Lady Julia Mandeville.” In the interval between these two, he published “Essai sur la poesie rhythmique,1763, which was thought a work of great merit. This was followed by the first of his more professional labours, “Traité de Timpot du vingtieme sur les successions, et de l'impot sur les marchandises chez les Romains,” a very curious history of the taxes which the ancient emperors imposed. In 1766, on the death of M. Hardron, he was elected into the French academy, notwithstanding the opposition of the encyclopedists, whose dislike seems not ill calculated to give us a favourable idea of the soundness of his principles. This was followed by a law professorship, and some years after he was advanced to the professorship of the law of nature and nations in the royal college of France. He was nominated to this by the king in 1774, and was the first professor, it being then founded. On this he wrote in the memoirs of the academy, a curious paper concerning the societies that were formed hy the Roman publicans for the receipt of the taxes. The body of the publicans was taken from the order of knights, and had great influence and credit. They were called by Cicero “the ornament of the capital,” and the “pillars of the state.” Th“knights, though rich, entered into associations, when the taxes of a whole province were farmed out by the senate, because no individual was opulent enough to be responsible for such extensive engagements; and the nature of these societies or associations, and the various conventions, commercial a>id pecuniary engagements, occupations, and offices, to which they gave rise, form the subject of this interesting paper, which was followed by various others on topics of the same nature. In 1777 he published his” Theorie des traits de commerce entre les nations,“the principles of which seem to be founded on justice and reciprocal benefits. In 1784 appeared another curious work on the ancient Roman laws and policy, entitled,” Recherches historiques surla Police des Romains, concernant les grands chemins, les rues, et les marches.“His” Commentaire sur les lois des clouze tables," first published in 1767, was reprinted in 1803, with improvements and additions, at the expense of the French government, and he was employed in some treatises intended for the national institute, when he died, Feb. 1, 1804, regretted as aprofound and enlightened law-writer. It is remarkable that in his essay on commercial treaties abovementioned, he contends for our Selden’s Mare Clausum, as the opinion of every man who is not misled by an immoderate zeal for his own country.

, a French historian and miscellaneous writer, was born at Quimper, Nov. 4, 1690, and entered among the Jesuits

, a French historian and miscellaneous writer, was born at Quimper, Nov. 4, 1690, and entered among the Jesuits in 1706. In 1710, after finishing his course of philosophy, he taught Latin at Caen, and afterwards rhetoric at iSevers. From that time he remained principally in the college of Louis le Grand at Paris, until his death, Jan. 7, 1743, employing himself in writing. Besides the part which he took for many years in the “Memoires de Trevoux,” he wrote: i. “Anacr^on and Sappho,” dialogues in Greek verse, Caen, 1712, 8vo. 2. “Recueil d' observations physiques tirees des meilleurs ecrivains,” Paris, 1719, 12mo, to which were added two more volumes, 1726 and 1730, by Grozelier. 3. “Histoire des guerres et des negociations qui precederent le traite de Westphalie sous le regne de Louis XIII. &c.” 1727, 4to, and 2 vols. 12mo, taken from the Memoirs of count d'Avaux, the French ambassador. This history still enjoys high reputation in F.rance. 4. “Exposition de la Doctrine Chretienne par demandes et par reponses,1741, 4to, and some other theological tracts that are now forgotten. 5. “Histoire du traite de Westphalie,” 2 vols. 4to, and 4 vols. 12mo, a superior work to that mentioned before, and highly praised by all French historians. It did not appear until after his death, in 1744. Besides these he wrote several pieces of a lighter kind, as an ingenious romance, entitled “Voyage Merveilleux du prince FanFeredin dans la Romancie, &c.1735, 12mo “Amusement philosophique sur le Langagedes Betes,1739,12mo, which, being censured for its satire, the author was banished for some time to la Fleche, and endeavoured to defend himself in a letter to the abbe Savaletta. He wrote also some comedies of very little merit, but his reputation chiefly rests on his historical works.

, a French medical writer, was born at Servian, in the diocese of Beziers, May 14, 1690,

, a French medical writer, was born at Servian, in the diocese of Beziers, May 14, 1690, and created doctor in medicine, at Montpellier, in 1717. Enjoying, during the course of a long life, a considerable portion of reputation, he was, in succession, made professor in mathematics, and secretary to the academy at Beziers, member of the royal society at Montpeliier, and corresponding member of the academy of sciences at Paris. He was also author of several ingenious dissertations: “On the properties of Rhubarb,” published at Beziers, 1717, 4to, probably his “Inaugural Thesis.” “Sur la cause de la Pesanteur,1720, 12mo, which obtained for him a prize from the academy at Bourdeaux; “Avis et remedes, contre la Peste,” Beziers, 1721, 8vo. “On Asthma and on the Gout,” in which complaints he recommends the Venice soap as a powerful auxiliary; “Sur la maniere de traiter la Petite Verole,” Beziers, 1736, 4to; and some years after, “On the best method of preserving the district of Beziers from that disease;” “Recueil des lettres, et autres pieces pour servir a I'histoire de Pacademie de Beziers,1736, 4to, with several other publications. He died in 1770, leaving a son, Henry Nicholas Bouillet, who was made doctor in medicine at Montpeliier, and member of the academy of Beziers. He published, in 1759, in 4to, “Observations sur l'anasarque, le hydropesies de poitrine, des pericarde, &c.

and in that they both happened to encourage a public clamour which had little solid foundation. The writer of archbishop' Boulter’s Life in the Biog. Brit, seems to doubt

* Dr. Welsted, a physician, was also The primate maintained a son of the of this golden election, and when he doctor’s, as a commoner, at Hart-halt became poor in the latter part of his in Oxford; and would effectually have life, the archbishop, though he was no provided for him, if the young gentlerelation, gave him, at the least, two man had not died before he had taken hundred pounds a year, till his death, a degree. Dr. Welsted was one of the Nor did his grace’s kindness to the editors of the Oxford Pindar, and doctor’s family end with his decease-, esteemed an excellent Greek scholar. and some time after he was preferred to the same honour by Dr. Thomas Tenison, archbishop of Canterbury. In these stations he was under a necessity of appearing often at court, where his merit obtained him the patronage of Charles Spencer, earl of Sunderland, principal secretary of state, by whose interest he was advanced to the rectory of St. Olave in Southwark, and to the archdeaconry of Surrey. The parish of St. Olave was very populous, and for the most part poor, and required such a liberal and vigilant pastor as Dr. Boulter, who relieved their wants, and gave them instruction, correction, and reproof. When king George I. passed over to Hanover in 1719, Dr. Boulter was recommended to attend him in quality of his chaplain, and also was appointed tutor to prince Frederic, to instruct him in the English tongue; and for that purpose drew up for his use “A set of Instructions.” This so recommended him to the king, that during his abode at Hanover, the bishopric of Bristol, and deanery of Christchurch, Oxford, becoming vacant, the king granted to him that see and deanery, and he was consecrated bishop of Bristol, on the fifteenth of November, 1719. In this last station he was more than ordinarily assiduous in the visitation of his diocese, and the discharge of his pastoral duty; and during one of these visitations, he received a letter by a messenger from the secretary of state, acquainting him, that his majesty had nominated him to the archbishopric of Armagh, and primacy of Ireland, then vacant by the death of Dr. Thomas Lindsay, on the 13th of July, 1724-, and desiring him to repair to London as soon as possible, to kiss the king’s hand for his promotion. After some, consultation on this affair, to which he felt great repugnance, he sent an answer by the messenger, refusing the honour the king intended him, and requesting the secretary to use his good offices with his majesty, in making his excuse, but the messenger was dispatched back to him. by the secretary, with the king’s absolute commands that he should accept of the post, to which he submitted, though not without some reluctance, and soon after addressed himself to his journey to court. Ireland was at that juncture not a little inflamed, by the copper-coin project of one Wood, and it was thought by the king and ministry, that the judgment, moderation, and wisdom of the bishop of Bristol would tend much to allay the ferment. He arrived in Ireland on the third of November, 1724, had no sooner passed patent for the primacy, than he appeared at all the public boards, and gave a weight and vigour to them; and, in every respect, was indefatigable in promoting the real happiness of the people. Among his other wise measures, in seasons of great scarcity in, Ireland, he was more than once instrumental in averting a pestilence and famine, which threatened the nation. When the scheme was set on foot for making a navigation, by a canal to be drawn from Lough -Neagh to Newry, not only for bringing coal to Dublin, but to carry on more effectually an inland trade in the several counties of the north of Ireland, he greatlv encouraged and promoted the design, not only with his counsel but his purse. Drogheda is a large and populous town within the diocese of Armagh, and his grace finding that the ecclesiastical appointments were not sufficient to support two clergymen there, and the cure over-burthensome for one effectually to discharge, he allotted out of his own pocket a maintenance for a second curate, whom he obliged to give public service every Sunday in the afternoon, and prayers twice every day. He had great compassion for the poor clergy of his diocese, who were disabled from giving their children a proper education, and maintained several of the sons of such in the university, in order to qualify them for future preferment, He erected four houses at Drogheda for the reception of clergymen’s widows, and purchased an estate for the endowment of them, after the model of primate Marsh’s charity; which he enlarged in one particular: for as the estate he purchased for the maintenance of the widows, amounted to twenty-four pounds a year more than he had set apart for that use, he appointed that the surplus should be a fund for setting out the children of such, widows apprentices, or otherwise to be disposed of for the benefit of such children, as his trustees should think proper. He also by his will directed, which has since been performed, that four houses should be built for clergymen’s widows at Armagh, and endowed with fifty pounds a year. During his life, he contracted for the building of a stately market-house at Armagh, which was finished by his executors, at upwards of eight hundred pounds expence. He was a benefactor also to Dr. Stevens’s hospital in the city of Dublin, erected for the maintenance and cure of the poor. His charities for augmenting small livings, and buying of glebes, amounted to upwards of thirty thousand pourids, besides what he devised by his will for the like purposes in England. Though the plan of the incorporated society for promoting English protestant working schools, cannot be imputed to primate Boulter, yet he was the chief instrument in forwarding the undertaking, which he lived to see carried into execution with consider, able success. His private charities were not less munificent, but so secretly conducted, that it is impossible to give any particular account of them: it is affirmed by those who were in trust about him, that he never suffered an object to leave his house unsupplied, and he often sent them away with considerable sums, according to the judgment he made of their merits and necessities. With respect to his political virtues, and the arts of government, when his health would permit him he was constant in his attendance at the council-table, and it is well known what weight and dignity he gave to the debates of that board. As he always studied the true interest of Ireland, so he judged, that the diminishing the value of the gold coin would be a means of increasing silver in the country, a thing very much wanted in order to effect which, he supported a scheme at the council- table, which raised the clamours of unthinking people, although experience soon demonstrated its wisdom. He was thirteen times one of the lords justices, or chief governors of Ireland; which office he administered oftener than any other chief governor on record. He embarked for England June 2, 1742, and after two days illness died at his house in St. James’s place, Sept. 27, and was buried in Westminster-abbey, where a stately monument has been erected to his memory. His deportment was grave, his aspect venerable, and his temper meek and humble. He was always open and easy of access both to rich and poor. He was steady to the principles of liberty, both in religion and politics. His learning was universal, yet more in substance than shew; nor would his modesty permit him to make any ostentation of it. He always preserved such an equal temper of mind that hardly any thing could ruffle, and amidst obloquy and opposition, steadily maintained a resolution of serving his country, embraced every thing proposed for the good of it, though by persons remarkable for their opposition to him: and when the most public-spirited schemes were introduced by him, and did not meet with the reception they deserved, he never took offence, but was glad when any part of his advice for the public good was pursued, and was always willing to drop some points, that he might not lose all; often saying, “he would do all the good to Ireland he could, though they did not suffer him to do all he would.” His life was mostly spent in action, and therefore it is not to be expected that he should have left many remains of his learning behind him nor do we know of any thing he bath written, excepting a few Charges to his clergy at his visitations, which are grave, solid, and instructive, and eleven Occasional Sermons, printed separately. In 1769, however, were published, at Oxford, in two volumes 8vo, “Letters written by his excellency Hugh Boulter, D. D. lord primate of all Ireland, &c. to several ministers of state in England, and some others. Containing an account of the most interesting transactions which passed in Ireland from 1724 to 1738.” The originals, which are deposited in the library of Christ church, in Oxford, were collected by Ambrose Philips, esq. who was secretary to his grace, and lived in his house during that space of time in which they bear date. They are entirely letters of business, and are all of them in Dr. Boulter’s hand-writing, excepting some few, which are fair copies by his secretary. The editor justly remarks, that these letters, which could not be intended for publication, have been fortunately preserved, as they contain the most authentic history of Ireland, for the period in which they were written: “a period,” he adds, “which will ever do honour to his grace’s memory, and to those most excellent princes George the first and second, who had the wisdom to place confidence in so worthy, so able, and so successful a minister; a minister who had the rare and peculiar felicity of growing still more and more into the favour both of the king and of the people, until the very last day of his life,” It is much to be regretted that in some of his measures, he was opposed by dean Swift, particularly in that of diminishing the gold coin, as it is probable that they both were actuated by an earnest desire of serving the country. In one affair, that of Wood’s halfpence, they appear to have coincided, and in that they both happened to encourage a public clamour which had little solid foundation. The writer of archbishop' Boulter’s Life in the Biog. Brit, seems to doubt whether he assisted Ambrose Philips in the paper called the “Freethinker;” but of this we apprehend there can be no doubt. It was published while he held the living of St. Olave’s.

, a French dramatic writer and satirist, was born in 1638, at Mussi-l'évêque in Burgundy.

, a French dramatic writer and satirist, was born in 1638, at Mussi-l'évêque in Burgundy. He was not brought up at school, and could only speak the rude provincial dialect of his country, when he came to Paris in 1651, yet, by the perusal of good books, with his good memory, he was soon able to converse and to write elegantly in French. Having composed, by order of Louis XIV. a book of no great merit, entitled “Of the proper study of sovereigns,1671, 12mo, the king was so well pleased with it, that he would have appointed him sub-preceptor to Monseigneur, if Boursault had been master of the Latin language. The duchess of Angouleme, widow of a natural son of Charles IX. having taken him to be her secretary, he was engaged to turn every week the gazette into rhyme, which procured him a pension of 2000 livres. Louis XIV. and his court were much entertained with him; but, having employed his satire against the Franciscans and the Capuchins, he was silenced. The queen’s confessor, a Spanish cordelier, caused both the gazette and the pension to be suppressed; and would have had him imprisoned, had it not been for the interest exerted in his behalf by his patrons. He shortly after obtained a new licence, and published his gazette under the title of the “Merry Muse;” but it was again suppressed. He afterwards got into favour once more, and was made receiver of the excise at Montlugon, where he died of a violent colic, aged 63, Sept. 5, 1701. He wrote several theatrical pieces, and other works. The chief of them are, “Æsop in the city,” and “Æsop at court;” which long remained to the stage. These two pieces and the following are an agreeable satire on the ridiculous manners or the several ages and conditions of life. His verse in general is harmonious, but his style sometimes negligent, yet in general easy and suitable to the subject. 2. The “Mercure galante,” or “La comedie sans titre,” in which he ingeniously ridicules the rage for getting a place in the Mercure galaut. 3. “La satyre des satyres,” in one act. Boiltau’s satirical notice of Boursault, to avenge Moliere, with whom he had had a difference, gave occasion to this piece, which Boileau had interest enough and meanness enough to prevent being played. The satirist being some years afterwards at the baths of Bourbon, Boursault, at that time receiver of the excise at Montluc/>n, repaired thither on purpose to offer him his purse and his services. At this act of generosity Boileau was much affected; and they immediately engaged in a mutual friendship, of which Boursault was highly deserving by the gentleness of his manners, and the cheerfulness of his disposition. He behaved with less tolerance, however, towards his other censors; and was able sometimes to chastise them with effect. A cabal having prevented the success of the first representation of “Æsop in the city,” the author added to it a fable of the dog and the ox, applying the moral of it to the pit; which so effectually silenced the cabal, that the piece had a run of forty-three nights without interruption. Thomas Cornell le had a sincere regard for Boursault, whom he used to call his son, and insisted on his applying to be admitted a member of the academy. Boursault desired to be excused on account of his ignorance, adding with his usual simplicity, “What would the academy do with an ignorant and illiterate (ignare & non Lettre) member, who knows neither Latin nor Greek?” “We are not talking (returned Corneille) of a Greek or Latin academy, but of a French academy; and who understands French better than you?” There are likewise by him, 1. Some romances, “The marquis de Chavigny,” “The prince de Conde” which are written with spirit “Artemisia and Polyanthus and,” We should only believe what we see.“2. A collection of letters on subjects of respect, obligation, and gallantry; known under the name of” Lettres a Babet;“now forgotten. 3.” Lettres nouvelles,“with fables, tales, epigrams, remarks, bon-mots, &c. 3 vols. 12mo, several times reprinted, though mostly written in a loose and inelegant style: a miscellany, which was very popular when ii first came out; but is much less at present, as the tales and bon-mots which Boursault has collected, or put into verse, are found in many other books. His fables have neither the simplicity of those of La Fontaine, nor the elegant precision of Phaedrus. There is an edition of the” Theatre de Boursault," in 3 vols. 1746, 12mo.

ariations to which a tale frequently repeated is always liable, or to the neglect of veracity in the writer, it certainly differed from accounts which had been orally given

This is the narrative which, after thirty years, Mr. Bower gave the public as a genuine account. Whether owing to the inaccuracy of those who had formerly heard it, to the variations to which a tale frequently repeated is always liable, or to the neglect of veracity in the writer, it certainly differed from accounts which had been orally given by him too much not to furnish some suspicions of the author. On his arrival in England it appears to have been his first object to procure att introduction to some persons of respectability in the country destined for his’ future residence. He had heard of Dr. Aspinwall soon after his arrival; and that divine having formerly belonged to the order of Jesuits, he waited on him, and was kindly received. By this gentleman he was introduced to Dr. Clarke; and to them both he opened, as he says, his mind, without disguise, respecting his doubts relative to his faith. After several conferences with these gentlemen, and some with Berkeley, the bishop of Cloyne, then dean of Londonderry, added to his own reading and reasoning, he obtained, as he says, the fullest conviction that many of the favourite doctrines of Rome were not only evidently repugnant to scripture and reason, but wicked, blasphemous, and utterly inconsistent with the attributes of the supreme and infinite being. He therefore withdrew himself from the communion of the church without further delay, took leave of the provincial, quitted the order, and broke off all connection with those of the communion. This happened in the month of November, 1726.

will be well printed in your edition, notwithstanding the absence of Senblerus” The same celebrated writer had long before told Mr. Bowyer, “No one’s thoughts will have

Though it is not our intention to notice the works printed by Mr. Bowyer, excepting when he himself contributed to them by prefaces, notes, or other additions, yet we shall mention his having been the printer, in 1742, of the additional book of the Dunciad; as he received, on this occasion, testimonies of regard both from the great poet and his learned commentator. Among other friendly expressions of Dr. Warburton, he says, “I have never more pleasure when there (in London), than when I loll and talk with you at my ease, de qualibet ente, in your diningroom:” And again, “The Greek I know will be well printed in your edition, notwithstanding the absence of Senblerus” The same celebrated writer had long before told Mr. Bowyer, “No one’s thoughts will have greater weight with me than your own, in whom I have experienced so much candour, goodness, and learning.” It is not, how-i ever, to be concealed, that a difference afterwards arose between them, in which, as is commonly the case, each party was confident that he was right. Mr. Bowyer, who thought himself slighted, used often to remark, that, “after the death of the English Homer, the letters of his learned friend wore a different complexion.” “But, perhaps,” as Mr, Nichols candidly and judiciously observes, “this may be one of the many instances, which occur through, life, of the impropriety of judging for ourselves in cases which affect our interest or our feelings.” Mr. Bowyer, indeed, had a great sensibility of temper with regard to any neglects which were shewed him by his literary friends, in the way of his business. This did not proceed from a principle of avarice, but from a consciousness of the respect which was due to him from his acquaintance, as the first of his profession: for he expressed his resentment as strongly in cases where profit could be no material object, as he did in more important instances. Dr. Squire, then, dean of Bristol, not having appointed him to print a sermon which had been preached before the house of commons, on the general fast day, Feb. 13, 1761, Mr. Bowyer wrote to the doctor, upon the occasion, an expostulatory letter. Nor was this the only evidence he gave how much he was offended, when he thought that a slight had been put upon him from a quarter where he imagined he had a natural claim to favour.

Michaelis. 2. Of the Sabbatical years, from the same. 3. Of the years of Jubilee; from an anonymous writer, in Masson’s Histoire Critique de la Republique des Lettres.”

He was very desirous that Mr. Clarke’s book should be translated and reprinted in France; and he took some pains, though without success, to get it accomplished. In 1773, three little tracts were published by him, under the title of “Select Discourses 1. Of the Correspondence of the Hebrew months with the Julian, from the Latin of Professor Michaelis. 2. Of the Sabbatical years, from the same. 3. Of the years of Jubilee; from an anonymous writer, in Masson’s Histoire Critique de la Republique des Lettres.” In 1774, he corrected a new edition of Schrevelius’s Greek Lexicon, to which he added a number of words (distinguished by an asterisk) he had himself collected in the course of his own studies. Considerable additions, which are still in manuscript, were made by him to the Lexicons of Hederic and of Buxtorf, the Latin ones of Faber and of Littleton, and the English Dictionary of Bailey; and he left behind him many other proofs of his critical skill in the learned languages. His Greek and Latin grammars in general are filled with such curious explanatory notes, as bear the most convincing proofs of consummate critical knowledge in those languages, and that knowledge he applied particularly to the advancement of sacred learning. It was his constant custom, in the course of his reading, to note down every thing which he thought might contribute to illustrate any passage of Scripture, esper cially of the Greek Testament. In pursuance of this method, it is hardly to be conceived what a number of useful and curious remarks stand inserted in the margins of his theological books, which may greatly contribute to improve future editions. In 1774, was published “The Origin of Printing, in two essays. 1. The substance of Dr. Middleton’s Dissertation on the Origin of Printing in England. 2. Mr. Meerman’s Account of the Invention of the Art at Harlem, and its progress to Mentz, with occasional remarks; and an appendix.” (See Richard Atkins.) The original idea of it was Mr. Bowyer’s; but it was completed by Mr. Nichols. The two learned friends, whose assistance is acknowledged in the preface, were the rev. Dr. Henry Owen, and the late Mr. Cæsar de Missy. Though this work appeared without a name, it was immediately judged to be Mr. Bowyer’s, and was well received in the world of letters, and justly spoken of in terms of great commendation, both at home and abroad. A second edition, with very considerable improvements, was published in 1776, and a Supplement in 1781. When Mr. Nichols was engaged in printing the “Original Works of Dr. King of the Commons,” and the “Supplement to Swift,” Mr. Bowyer, by suggesting useful hints, and adding some illustrations, assisted him in both these undertakings. Our eminent printer now drew to the end of his literary career, which he closed with a new edition, in 1777, of Dr. Bentley’s “Dissertation on the Epistles of Phalaris.” Dr. Bentley was a writer whom he had always held in the highest estimation. In the republication of this great critic’s Dissertation, Mr. Bowyer inserted the remarks which had occurred to him in the course of many years attention to the subjects there treated of; and ascribed them to the respective authors irom whose books or personal communication they were selected. He was much indebted, on this occasion, to the friendly assistance of Dr. Salter and Dr. Owen.

, a writer who would scarcely have deserved notice, if he had not been

, a writer who would scarcely have deserved notice, if he had not been obtruded on the public as the author of Junius’s Letters, was the second son of Alexander Macauley, esq. of the county of Antrim, in Ireland. He was born in 1746; was educated at Trinity college, Dublin; and was designed for the bar; but, instead of prosecuting his original views, came over to London, where, under the patronage of Mr. Richard Burke, he soon became known both in the literary and fashionable world. A propensity to extravagance had already reduced him to considerable embarrassments, when, in 1777, he married a lady of good fortune; but this relief was only temporary; for the same expensive habits still continued, and at length obliged him to accompany lord Macartney to Madras, in the capacity of a second secretary. He remained there after his lordship’s return, and died in 1791, having for some years previously to his death, held the lucrative office of master attendant, with little advantage to his circumstances. He wrote in Ireland, a political periodical paper, called “The Freeholder,” in 1772; an Introduction to lord Chatham’s speeches on the American war, reported and published by him; and the “Whig,” published in Almon’s newspaper, the London Courant, in 1780. In I?y4, he also wrote a few periodical essays called “The Indian Observer,” published at Madras. These were reprinted in an 8vo volume, in 1798, by thejate Mr. Laurence Dundas Campbell, with a view to establish an assertion which Almon first made, if we mistake not, purporting that Mr. Boyd was the author of Junius; but unfortunately the reader has “the bane and antidote” both before htm in this volume, and few attempts of the kind can be conceived more injudicious than a comparison between the styles of Boyd and Junius. Boyd wrote after Junius, and, like most political writers, aims at his style; and the only conclusion which his friends have arrived at amounts tu this absurdity, that an imitator must be an original writer; and even this in the case of Mr. Boyd is peculiarly unfortunate, for his imitations are among the most feeble that have been ever attempted. Mr. Campbell returned to the charge, however, in 1800, with a publication of “The miscellaneous works of Hugh Boyd, the author of the Letters of Junius: with an account of his Life and Writings,” 2 vols. 8vo.

, a Scotch writer of considerable reputation in the sixteenth century, the son

, a Scotch writer of considerable reputation in the sixteenth century, the son of Robert Boyd, of Pinkill in Ayrshire, was born Jan. 13, 1562. Having lost his father early, he was educated under the inspection of his uncle, Mr. James Boyd, of Trochrig, who, with the then unpopular title of “Archbishop of Glasgow,” performed the offices of minister of the Barony parish in that city. Young Boyd, in his nature lively and headstrong, soon grew weary of academical discipline, quarreled with his preceptors, renounced his studies, and, eager to become a man of the world, presented himself at court. It is not unlikely that in this scheme ae relied chit fly on the patronage of liobert, fourth lord Boyd, who was probably the cousin-gernran of Boyd’s father. All, however, that we learn of his proficiency at cm:;c is, that he fought one duel, and was engaged in numberless broils. His relations advised him to follow the profession of arms in the Low Countries, for they could not tolerate his impetuous and unruly temper, and perhaps they were little inclined or little able to support him in a manner of life which had no determined object or aim. Boyd readily consented to become a soldier; but he chose France rather than the Low Countries, for the theatre of his future achievements. He went therefore to Paris, furnished with a small stock of money, all of which he soon lost at dice. This the author of his life ascribes to some secret fate, “occulto veluti fato” but says his more recent biographer, lord Hailes, we may absolve fate, for when the raw and self-sufficient go amongst sharpers, they ought to ascribe their ruin to folly.

, a lexicographer and miscellaneous writer, was born June 13, 1667, at the city of Castres in Upper Languedoc.

, a lexicographer and miscellaneous writer, was born June 13, 1667, at the city of Castres in Upper Languedoc. His great-grandfather and grandfather were masters of the riding-school at Nismes; his father was president of the supreme court at Castres, and his mother was Catherine, daughter of Campdomerius, a celebrated physician, circumstances which have been recorded to prove that he was of a good family. He was certainly of a conscientious one, his relations being exiles for their adherence to the protestant religion. He was first educated by his mother’s brother, Campdomerius, a noted divine and preacher of the reformed church, and then was sent to the protestant school at Puy Laurent, where he applied assiduously, and excelled all his schoolfellows in Greek and Latin. In 1685, when the persecution prevailed against the protestants in France, he followed his uncle to Holland, and pressed by want, was obliged to enter into the military service in 1687; but soon, by the advice of his relations, returned to his studies, and went to the university of Franeker, where he went through a regular course of education, and added to philosophy, divinity, history, &c. the study of the mathematics. In 1689 he came over to England, and the hopes of being able to return to France, which the protestants in general entertained, being disappointed, he was obliged to have recourse to his pen for a livelihood. His first employment appears to have been to transcribe and prepare for the press Camden’s letters from the Cotton ian library, for Dr. Smith, who afterwards published them. In 1692, he became French and Latin tutor to Allen Bathurst, esq. eldest son of sir Benjamin Bathurst, who, being much in favour with the princess Anne of Denmark, afterwards queen of Great Britain, he had hopes of some preferment at court. With this view he paid great attention to his pupil’s education (who was afterwards lord Bathurst), and for his use composed two compendious grammars, the one Latin, the other French; but the latter only was printed, and to this da,y is a standard book. His hopes of preferment, however, Appear to have been fallacious, which his biographer attributes to his siding with a different party from the Bathurst family in the political divisions which prevailed at that time in the nation, Boyer, like the rest of his countrymen who had fled hither for religion, being a zealous whig. After this, having made himself master of the English tongue, he became an author by profession, and engaged sometimes alone, and sometimes in conjunction with the booksellers, in various compilations, and periodical works of the political kind, particularly a newspaper called the “Post-Boy;” the “Political State of Great Britain,” published in volumes from 1710 to 1729 a “History of William III.” 3 vols. 8vo “Annals of the reign of Queen Anne,” 11 vols. 8vo, and a “Life of Queen Anne,” fol. all publications now more useful than when published, as they contain many state papers, memorials, &c. which it would be difficult to find elsewhere; but his name is chiefly preserved by his French Dictionary, 1699, 4to, and a French Grammar, of both which he lived to see several editions, and which still continue to be printed. His political principles involved him with Swift, who often speaks contemptuously of him, and with Pope, who has given him a place in the Dunciad. He died Nov. 16, 1729, at a house he had built in Five Fields, Chelsea, and was buried in Chelsea church-yard.

October 1679, aged fifty-eight; leaving behind him the character of an able general, statesman, and writer. He had issue by his lady, two sons and five daughters. His

Soon after this affair, his lordship, with sir Charles Coote, lately made earl of Montrath, and sir Maurice Eustace, were constituted lords justices of Ireland, and commissioned to call and hold a parliament. Some time before the meeting of the parliament, he drew with his own hand the famous act of settlement, by which he fixed the property, and gave titles to their estates to a whole nation. When the duke of Ormond was declared lord lieutenant, the earl of Orrery went into Munster, of which province he was president. By virtue of this office, he heard and determined causes in a court called the residency-court; and acquired so great a reputation in his judicial capacity, that he was offered the seals both by the king and the duke of York after the fall of lord Clarendon; but, being very much afflicted with the gout, he declined a post that required constant attendance. During the first Dutch war, in which France acted as a confederate with Holland, he defeated the scheme formed by the duke de Beaufort, admiral of France, to get possession of the harbour of Kinsale, and took advantage of the fright of the people, and the alarm of the government, to get a fort erected under his own directions, which was named Fort Charles. He promoted a scheme for inquiring into, and improving the king’s revenue in Ireland; but his majesty having applied great sums out of the revenue of that kingdom which did not come plainly into account, the inquiry was never begun. Ormond, listening to some malicious insinuations, began to entertain a jealousy of Orrery, and prevailed with the king to direct him to lay down his residential court; as a compensation for which, his majesty made him a present of 8000l. Sir Thomas Clifford, who had been brought into the ministry in England, apprehensive that he cpuld not carry his ends in Ireland whilst Orrery continued president of Munster, procured articles of impeachment of high treason and misdemeanours to be exhibited against him in the English house of commons; but his lordship being heard in his place, gave an answer so clear, circumstantial, and ingenuous, that the affair was dropt. The king laboured in vain to reconcile him to the French alliance, and the reducing of the Dutch. At the desire of the king and the duke of York, he drew the plan of an act of limitation, by which the successor would have been disabled from encroaching on civil and religious liberty; but the proposing thereof being postponed till after the exclusion-bill was set on foot, the season for making use of it was past. The iing, to hinder his returning to Ireland, and to keep him about his person, offered him the place of lord-treasurer; but the earl of Orrery plainly told his majesty that he was guided by unsteady counsellors, with whom he could not act. He died in October 1679, aged fifty-eight; leaving behind him the character of an able general, statesman, and writer. He had issue by his lady, two sons and five daughters. His writings are these: 1. “The Irish colours displayed; in a reply of an English Protestant to a letter of an Irish Roman catholic,” London, 1662, 4to. 2. “An answer to a scandalous letter lately printed, and subscribed by Peter Walsh, procurator for the secular and regular popish priests of Ireland, entitled A letter desiring a just and merciful regard of the Roman catholics of Ireland, given about the end of October 1660, to the then marquis, now duke of Ormond, and the second time lord lieutenant of that kingdom. By the right honourable the earl of Orrery, &c. being a full discovery of the treachery of the Irish rebels since the beginning of the rebellion there, necessary to be considered by all adventurers, and other persons estated in that kingdom,” Dublin, 1662, 4to. 3. “A poem on his majesty’s happy restoration.” 4. “A poem on the death of the celebrated Mr. Abraham CowJey,” London, 1667, fol. 5. “The history of Henry V. a tragedy,” London, 1668, fol. 6. “Mustapha, the son of Soliman the Magnificent, a tragedy,” London, Ifi67, fol. and 1668. 7. “The Black Prince, a tragedy,” London, 1672, fol. 8. “Triphon, a tragedy,” London, 1672, fol. These four plays were collected and published together in 1690, folio, and make now the entire first volume of the new edition of the earl’s dramatic works. 9. “Parthenissa, a romance in three volumes,” London, 1665, 4to, 1667, fol. 10. “A Dream.” In this piece he introduces the genius of France persuading Charles II. to promote the interest of that kingdom, and act upon French principles. He afterwards introduces the ghost of his father, dissuading him from it, answering all the arguments the genius of France had urged, and proving to him from his own misfortunes and tragical end, that a kind’s

is lordship’s writings, although it must be confessed that he does not appear to much advantage as a writer. The charge made by lord Orford, that the Biographia Britannica

There is some use in retaining this list of his lordship’s writings, although it must be confessed that he does not appear to much advantage as a writer. The charge made by lord Orford, that the Biographia Britannica is a " defence of every body,'' never appeared better founded than in the high character given of lord Orrery’s poetry, a character probably borrowed from such cr.tics as Aubrey and Winstanley. Jt would have been quite sufficient to have vindicated his poems from the general contempt with which they have sometimes been mentioned.

s, wrote “A pious meditation upon a Broomstick, in the style of the honourable Mr. Boyle.” A certain writer, by way of making reprisals upon Swift for his treatment of

In 1664 he was elected into the company of the royal mines; and was all this year taken up in the prosecution of various good designs, which probably was the reason why he did not send abroad any treatises either of religion or philosophy. The year following, however, appeared, 8. “Occasional Reflections upon several subjects; whereto is prefixed a discourse about such kind of thoughts,1665, 8vo, reprinted in 1669, 8vo. This piece is addressed to Sophronia, under whose name he concealed that of his beloved sister, the viscountess of Ranelagh. The thoughts themselves are on a vast variety of subjects, written many years before; some indeed upon trivial occasions, but all with great accuracy of language, much wit, more learning, and in a wonderful strain of moral and pious reflection. Yet this exposed him to the only severe censure that ever was passed upon him, and that too from no less a man than the celebrated dean Swift; who, to ridicule these discourses, wrote “A pious meditation upon a Broomstick, in the style of the honourable Mr. Boyle.” A certain writer, by way of making reprisals upon Swift for his treatment of Mr. Boyle, which he affirms to be as cruel and unjust as it is trivial and indecent, has observed, that, from this very treatise, which he has thus turned into ridicule, he borrowed the first hint of his Gulliver’s Travels. He grounds his conjecture upon the following passage, to be found in the Occasional Reflections: “You put me in mind of a fancy of your friend Mr. Boyle, who was saying, that he had thoughts of making a short romantic story, where the scene should be laid in some island of the southern ocean, governed by some such rational laws and customs as those of the Utopia or the New Atalantis. And in this country he would introduce an observing native, that, upon his return home from his travels made in Europe, should give an account of our countries and manners under feigned names; and frequently intimate in his relations, or in his answers to questions that should be made him, the reasons of his wondering to fi-nd our customs so extravagant, and differing from those of his own country. For your friend imagined that, by such a way of exposing many of our practices, we should ourselves be brought unawares to condemn, or perhaps to laugh at them; aikl should at least cease to wonder, to find other nations think them as extravagant as we think the manners of the Dutch and Spaniards, as they are represented in our travellers* books.” The same year Mr. Boyle published an important work, entitled, 9. “INew experiments and observations upon Cold; or, an experimental history of cold begun: with several pieces thereunto annexed,1665, 8vo, reprinted in 1683, 4to.

he, may not a little improve both a statesman, a critic, and a divine, as well as they will make the writer pass for all three.” In 1687, Mr. Boyle published, 36. “The

In June 1686, his friend Dr. Gilbert Burnet, afterwards bishop of Salisbury, transmitted to him from the Hague the manuscript account of his travels, which he had dra.vn up in the form of letters, addressed to Mr. Boyle: who, in his answer to the doctor, dated the 14th of that month, expresses his satisfaction in “finding, that all men do not travel, as most do, to observe buildings and gardens, and modes, and other amusements of a superficial and almost insignificant curiosity; for your judicious remarks and reflections, says he, may not a little improve both a statesman, a critic, and a divine, as well as they will make the writer pass for all three.” In 1687, Mr. Boyle published, 36. “The martyrdom of Theodora and Dydimia,” 8vo; a work he had drawn up in his youth. 37. “A disquisition about the final causes of natural things; wherein it is enquired, whether, and, if at all, with what caution, a naturalist should admit them.” With an appendix, about vitiated light, 1688, 8vo.

method of husbanding his remaining time for the benefit of the learned. In doing this, as a certain writer says, he preferred generals to particulars; and the assistance

In the month of May this year, our author, though very unwillingly, was constrained to make his complaint to the public, of some inconveniences under which he had long laboured; and this he did by “an advertisement about the loss of many of his writings addressed to J. W. to be communicated to those of his friends that are virtuosi; which may serve as a kind of a preface to most of his mutilated and unfinished writings.” He complains in this advertisement of the treatment he met with from the plagiaries, both at home and abroad; and though it might have been difficult in any other man to have done so, without incurring the imputation of self-conceit and vanity, yet Mr. Boyle’s manner is such, as only to raise in us an higher esteem and admiration of him. This advertisement is inserted at length in his life. He now began to find that his health and strength, notwithstanding all his care and caution, gradually declined, as he observes in a letter to M. le Clerc, dated May 30, 1689; which put him upon using every possible method of husbanding his remaining time for the benefit of the learned. In doing this, as a certain writer says, he preferred generals to particulars; and the assistance of the whole republic of letters to that of any branch, by what ties soever he might be connected therewith. It was with this view, that he no longer communicated particular discourses or new discoveries to the royal society; because this could not be done, without withdrawing his thoughts from tasks which he thought of still greater importance. It was the more steadily to attend to these, that he resigned his post of governor of the corporation for propagating the gospel in New England; nay, he went so far as to signifyto the world, that he could no longer receive visits as usual, in an advertisement, which begins in the following manner. “Mr. Boyle finds himself obliged to intimate to those of his friends and acquaintance, that are wont to do him the honour and favour of visiting him, 1. That he has by some unlucky accidents, namely, by his servant’s breaking a bottle of oil of vitriol over a chest which contained his papers, had many of his writings corroded here and there, or otherwise so maimed, that without he himself 'fill up the lacunae out of his memory or invention, they will not be intelligible. 2. That his age and sickliness have for a good while admonished him to put his scattered, and partly defaced, writings into some kind of order, that they may not remain quite useless. And, 3. That his skilful and friendly physician, sir Edmund King, seconded by Mr. Boyle’s best friends, has pressingly advised him against speaking daily with so many persons as are wont to visit him, representing it as what cannot but much waste his spirits,” &c. He ordered likewise a board to be placed over his door, with an inscription signifying when he did and did not receive visits.

physicians whom he named, and that gome of the most valuable might be preserved. “Indeed,” says the writer of his life, “it is highly reasonable to suppose, that many

Among the other great works, which by this means he gained time to finish, there is reason to believe, that one was a collection of elaborate processes in chemistry; concerning which he wrote a letter to a friend, which is still extant; but the piece itself was never published, though we read in the letter, “that he left it as a kind of hermetic legacy to the studious disciples of that art.” Besides these papers, committed to the care of one whom he esteemed his friend, he left also very many behind him at the time of his death, relating to chemistry; which, as appears by a Jetter directed to one of his executors, he desired might be inspected by three physicians whom he named, and that gome of the most valuable might be preserved. “Indeed,” says the writer of his life, “it is highly reasonable to suppose, that many important discoveries were contained in them; chemistry being his favourite study, and opening to him perpetually such a new scene of wonders, as easily persuaded him of the possibility of transmuting metals into gold. This persuasion of his is evident from several parts of his writings, and was avowed by himself to the great Dr. Halley, the lateroyal astronomer, who related to me his conversation with him upon that subject. And it was probably in consequence of this opinion, that he took so much pains to procure, as he did in August 1689, an act for the repeal of a statute made in the fifth year of king Henry IV. against the multiplying of gold and silver.

lordship, with the following particulars of his character: “The character of John earl of Cork, as a writer and as a man, may partly be collected from his own works, and

His last work was posthumous, “Letters from Italy,” written in 1754 and 1755, to William Duucombe, esq. and published, in 1774, by the rev. Mr. John Buncombe, who well knew and highly esteemed lord Cork’s talents and virtues. Mr. Buncombe has prefixed a life of his lordship, with the following particulars of his character: “The character of John earl of Cork, as a writer and as a man, may partly be collected from his own works, and partly from the testimonies which have been given of him by some of the most distinguished among his contemporaries. I shall only beg leave to add, that, in every domestic and social relation, in alltthe endearing connections of life, as a husband, a father, a friend, a master, he had few equals. The lustre which he received from rank and title, and from the personal merit of his family, he reflected back, unimpaired and undhninished; and though ‘the post of honour’ which he chose and preferred was ‘a private station,’ though he was neither a statesman nor a soldier, like the first lord Cork, the first lord Orrery, and his own father; the rival of Palladio, like the late lord Burlington; or the rival of Bacon, like Mr. Robert Boyle; yet in a general taste for literature, or, as they are commonly called, polite studies, he was by no means inferior to his ancestors. Being much in the great world at the beginning of his life, he despised and detested it when he arrived at years of reflection. His constitution was never strong, and he was very thankful that it was not so; as his health was a true and no very irksome excuse to avoid those scenes, by which his body would have been hurt, and his mind offended. He loved truth even to a degree of adoration. He was a real Christian; and. as such, constantly hoped for a better life, there trusting to know the real causes of those effects, which here struck him with wonder, but not with doubt.

te rev. John Duncombe some “Observations on the Antiquities of Reculver;” which are inserted by that writer in his History of Reculver and Herne: and, in 1784, appeared

This was his principal literary production; but being of a most liberal and communicative disposition, he was at all times ready to assist his friends with hints and observations on any subject which had engaged his attention. Thus, in 1783, we find him communicating to the late rev. John Duncombe some “Observations on the Antiquities of Reculver;” which are inserted by that writer in his History of Reculver and Herne: and, in 1784, appeared a small work of 25 pages in quarto, with three plates, entitled “A Collection of the minute and rare Shells lately discovered in the sand of the sea-shore near Sandwich, by William Boys, esq. F. S. A. considerably augmented, and a11 their figures accurately drawn, as magnified with the microscope, by George Walker, bookseller at Faversham;” which in the preface is candidly acknowledged, by the editor, to be the joint production of Mr. Boys and himself, assisted by their common friend, the late Edward Jacob, esq. of Faversham. Plancus, in a treatise “De Conchis minus notis,” printed at Venice in 1739, is the only writer who had before described shells so minute as those which are the subject of Mr. Walker’s work.

two different souls on different occasions. These last accounts are in some degree confirmed by the writer of his life in Gibber’s collection, who says that while Boyse

Although there is too much reason to believe that no part of Boyse’s character has been misrepresented in the preceding narrative, he must not be deprived of the evidence which Mr. Nichols’s correspondent has advanced in his favour. He assures us that he knew him from the year 1732 to the time of his death; and that he never saw any thing in his wife’s conduct that deserved censure; that he was a man of learning; and when in company with those by whom he was not awed, an entertaining companion; but so irregular and inconsistent in his conduct, that it appeared as if he had been actuated by two different souls on different occasions. These last accounts are in some degree confirmed by the writer of his life in Gibber’s collection, who says that while Boyse was in his last illness he had no notion of his approaching end, nor “did he expect it until it was almost past the thinking of.” His mind, indeed, was often religiously disposed; he frequently thought upon that subject; and probably suffered a great deal from the remorse of his conscience. The early impressions of his good education were never entirely obliterated; and his whole life was a continual struggle between his will and reason, as he was always violating his duty to the one, while he fell under the subjection of the other. It was, adds the same author, in consequence of this war in his mind, that he wrote a beautiful poem called “Recantation.

other part of his character; and some have thence pronounced a hasty judgment upon his fidelity as a writer upon the English law. It seems, indeed, to be a fashion to discredit

, a celebrated English lawyer in the thirteenth century, was, according to Mr. Prince, born in Devonshire; and studied at Oxford, where he took the degree of LL. D. Applying himself afterwards to the study of the laws of England, he rose to great eminence at the bar; and, in 1244, was by king Henry III. made one of the judges itinerant. At present he is chiefly known by his learned work, “Delegibus et consuetudinibus Angliae,” the first printed edition of it was in 1569, folio, Jn 1640 it was printed in 4to, and great pains was taken to collate various Mss. One of the most authentic manuscripts of this work was burnt in the fire which consumed a part of the Cotton library, Oct. 23, 1731. It is a finished and systematic performance, giving a complete view of the law in all its titles, as it stood at the time it was written. It is divided into five books, and these into tracts and chapters. Consistently with the extensiveness and regularity of the plan, the several parts of it are filled with a curious and accurate detail of legal learning, so that the reader ever fails of deriving instruction or amusement from the study of this scientific treatise on our ancient laws, and customs. It is written in a style much beyond the generality of the writers of that age; being though not always polished, yet sufficiently clear, expressive, and nervous. The excellence of Bracton’s style must be attributed to his acquaintance with the writings of the Roman lawyers and canonists, from whom likewise he adopted greater helps than the language in which he wrote. Many of those pithy sentences which have been handed down from him as rules and maxims of our law, are to be found in the volumes of the imperial and pontifical jurisprudence. The familiarity with which Bracton recurs to the Roman code has struck many readers more forcibly than any other part of his character; and some have thence pronounced a hasty judgment upon his fidelity as a writer upon the English law. It seems, indeed, to be a fashion to discredit Bracton, on a supposition of his having mingled too much of the civilian and canonist with the common lawyer; any notion that has got into vogue on such a subject is likely to have many to retail it, and few to examine its justness. Among others who have most decidedly declared against Bracton, we find M. Houard, the Norman advocate: this gentleman was at the pains to give an edition of Glanville, Jb'leta, and Britton but has omitted Bracton, because his writings had corrupted the law of England. But his conceptions about the purity of the law of England have seduced him into a very singular theory. He lays it down that Littleton’s tenures exhibit the system introduced by William the Conqueror in all its genuine purity; that this system was corrupted by a mixture from other polities in the writings of Britton, Fleta, and Glanville, but more particularly in those of Bracton. Full of this preposterous idea, he published an edition of Littleton, with a commentary, and, to decide the point without more debate, has entitled it “Anciennes Loix des Francois.” After this, the admirers of Bracton will not apprehend much from this determined enemy to his reputation as an English lawyer.

, a popular and very voluminous writer on gardening and agriculture in the last century, was one of

, a popular and very voluminous writer on gardening and agriculture in the last century, was one of the first who treated these subjects in a philosophical manner, and certainly possessed considerable botanical knowledge, although his general conduct was little entitled to respect. He first made himself known to the public by two papers printed in the Philosophical Transactions: one on the motion of the sap in vegetables, the other on the quick growth of mouldiness in melons. He became a fellow of the royal society, and was chosen, Nov. 10, 1724, professor of botany at Cambridge, but in a manner which reflects little credit on him. His election was procured by a pretended verbal recommendation from Dr. Sherrard to Dr. Bentley, and pompous assurances that he would procure the university a public botanic garden by his own private purse and personal interest. The vanity of his promises was soon discovered, as well as his almost total ignorance of the learned languages; and as he neglected to read lectures, the university made no difficulty in permitting Dr. Martyn to do it. Mr. Bradley, however, read a course of lectures on the Materia Medica in 1729 at the Bull inn, which he published next year at London, 8vo, and of which the reader may see a humorous criticism in the Grub-street Journal, No. 11* In 1731, his conduct became so scandalous, that it was in agitation to dismiss him. from his professorship, but he died soon after, Nov. 5, 1732. He was the author of several publications, chiefly on gardening and agriculture, consisting of two folio volumes, four quarto, and nearly twenty in octavo, which are enumerated in Mr. Nichols’s Life of Bowyer. His “New Improvement of Planting and Gardening, both philosophical and practical,1717, 8 vo, went through repeated impressions, as did his “Gentleman’s and Gardener’s Kalendar.” His “Philosophical Account of the Works of Nature,1721, 4to, was a popular, instructive, and entertaining work, and continued in repute several years. The same may be said of his “General Treatise of Husbandry and Gardening,” 1726, 2 vols. 8vo; and of his “Practical Discourses concerning the four elements, as they relate to the growth of plants,1727, 8vo. His “Dictiona-ium Botanicum,1728, 8vo, Dr. Pulteney thinks, was the first attempt of the kind in England. Exotic botany was indebted to him for an undertaking, which there is reason to regret he was not enabled to pursue and perfect. This work was entitled “Historia plantarum Suceuientarum,1716, 4to, published in decads from 1716 to 1727, but only five were completed. The industry and talents of Bradley were not mean; and though^ unadorned by learning, were sufficient to have secured him that reputable degree of respect from posterity, which it will ever justly withhold from him who fails to recommend such qualifications by integrity and propriety of conduct, but in these, unhappily, Bradley was deficient. Among his other publications appears a translation of Xenophon’s GEconomicks from the Greek. It was, however, only an old translation modernized, to pass oft' which the booksellers paid him a sum of money for his name, then a popular one. There are obvious coincidences between his character and that of the more recently celebrated botanical and miscellaneous writer, sir John Hill.

irth of the pretended prince of Wales. He died on the nineteenth of August, 1700. He was an accurate writer, and a curious and diligent searcher into our ancient records;

, a noted historian and physician of the seventeenth century, was born in the county of Norfolk, and admitted in Caius college in Cambridge, February 20, 1643. He took his degree of bachelor of physic in 1653, and was created doctor in that faculty September 5, 1660, by virtue of the king’s mandatory letters. On the first of December the same year, he was, in pursuance of king Charles’s mandate, elected master of his college, upon the resignation of Dr. Bachcroft. About the year 1670, or as some think not until 1685, he was appointed keeper of the records in the Tower of London; in which office he employed himself in perusing those most valuable monuments in his possession, with a view to his historical works. Some time after, he was chosen regius professor of physic in the university of Cambridge. In 1679, he wrote a letter to Dr. Sydenham, on the influence of the air, &c. which is published among that learned person’s works. But his largest and most considerable performance was, “An Introduction to the old English History,” in which he maintains these three propositions: 1. That the representatives of the commons in parliament, viz. knights, citizens, and burgesses, were not introduced till the forty-ninth of Henry III.; 2. That William, duke of Normandy, made an absolute conquest of the nation; 3. That the succession to the crown of England is hereditary (descending to the nearest of blood), and not elective: And “A complete History of England, from the first entrance of the Romans, unto the end of the reign of king Richard II.” in three vols. fol. about which he was employed several years, and which was printed 1685 and 1700, usually bound in two volumes. In the year 1681 he was chosen one of the representatives for the university of Cambridge, in that parliament which met at Oxford; and again in 1685, in the parliament of king James II. He was likewise physician in ordinary to this king; and, on the twenty -second of October, 1688, was one of those persons who gave in their depositions concerning the birth of the pretended prince of Wales. He died on the nineteenth of August, 1700. He was an accurate writer, and a curious and diligent searcher into our ancient records; but his impartiality has been called in question, particularly by those who contend for the higher antiquity of parliaments, and a larger proportion of popular influence in the constitution. Tyrell wrote his “General History of England,” in opposition to that of Brady. Dr. Gilbert Stuart, who hated all Scotch historians except himself, maintains that Hume executed his History on Brady’s principles; allowing Brady to pdssess an excellent understanding and admirable quickness, Dr. Stuart asserts also, that he was the slave of a faction. Dr. Brady’s other publications were, “An Answer to Mr. Petyt’s Book on Parliaments,” London, 1681, 8vo;- and “An Historical Treatise of Cities and Burghs or Boroughs,” ibid. 1690, fol. reprinted 1704.

, M. A. rector of St. George the Martyr, Southwark, and vicar of Wickham-Skeith, a political writer, who has been sometimes mistaken for the subject of our last

, M. A. rector of St. George the Martyr, Southwark, and vicar of Wickham-Skeith, a political writer, who has been sometimes mistaken for the subject of our last article, was, however, probably of the same age, although we have no account of his early life. He was of Caius college, Cambridge, where he proceeded B. A. 1766, and M. A. 1769. When he had obtained the latter degree, he wrote an ethical essay, entitled “Conscience,” intended for one of the Seatonian prizes; but an accidental delay which it met with on the road, occasioned its being presented to the vice-chancellor two days after the appointed time, and on that account it could not be admitted to the competition. Mr. Brand, however, published his poem in a quarto pamphlet in 1772, and it was allowed to possess considerable merit, but not enough to procure it a place among the favourite poems of the day. From this time we find him devoting his attention to political subjects, which produced in succession; 1. “Observations on some of the probable effects of Mr. Gilbert’s bill, with remarks deduced from Dr. Price’s account of the national debt,1776, 8vo. 2. “The Alteration of the Constitution of the House of Commons, and the inequality of the Land-Tax, considered conjointly,1793, 8vo. 3. “A Defence of the pamphlet ascribed to John Reeves, esq. and entitled ‘ Thoughts on the English government,’ addressed to the members of the loyal associations against republicans and levellers,1796, 8vo; a clear and methodical tract, but exceeded in general utility by, 4. “An historical essay on the principles of Political Associations in a state; chiefly deduced from the French, English, and Jewish Histories; with an application of those principles, in a comparative view of the associations of the year 1792, and that recently instituted by the Whig Club,1796, 8vo. 5. “A determination of the average depression of the price of wheat in war, below that of the preceding peace; and of its readvance in the following; according to its yearly rules, from the Revolution to the end of the last peace; with remarks on their greater variations in that entire period/* 1800, 8vo. 6.” A Letter to **** ******, esq. on Bonaparte’s proposals for opening a negociation for peace; in which the British guarantee of the crown of France to the house of Bourbon, contained in the triple and quadruple alliances, and renewed by the treaty of 1783, is considered; together with the conduct of our national parties relating to it,“1800, 8vo, an argument more ingenious than satisfactory, and unfortunately leading to an impracticable conclusion. 7.” A Refutation of the Charge brought against the marquis Wellesley, on account of his conduct to the nabob of Oude. From authentic documents,“1807, 8vo. This was the last of Mr. Brand’s political works. As a divine, we know only of a” Fast Sermon,“published by him in 1794, and a” Visitation Sermon," 1800. In 1797, he was presented by the lord chancellor (Loughborough) to the rectory of St. George’s in Southwark, vacant by the death of the rev. Joseph Pote, the value of which Mr. Brand procured to be increased by act of parliament, in 1807, but did not live long enough to profit by it, as he died Dec. 23, 1808, leaving a numerous family.

. 12mo; and Murdoch’s new loxodromic tables, for the construction of marine charts. This industrious writer died March 21, 1742, aged only twenty-nine. His eloge was composed

, a member of the French academy of sciences, was born at Paris, Sept. 14, 1713, of a good family, and after having studied humanities in the Mazarin college, and a course of philosophy in the college of Beauvais, applied himself more particularly to medicine and law, and the oriental languages in the royal college. The great progress which he made in the latter, occasioned his being invited to Rheims to teach these languages, and to fill a professor’s chair; but this he declined out of respect to his father, who wished him to appear at the bar. Neither this, however, nor languages, were to his own liking, and his parents, after some consideration, allowed him to pursue his inclination for medicine, and natural history, to which he added a taste for general literature and criticism. In 1737, he began to give extracts from the London Philosophical Transactions, and this with so much judgment and ability as to excite the attention of the literati of France, who after revolving the plan, conceived that a translation of the Transactions with notes would be more useful than these extracts, and agreed that M. de Bremond should be requested to undertake it. He accordingly began the work, and published four vols. 4to. including the years 1731—1736, withacomplete index, and notes pointing out where the subjects are treated in the memoirs of other learned bodies, or in separate publications: some of these notes are complete dissertations. The royal society, on this, honoured him with the title of secretary; and on March 18, 1739, he was admitted into the French royal academy of sciences. The same year he read a learned paper on respiration. He joined afterwards with M. Morand, a celebrated surgeon, in collecting and translating all the English publications respecting Mrs. Stephens’s remedy for the stone, which once was thought infallible. He translated likewise Dr. Halley’s experiments on sea water, and Hauksbee’s experiments, 2 vols. 12mo; and Murdoch’s new loxodromic tables, for the construction of marine charts. This industrious writer died March 21, 1742, aged only twenty-nine. His eloge was composed by M. cle Mairan, then secretary to the academy.

, “a writer,” says Phillips, “of pastorals, sonnets, canzons and madrigals,

, “a writer,” says Phillips, “of pastorals, sonnets, canzons and madrigals, in which kind of writing he keeps company with several other contemporary emulators of Spenser and sir Philip Sidney,” flourished in the reign of queen Elizabeth, but very little is known of his personal history. Sir Egerton Brydges produces very probable evidence that he was of a Staffordshire family. He was a writer, says Dr. Percy, of some fame in the above reign, and published an interlude entitled “An Old Man’s Lesson, and a Young Man’s Love,” 4to, and many other little pieces in prose and verse, the titles of which may be seen in Winstanley, Ames’s Typography, and Osborn’s Harleian Catalogue. He is mentioned with great respect by Meres in his second part of Wit’s Commonwealth, 1598, p. 283, and is alluded to in Beaumont and Fletcher’s Scornful Lady, act 2, and again in Wit without money, act 3, The ballad of Phillida and Corydon, reprinted by Percy, is a delicious little poem; and if we may judge from this and other specimens given in our references, his poetical powers were distinguished by a simplicity at once easy and elegant.

, advocate of the parliament of Paris, and an eminent law writer and pleader, was born at Montrotier, about four leagues from

, advocate of the parliament of Paris, and an eminent law writer and pleader, was born at Montrotier, about four leagues from Lyons, Feb. 24, 1656. After studying languages and philosophy at Lyons, he came to Paris in 1677 to apply himself to law, and in 1680 was appointed an advocate. Having conceived a preference to the written over the common law, -he made the former his particular study, and traced its origin with the true spirit of an antiquary. This course of study produced a very much improved edition of the works of Claude Henrys, 1708, 2 vols. fol. and afterwards a work of great utility in the French law, which he undertook at the request of the chancellor D'Aguesseau, entitled “Recueil des principals questions de droit qui se jugent diversement dans differens tribunaux du royaume,1718, 12mo, reprinted with additions in 1756, 2 vols. and in 1785, 4to, both with additions by Boucher d'Argis. He died April 21, 1727.

an eminent English divine and controversial writer, the son of Thomas Brett, gent. of Spring-grove, in the parish

an eminent English divine and controversial writer, the son of Thomas Brett, gent. of Spring-grove, in the parish of Wye, in Kent, by Letitia, his wife, the daughter and heir of John Boys, esq. of Bettishanger, near Sandwich, in that county, was born at the seat of the latter, 3d Sept. 1667. His father disliking the situation of the old house at Wye, where his ancestors had lived for many generations, rebuilt it in a more commodious place, near a small grove of trees and a pleasant spring of water in the same parish, from whence he gave it the name of Spring-grove. He came and settled there in 1674, and sent his son to its grammar-school; the master of which was then John Paris, A. M. but he dying about three years after, was succeeded by Samuel Pratt, under whose instruction the youth remained until 1684.

, a dramatic writer of the reign of king James I. appears to have been held in high

, a dramatic writer of the reign of king James I. appears to have been held in high estimation by the wits of that time, but there are many disputes as to his works, and no information concerning his life. The various dramatic annalists assign him from one to six plays. The controversy seems of little consequence, unless that it gave rise to a storyof Oliver Cromwell’s having acted a part in one of his supposed plays, entitled “Lingua,” the part of one ambitious for a crown and that his ambition was first excited by personating this character. The story, however, seems as doubtful as the author of the play.

son sir Orlando, may be seen in the Biog. Brit. vol. VI. p. 3740. The lord-keeper is known as a law writer, by his “Conveyances, being select precedents of deeds and instruments

, a lawyer of considerable eminence, was the son of Dr. John Bridgeman, bishop of Chester, and educated to the profession of the law, in which, as he disapproved of the usurpation, he made no figure until the restoration, when on May 13, 1660, he was called to be a serjeant by the king’s special writ, and on June 1, was advanced to be lord chief baron of the exchequer, from which, Oct. 22, he was removed to be lord chief justice of the common pleas. While he presided in this’ court, his reputation was at its height for equity and moderation. In 1667, when the great seal was taken from lord Clarendon, the king delivered it, August 13, to sir Orlando, with the title of Keeper. After this, his good name began to decline: he was timid and irresolute, and his timidity still increased with his years: nor was his judgment equal to all the difficulties of his office. His Jady, a woman of cunning and intrigue, was too apt to interfere in chancery suits; and his sons, who practised under him, did not bear the fairest characters. He was desirous of an union with Scotland, and a comprehepsion with the dissenters: but was against tolerating the papists. He is said to have been removed from his office for refusing to affix the seal to the king’s declaration for liberty of conscience, Nov. 17, 1672. The time of his death we have not been able to ascertain, but a singular account of his son sir Orlando, may be seen in the Biog. Brit. vol. VI. p. 3740. The lord-keeper is known as a law writer, by his “Conveyances, being select precedents of deeds and instruments concerning the most considerable estates in England,1682, 1699, 1710, 1725, 2 parts, folio.

, an eminent Roman catholic priest and writer in the reign of queen Elizabeth, was born at Worcester, in 1538.

, an eminent Roman catholic priest and writer in the reign of queen Elizabeth, was born at Worcester, in 1538. In 1555 he was entered of Exeter college, Oxford, according to Pits, which Wood doubts; but he took his degree of B. A. in I 559, and M. A. in 1562, at which last time he was a member of Christ church. He and the celebrated Campian were so esteemed for their talents, as to be selected to entertain queen Elizabeth with a public disputation in 1566. Bristow was afterwards, in July 1567, made a fellow of Exeter college, by the interest of sir William Petre, who had founded some fellowships in that college, and who would have promoted him further, had he not laid himself open to the suspicion of holding popish tenets; and this appeared more plainly by his quitting the university on carvlinal Alan’s invitation. He went then to Doway, and after prosecuting his theological studies in that academy, was admitted to his doctor’s degree in 1579, and, says his biographer, was Alan’s “right hand upon all occasions.” He was made prefect of studies, lectured on the scriptures, and in the absence of Alan acted as regent of the college. His intense studies, however, injured a constitution originally very weak, and after a journey to Spa, which had very little effect, he was recommended to try his native air. On his return to England, he resided for a very short time with a Mr. Bellamy, a gentleman of fortune, at Harrow on the Hill, where he died Oct. 18, 1581. The popish historians concur in expressing the loss their cause suffered by his death, he being teemed “an Alan in prudence, a Stapleton in acuteness, a Campian in eloquence, a Wright in theology, and a Martin in languages.” He wrote, 1. “Dr. Bristow’s motives,” Antwerp, 1574, 1599, 8vo, translated afterwards into Latin, by Dr. Worthington, Doway, 1608, 4to. 2. “A Reply to William Fulk (his ablest antagonist), in defence of Dr. Allen (Alan’s) articles, and book of purgatory,” Louvain, 1580, 4to. 3. “Fifty-one demands, to be proposed by catholics to heretics,” London, 1592, 4to. 4. “Veritates Aurese S. R. Ecclesiae,1616. 5. “Tabula in summam theologicam S. Thomse Aquinatis,1579. He wrote also “An Apology in defence of Alan and himself,” and notes upon the Rheims Testament.

The preceding facts may be sufficient to illustrate Dr. Brocklesby’s character. His future fame as a writer must rest on his publications, of which the following is, we

He was interred Dec. 18, in the church-yard of St. Cle^ jnent Danes, in a private manner, according to his request. His fortune, amounting to near 30,000l. after a few legacies to friends and distant relations, was divided between his two nephews, Robert Beeby, esq. and Dr. Thomas Young. The preceding facts may be sufficient to illustrate Dr. Brocklesby’s character. His future fame as a writer must rest on his publications, of which the following is, we believe, a correct list: 1. “Dissertatio Inaug. de Saliva Sanaet Morbosa,” Lug. Bat. 1745, 4to. 2. “An Essay concerning the Mortality of the Horned Cattle,1746, 8vo. 3. “Eulogium Medicum, sive Oratio Anniyersaria Harveiana habita in Theatris Collegii Regal is Me-? dicorum Londinensium, Die xviii Octobris,1760, 4to. 4. “Œconomical and Medical Observations from 1738 to 1763, tending to the improvement of Medical Hospitals,1764, 8vo. 5. “An Account of the poisonous root lately found mixed with Gentian,” Phil. Trans. N. 486. 6. “Case of a Lady labouring under a Diabetes,” Med. Observ. No. III. 7. “Experiments relative to the Analysis and Virtues of Seltzer Water,” ibid. vol. IV. 8. “Case of an Encysted Tumour in the Orbit of the Eye, cured by Messrs, Bromfield and Ingram,” ibid. 9. “A Dissertation on the Music of the Antients.” We do not know the date of this last article, but believe it to be amongst his early literary amusements. When Dr. Young was at Leyden, a professor, understanding he was a nephew of Dr. Brocklesby’s, shewed him a translation of it in the German language.

credit the author had obtained: accordingly in the following year they were attacked by an anonymous writer, said to be Mr. Justamond, in a pamphlet, entitled “Notes on

, an eminent English surgeon, was born in London, in 1712, and studied surgery under the celebrated Ranby, by whose instructions he was soon enabled to practise on his own account. In 1741, he began to give lectures on anatomy and surgery, and soon found his theatre crowded with pupils. Some years after, in conjunction with the rev. Mr. Madan, he formed the plan of the Lock hospital, into which patients were first received Jan. 3, 1747, and was made first surgeon to that establishment, an office he filled with advantage to the patients and credit to himself for many years. With a view of contributing to its success, he altered an old comedy, “The City Match,” written in 1639, by Jaspar Maine, and procured it to be acted at Drury-lane theatre, in 1755, for the benefit of the hospital. He was also, very early after its being instituted, elected one of the surgeons to St. George’s hospital. In 1761, he was appointed in the suite of the noble persons, who were sent to bring over the princess of Mecklenburgh, our present queen, and was soon after appointed surgeon to her majesty’s household. In 1751, he sent to the royal society a case of a woman who had a foetus in her abdomen nine years, which is printed in their Transactions for the same year. In 1757, he published an account of the English night shades, the internal use of which had been recommended in scrophulous cases; but they had failed in producing the expected benefit with him. In 1759, he gave “A Narrative of a Physical Transaction with Mr. Aylet, surgeon, at Windsor.” This is a controversial piece of no consequence now, but the author clears himself from the imputation of having treated his antagonist improperly. Ira 1767, he published “Thoughts concerning the present peculiar method of treating persons ^inoculated for the Small-pox.” This relates to the Suttons, who were now in the zenith of their reputation. He thinks their practice of exposing their patients to the open air in the midst of winter, of repelling the eruption, and checking or preventing the suppurative process, too bold, and hazardous, On the whole, however, he acknowledges, they were deserving of commendation, for the improvements they had introduced, in the treatment, both of the inoculated and natural small-pox. His next work, the most considerable one written by him, was “Chirurgical Cases and Observations,” published in 1773, in 2 vols. 8vo. Though there are much judicious practice, and many valuable observations contained in these volumes, yet they did not answer the expectations of the public, or correspond to the fame and credit the author had obtained: accordingly in the following year they were attacked by an anonymous writer, said to be Mr. Justamond, in a pamphlet, entitled “Notes on Chirurgical Cases and Observations, by a Professor of Surgery.” The strictures contained in these notes are keen and ingenious, and, though evidently the produce of ill-humour, yet seem to have had the effect of preventing so general a diffusion of the cases, as the character of the author would otherwise have procured them. They have never been reprinted. About this time the author took a spacious mansion in Chelsea park, which he enlarged, altered, and furnished in an elegant style. Hither he retired, after doing his business, which he began gradually to contract into a narrower circle. With that view, a few years after, he gave up his situation as surgeon to the Lock hospital. His other appointments he kept to the time of his death, which happened on the 24th of November, 1792, in the 80th year of his age.

, an amiable and ingenious writer, was a native of Ireland, where he was born in the year 1706.

, an amiable and ingenious writer, was a native of Ireland, where he was born in the year 1706. His father, the rev. William Brooke of Rantavan, rector of the parishes of Killinkare, Mullough, Mybullough, and Licowie, is said to have been a man of grent talents and worth; his mother’s name was Digby. His education appears to have been precipitated in a manner not very usual: after being for some time the pupil of Dr. Sheridan, he was sent to Trinity college, Dublin, and from thence removed, when only seventeen years old, to study law in the Temple. Dr. Sheridan was probably the means of his being introduced in London to Swift and Pope, who regarded him as a young man of very promising talents. How long he remained in London we are not told*, but on his return to Ireland he practised for some time as a chamber counsel, when an incident occurred which interrupted his more regular pursuits, and prematurely involved him in the cares of a family. An aunt, who died at Westmgath about the time of his arrival in Ireland, committed to him the guardianship of her daughter, a lively and beautiful girl between eleven and twelve years old. Brooke, pleased with the trust, conducted her to Dublin, and placed her at a boarding-school, where, during his frequent visits, he gradually changed the guardian for the lover, and at length prevailed on her to consent to a private marriage. In the life prefixed to his works, this is said to have taken place before she had reached her fourteenth year: another account, which it is neither easy nor pleasant to believe, informs us that she was a mother before she had completed that year. When the marriage was discovered, the ceremony was again performed in the presence of his family. For some time this happy pair had no cares but to please each other, and it was not until after the birth of their third child that Brooke could be induced to think seriously how such a family was to be provided for. The law had long been given up, and he had little inclination to resume a profession which excluded so many of the pleasures of imagination, and appeared inconsistent with the feelings of a mind tender, benevolent, and somewhat romantic. Another journey to London, however, promised the advantages of literary society, and the execution of literary schemes by which he might indulge his genius, and be rewarded by fame and wealth. Accordingly, soon after his arrival, he renewed his acquaintance with his former friends, and published his philosophical poem, entitled “Universal Beauty.” This had been submitted to Pope, who, probably, contributed his assistance, and whose manner at least is certainly followed. At what time this occurred is uncertain. The second part was published in 1735, and the remainder about a year after. What fame or advantage he derived from it we know not, as no mention is made of him in the extensive correspondence of Pope or Swift. He was, however, obliged to return to Ireland, where for a short time he resumed his legal profession.

inciples, which were those of the strictest kind, with his continual ambition to shine as a dramatic writer.

During his residence in Ireland, he kept up a literary correspondence with his London friends, but all their letters were consumed by an accidental fire. Two from Pope, we are told, are particularly to be lamented, as in one of these he professed himself in heart a protestant, but apologized for not publicly conforming, by alleging that it would render the eve of his mother’s life unhappy. Pope’s filial affection is the most amiable feature in his character; but this story of his declining to conform because it would give uneasiness to his mother, falls to the ground when, the reader is told that his mother had been dead six: or seven years before Brooke went to Ireland. In another letter, he is said, with more appearance of truth, to have advised Brooke to take orders, “as being a profession better suited to his principles, his disposition, and his genius, than that of the law, and also less injurious to his health.” Why he did not comply with this advice cannot now be known; but, before this time, he appears to have been of a religious turn, although it is not easy to reconcile his principles, which were those of the strictest kind, with his continual ambition to shine as a dramatic writer.

, a French writer of great learning, was born at Dijon, in 1709, and became a

, a French writer of great learning, was born at Dijon, in 1709, and became a counsellor of parliament, in 1730, and president a worker in 1742. During the leisure which his public employments afforded, he cultivated most of the sciences, and was allowed to be well acquainted with all. Voltaire only has attacked his literary reputation, and this his countrymen ascribe to the malice which that writer was seldom anxious to conceal. Buffon, on the contrary, regarded him as a scholar of the first rank, an acute philosopher, and an original and valuable writer; nor was he less estimable in private life. In 1774 he was appointed president of the parliament of Burgundy, but died soon after, at Paris, in 1777, whither he had come to visit his married daughter. He was a member of the academy of Dijon, of the inscriptions and belles lettres, and other learned societies. He wrote: 1. “Lettres sur la Decouverte de la ville d'Herculaneum,1750, 8vo. 2. “Histoire des Navigations aux Terres Australes,1756, 2 vols. 4to, in which he endea* voured to prove the existence of a southern continent, which subsequent navigators have disproved. 3. “Du culte des dieux Fetiches, ou parallele de l'ancienne idolatrie avec celle des peuples de Nigritie,1760, 12mo, a piece which has been improperly attributed to Voltaire. 4. “Traite de la formation mecanique des Langues,1765, 2 vols. 12mo, in which he attempts a general etymological system founded on the mechanical formation of articulate sounds; but his countrymen allow that he leans too much to paradox, which certainly has long been an extensive branch of French philosophy. 5. “Histoire de la Republique Romaine dans la cours du VII siecle, par Salluste,” Dijon, 3 vols. 4to. This may be accounted his principal work, and was long his principal employment. He was so sensible of the loss of Sal lust’s principal work, that he resolved to collect his fragments with greater care than had ever been employed before; and by the most accurate arrangement to trace out as near as possible the plan and chief features of that work, and then to connect these fragments in the manner of Freinshemius in his “Fragmenta Livii.” But as De Brosses soon became sensible of the difficulty of assimilating his Latin diction to that of Sallust, he changed his first design, and resolved on translating both the fragments and his author’s histories of the Catilinarian and Jugurthine wars into French, and to attempt to supply the lost work from other ancient writers. The first volume opens with a preface containing remarks on the various methods of writing history, and some information concerning Roman names, ranks, magistracies, and elections. The body of the work itself begins with a translation of, and commentary on, Sallust’s Jugurthine war. The notes subjoined to this part treat chiefly of the geography and population of Africa, and the text is illustrated by a map of Africa, a plan of Meteilus’s march against Jugurtha, and its illustration by a military connoisseur. After this follows the restoration of Sallust’s five books, continued in vol. II. comprizing the war with Mithridates: a description of the Pontus Euxinus, with the adjacent countries; the Gladiatorian war, raised by Spartacus, and the war of Greta. The third volume contains a translation of the Catilinarian war, with its sequel, illustrated with historical and political notes; Sallust’s two letters to Caesar, commonly styled “Orat. de Rep. ordinanda,” which De Brosses considers as genuine; a very minute collection of all the notices of Sallust’s life, writings, gardens, buildings, and even of the remains discovered in later times. The whole concludes with the abb Cassagne’s “Essay on the Art of composing History, and on the works of Sailust.‘-’ Industrious as M. de Brosses has been in this work, we believe that in the life of Sailust, at least, he has been improved upon by Henry Stuart, esq. in his late elaborate publication,” The works of Sailust,“1806, 2 vols. 4to, Besides these, De Brosses contributed many learned papers to the Paris and Dijon memoirs, but his family disown 3 vols. of” Lettres historiques et critiques sur l'Italie," published in 1799 in his name.

rtations, but also with supplements, which sometimes leave the reader in a doubt, whether the modern writer is not a successful rival of the ancient: this was first published

, an eminent classical scholar and editor, was born at Tanay, a small village of the Nivernois, in 1722, and died at Paris, Feb. 12, 1789, at the age of 67. In his youth he made it his practice to write notes in every book that he read; and the margins of severaHn his library were entirely filled with them. Until his last moment he pursued the same 'method of study. All these he arranged wonderfully in his memory; and if it had been possible after his death to have put his papers in that order which he alone knew, they would have furnished materials for several curious volumes. With this method, and continued labour for twelve hours a day, the abbé Brotier acquired an immense stock of various knowledge. Except the mathematics, to which it appears he gave little application, he was acquainted with every thing; natural history, chemistry, and even medicine. It was his rule to read Hippocrates and Solomon once every year in their original languages. These he said were the best books for curing the diseases of the body and the mind. But the belles lettres were his grand pursuit. He had a good knowledge of all the dead languages, but particularly the Latin, of which he was perfectly master: he was besides acquainted with most, of the languages of Europe. This knowledge, however extensive, was not the only part in which he excelled. He was well versed in ancient and modern history, in chronology, coins, medals, inscriptions, and the customs of antiquity, which had always been objects of his study. He had collected, a considerable quantity of materials for writing a new history of France, and it is much to be regretted that he was prevented from undertaking that work. The akl>6 Brotier recalls to our remembrance those laborious writers, distinguished for their learning, Petau, Sirmond, Labbu, Cossart, Hardouin, Souciet, &c. who have done so much honour to the college of Louis XIV. in which he himself was educated, and where fre lived several years as librarian; and his countrymen say he is the last link of that chain of illustrious men, who have succeeded one another without interruption, for near two centuries. On the dissolution of the order of Jesuits, the abbe Brotier found an asylum equally peaceful and agreeable in the house of Mr. de la Tour, a printer, eminent in his business, who has gained from all connoisseurs a just tribute of praise for those works which have come from his press. It was in this friendly retirement that the abbe Brotier spent the last twenty-six years of his life, and that he experienced a happiness, the value of which he knew how to appreciate, which arose from the care, attention, and testimonies of respect, bestowed upon him both by Mr. and Mrs. de la Tour. It was there also that he published those works which will render his name immortal; an edition of Tacitus, enriched not only with notes and learned dissertations, but also with supplements, which sometimes leave the reader in a doubt, whether the modern writer is not a successful rival of the ancient: this was first published in 1771, 4 vols. 4to, and reprinted in 1776, in 7 vols. fcvo. He published also in 1779, 6 vols. 12mo, an edition of Pliny the naturalist, which is only a' short abridgment of what he had prepared to correct and enlarge the edition of Hardouin, and to give an historical series of all the new discoveries made since the beginning of this century; an immense labour, which bespeaks the most extensive erudition. To these two editions, which procured the abbe Brotier the applauses of all the literati in Europe, he added in 1778, 8vo, an edition of Rapin on gardens, at the end of which he has subjoined a history of gardens, written in Latin with admirable elegance, and abounding in the most delightful imagery: for the abbe was not one of those pedants, according to the expression of the poet, “herisses de Grec & de Latin;” he possessed a lively imagination, and a fine taste, with clearness and perspicuity; and above all, a sound judgment, which never suffered him to adopt in writing any thing that was not solid, beautiful, and true. His other works are, 1. “Examen de PApologie de M. I 7 Abbe de Prades,1753, 8vo. 2. “Conclusiones ex universa Theologia,1754, 4to. 3. “Traite des Monnoies Romanies, Grecques, et Hebr. compares avec les Monnoies de France, pour l'intelligencederEcriture Sainte, et de tous les auteurs Grecs, et Remains,1760, 4to. 4. “Prospectus d'une edit. Lat. de Tacite,1761,5 vols. 4to. 5, “Supplementa, lib. 7. loAnnal. Taciti,” 17 v 55, 8vo. 6.“Cl. viri de la Caille vita”7 1763, 4to. 7. “Phaedri Fabularum, lib. v. cum notis et suppl. access. Parallela J. de la Fontaine Fabulse,1785, 12mo. 8. “Memoire du Levant1780, and an edition of“Brumoy’s Theatre,1785, 13 vols. 8vo. In 1790 his nephew published his “Parolles Memorables,” a work of which Mr. Seward has made great use in his “Anecdotes.

, an ingenious English writer, descended from the Browns of Colstown near Haddington in Scotland,

, an ingenious English writer, descended from the Browns of Colstown near Haddington in Scotland, was born in Northumberland, Nov. 5, 1715, at Rothbury, of which place his father was curate, but removed almost immediately after to the vicarage of Wigton in. Cumberland, where, at a grammar-school, he received the first part of his education; and was thence removed, May 8, 1732, to St. John’s college in Cambridge. He remained here, till in 1735 he took the degree of B. A. then returned to Wigton, and soon after went into orders. His first settlement was in Carlisle, being chosen a minor canon and lecturer in the cathedral there. This situation he afterwards resigned, on being reproved for omitting the Athanasian creed, which it is said was merely accidental. His pride, however, was hurt, and next Sunday he read the creed, out of course, and immediately after resigned. In 1739 he took a M. A. degree at Cambridge. In the rebellion of 1745, he acted as a volunteer at the siege of Carlisle, and behaved himself with great intrepidity; and, after the defeat of the rebels, when some of them were tried at Carlisle in 1746, he preached two excellent sermons in the cathedral, “on the mutual connection between religious truth and civil freedom; and between superstition, tyranny, irreligion, and licentiousness.” These are to be found in the volume of his sermons.

Brown now began to make no small figure as a writer 5 and in 1751, published Jiis “Essays on Shaftesbury’s Char

Brown now began to make no small figure as a writer 5 and in 1751, published Jiis “Essays on Shaftesbury’s Characteristics,” 8vo, a work written with elegance and spirit, aud so applauded as to be printed a fifth time in 1764. This was suggested to him by Warburton, and to Warburton by Pope, who told Warburton that to his knowledge the Characteristics had done more harm to revealed religion in England than all the works of infidelity put together. He is imagined to have had a principal hand in another book, published also the same year, and called w An essay on musical expression;“though the avowed author was Mr. Charles Avison. (See Avison.) In 1754 he printed a sermon,” On the use and abuse of externals in religion: preached before the bishop of Carlisle, at. the consecration of St. James’s church in Whitehaven, and soon after he was promoted to Great Horkesiey in Essex; a living conferred upon him by the late earl of Hard wick e. His next appearance was as a dramatic writer. In 1755, hk tragedy “Barbarossa,” was produced upon the stage, and afterwards his “Athelstan” in 1756. These tragedies were acted with considerable success, under the management of Garrick; and the former long remained what is called a stock-piece, notwithstanding many critical objections offered to it in the publications of the time.

t mistakes, very instructing as well as amusing. “Observations” were printed upon it by an anonymous writer, and Dr. Brown defended himself in “Remarks.” He published in

Between the first and second volume of the Estimate, he republished Dr. Walker’s “Diary of the Siege of Londonderry;” with a preface, pointing out the useful purposes to which the perusal of it might be applied. He was, about this time, presented by the bishop of Carlisle, Dr. Osbal* deston, to the vicarage of St. Nicholas in Newcastle upon Tyne, resigning Great Horkesley in Essex; and was made one of the chaplains in ordinary to his present majesty. These were all the preferments our author ever received; and, as this was supposed to be no small mortification to a man of Dr. Brown’s high spirit, so it was probably this high spirit which was the cause of it; for such was his temper that he never could preserve his friends long, and he had before this time quarrelled with Warburton and lord Hardwicke. In 1760 he published an additional dialogue of the dead, between “Pericles and Aristides,” being a sequel to a dialogue of lord Lyttelton’s between “Pericles and Cosmo.” This is supposed by some to have been designed as a vindication of Mr. Pitt’s political character, against some hints of disapprobation by lord Lyttelton; while others have not excluded a private motive of resentment. It is said that lord Lyttelton in a numerous and mixed company neglected to take notice of our author in so respectful a manner as he thought he deserved; and in revenge, weak enough certainly, he composed the dialogue. His next publication was “The Cure of Saul,” a sacred ode; which was followed the same year by a “Dissertation on the rise, union, and power, the progressions, separations, and corruptions of poetry and music,” 4to. This is a pleasing performance, displays great ingenuity, and, though not without mistakes, very instructing as well as amusing. “Observations” were printed upon it by an anonymous writer, and Dr. Brown defended himself in “Remarks.” He published in 8vo, 1764, the “History of the rise and progress of Poetry through its several species:” being the substance of the above work concerning poetry only, for the benefit of classical readers not knowing in music. The same year, he printed a volume of “Sermons,” most of which had been printed separately; and in 1765, “Thoughts on Civil Liberty, Licentiousness, and Faction;” a piece, drawn up with great parade, and assuming a scientific form, with an intention to censure the opposers of administration at that time. A sermon on the “Female character and education,” preached the 16th of May, 1765, before the guardians of the asylum for deserted female orphans.

l as form the best excuse, for this. genius was extensive; for, besides his being so elegant a prose writer in various kinds of composition, he was a poet, a musician,

Dr. Brown was a man of uncommon ingenuity, but unfortunately tinctured with an undue degree of self-opinion, and perhaps the bias of his mind to insanity will assign this best cause, as well as form the best excuse, for this. genius was extensive; for, besides his being so elegant a prose writer in various kinds of composition, he was a poet, a musician, and a painter. His learning does not, however, appear to have been equal to his genius. His invention was, indeed, inexhaustible; and hence he was led to form magnificent plans, the execution of which required a greater depth of erudition than he was possessed of. In divinity, properly so called, as including an extensive knowledge of the controverted points of theology, and a critical acquaintance with the Scriptures, he was not deeply conversant. All we can gather from his sermons is, that his ideas were liberal, and that he did not lay much stress on the disputed doctrines of Christianity. His temper, we are told, was suspicious, and sometimes threw him into disagreeable altercations with his friends; but this arose, in a great measure, if not entirely, from the constitutional disorder described above, a very suspicious turn of mind being one of the surest prognostics of lunacy. He has been charged with shifting about too speedily, with a view to preferment; and it was thought, that his “Thoughts on Civil Liberty, Licentiousness, and Faction,” seemed to have something of this appearance. He, however, in that performance endeavoured to remove the objection, by observing, that, if he had indirectly censured those whom he had formerly applauded, he never was attached to men, but measures; and that, if he had questioned the conduct of those only who were then out of power, he had heretofore questioned their conduct with the same freedom, when in the fulness of their power. Upon the whole, Dr. Brown’s defects, which chiefly arose from a too sanguine temperament of constitution, were compensated by many excellencies and virtues. With respect to his writings, they are all of them elegant. Even those which are of a more temporary nature may continue to be read with pleasure, as containing a variety of curious observations; and in his Estimate are many of those unanswerable truths that can never be unseasonable or unprofitable.

, an able and learned minister and writer among the protestant dissenters, and who was remarkable for

, an able and learned minister and writer among the protestant dissenters, and who was remarkable for a mental disorder of a most extraordinary kind, was born at Shepton-Mallet, in Somersetshire, about 1680. He was instructed in grammar by the rev. Mr. Cumming, who was pastor of a congregation in that town; from whence he was removed to Bridgewater, and finished Jiis studies under the care of the rev. Mr. Moor. As he possessed uncommon parts, which had been improved by the most assiduous application, he was very early thought qualified for the ministry; so that he began to preach some time before he was twenty years of age. His talents soon rendered him so conspicuous among the dissenters, that he was chosen minister of a considerable congregation at Portsmouth, in which situation he continued some years. In 1706, he published a small treatise, entitled “A caveat against evil Company.” In 1709, he published, in one volume, 8vo, “The true character of the real Christian.” He discharged the duties of the pastoral office at Portsmouth with so much fidelity and diligence, as procured him universal esteem; but, in 1716, he removed to the great regret of his congregation, in consequence of his being invited to accept of the pastoral charge of the congregation of protestant dissenters in the Old Jewry, London, which was one of the most considerable in the kingdom. In 1720, he published, in one volume, 12mo, “Hymns and Spiritual Songs, in three books.” In 1722, he published a volume of “Sermons,” and about the same time a “Letter to the rev. Thomas Reynolds,” in which he censures that gentleman and other dissenters for requiring of their brethren explicit declarations of their belief in the doctrine of the Trinity. At the Old Jewry he continued to preach for about seven years with the greatest reputation, mid was much beloved and esteemed by his congregation: but, in 1723, a complicated domestic affliction, the loss of his wife, and of an only son, so deeply affected him, that he was at first in a state little different from distraction; and the disorder which his imagination had sustained from the shock that he had received, at length settled into a melancholy of a very extraordinary nature. He desisted from the duties of his function, and could not be persuaded to join in any act of worship, either public or private. He imagined, " that Almighty God, by a singular instance of divine power, had, in a gradual manner, annihilated in him the thinking substance, and utterly divested him of consciousness: that though he retained the human shape, and the faculty of speaking, in a manner that appeared to others rational, he had all the while no more notion of what he said than a parrot. And, very consistently with this, he looked upon himself as no longer a moral agent, a subject of reward or punishment. 7 ' He continued in this persuasion to the end of his life, with very little variation. Nothing grieved him more, than that he could not persuade others to think of him as he thought of himself. He sometimes considered this as questioning his veracity, which affected him in the most sensible manner; and he often took pains, by the most solemn asseverations, to remove such an imputation. At other times, and in a more gloomy hour, he would represent the incredulity which was manifested towards him, as a judicial effect of the same divine power jhat had occasioned this strange alteration in him, as if God had determined to proceed against him in this way, and would have no application made in his behalf. Upon this account, for a long while, he was unwilling that any prayers should be made for him; which, he would say, could be warranted by nothing but a faith in miracles, and even refused to say grace at table, or if urged to it, appeared in the greatest distress. At the beginning of his disorder, he was so unhappy in himself, as to have frequent propensities to deprive himself of life; but he afterwards grew more serene, and appeared to have little or no terror upon his mind. He considered himself as one who, though he had little to hope, had no more to fear, and was therefore, for the most part, calm and composed; and when the conversation did not turn upon himself, as it was generally rational and very serious, so was it often cheerful and pleasant. But his opinion concerning himself occasionally led him into inconsistencies; and when these were pointed out to him, he sometimes appeared much puzzled.

on of years, and the effect of a design early formed, and long pursued. It is, indeed, adds the same writer, to be wished, that he had longer delayed the publication, and

In 1646, he printed “Enquiries into vulgar and common Errors,” small folio, a work, says his biographer, which, as it arose not from fancy and invention, but from observation and books, and contained not a single discourse of one continued tenor, but an enumeration of many unconnected particulars, must have been the collection of years, and the effect of a design early formed, and long pursued. It is, indeed, adds the same writer, to be wished, that he had longer delayed the publication, and added what the remaining part of his life might have furnished. He published in 1673 the sixth edition, with some improvements. This book, like his former, was received with great applause, was answered by Alexander Koss, and translated into Dutch and German, and afterwards into French. It might, Dr. Johnson thinks, now be proper to reprint it with notes, partly supplemental and partly emendatory, to subjoin those discoveries which the industry of the last age has made, and correct those mistakes which the author has committed, not by idleness or negligence, but for want of Boyle’s and Newton’s philosophy.

The reputation of Browne encouraged some low writer to publish, under his name, a book called “Nature’s cabinet

The reputation of Browne encouraged some low writer to publish, under his name, a book called “Nature’s cabinet unlocked,” translated, according to Wood, from the physics of Magirus, but Browne advertised against it. In 1658, the discovery of some ancient urns in Norfolk gave him occasion to write “Hydriotaphia, Urn -burial, or a discourse of Sepulchral Urns,” 8vo, in which he treats with his usual learning, on the funeral rites of the ancient nations; exhibits their various treatment of the dead; and examines the substances found in these Norfolk urns. There is, perhaps, none -of his works which better exemplifies his reading or memory. To this treatise was added “The Garden of Cyrus, or the Quincunxial lozenge, or net-work plantation of the ancients, artificially, naturally, mystically considered.” This is a more fanciful performance than the other, but still it exhibits the fancy of a man of learning. Besides these, he left some papers prepared for the press, of which two collections have been published, the first by Dr. Thomas Tennison, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, in 1684, 8vo, entitled, “A Collection of Miscellaneous Tracts,” and these, with what had been published in his life-time, were printed in one vol. fol. in 1686. In 1690 his son, Dr. Edward Browne, of whom we have already spoken, published a single tract, entitled “A Letter to a friend upon occasion of the death of his intimate friend,” 8vo. The second collection was of the “Posthumous Works,” edited in 1722 by Owen Brigstock, esq. his grandson by marriage.

an to lose the stability which it had obtained in the time of Elizabeth; and was considered by every writer as a subject on which he might try his plastic skill, by moulding

In 1716 there appeared a book of his in 12mo, entitled “Christian Morals,” published from the original and correct manuscript of the author, by John Jeffery, D. D. archdeacon of Norwich. It was dedicated by our author’s daughter, Mrs. Elizabeth Littleton, to David, earl of Buchan. Of this a second edition was published in 1756 by Mr. John Payne, bookseller, and one of Dr. Johnson’s early patrons, who solicited him to write a life of sir Thomas. This, of which we have availed ourselves in the preceding account, may be classed among Dr. Johnson’s best biographical performances, and the present article may be very properly concluded with his character of Browne’s works. After mentioning the various writers who have noticed Browne, he adds, “But it is not on the praises of others, but on his own writings, that he is to depend for the esteem of posterity; of which he will not easily be deprived, while learning shall have any reverence among men: for there is no science in which he does not discover some skill; and scarce any kind of knowledge, profane or sacred, abstruse or elegant, which he does not appear to have cultivated with success. His exuberance of knowledge, and plenitude of ideas, sometimes obstruct the tendency of his reasoning, and the clearness of his decisions: on whatever subject he employed his mind, there started up immediately so many images before him, that he lost one by grasping another. His memory supplied him with so many illustrations, parallel or dependent notions, that he was always starting into collateral considerations: but the spirit and vigour of his pursuit always gives delight; and the reader follows him, without reluctance, through his mazes, in themselves flowery and pleasing, and ending at the point originally in view. To have great excellencies, and great faults, ‘ magn<e virtutes nee minora vitia, is the poesy/ says our author, l of the best natures.’ This poesy may be properly applied to the style of Browne: it is vigorous, but rugged; it is learned, but pedantic; it is deep, but obscure; it strikes, but does not please; it commands, but does not allure; his tropes are harsh, and his combinations uncouth. He fell into an age, in which our language began to lose the stability which it had obtained in the time of Elizabeth; and was considered by every writer as a subject on which he might try his plastic skill, by moulding it according to his own fancy. Milton, in consequence of this encroaching licence, began to introduce the Latin idiom; and Browne, though he gave less disturbance to our structures and phraseology, yet poured in a multitude of exotic words; many, indeed, useful and significant, which, if rejected, must be supplied by circumlocution, such as commensality for the state of many living at the same table; but many superfluous, as a paralogical for an unreasonable doubt; and some so obscure, that they conceal his meaning rather than explain it, as arthriticai analogies for parts that serve some animals in the place of joints. His style is, indeed, a tissue of many languages; a mixture of heterogeneous words, brought together from distant regions, with terms originally appropriated to one art, and drawn by violence into the service of another. He must, however, be confessed to have augmented our philosophical diction; and in defence of his uncommon words and expressions, we must consider, that he had uncommon sentiments, and was not content to express in many words that idea for which any language could supply a single term. But his innovations are sometimes pleasing, and his temerities happy: he has many verba ardentia, forcible expressions, which he would never have found, but by venturing to the utmost verge of propriety; and flights which would never have been reached, but by one who had very little fear of the shame of falling.

, a laborious Italian writer, was born at Florence towards the conclusion of the fifteenth

, a laborious Italian writer, was born at Florence towards the conclusion of the fifteenth century. Having meddled in 1522 in the plot formed by some Florentine citizens against cardinal Julius de Medicis, afterwards pope Ciement VII. he was obliged to expatriate himself, and withdrew into France. The Medici being driven out of Florence in 1527, this revolution brought him back to his country, where the liberty with which he chose to speak against the monks and priests, raised a suspicion of his being attached to the opinions of Luther. He was put into prison, and would not have escaped an ignominious death but for the kind offices of his friends; who procured a mitigation of his punishment to an exile of two years. He then retired to Venice with his brothers, who were printers and booksellers, and employed their presses in printing the greater part of his works, of which the most known and the most in request, is the, whole Bible translated into Italian, with annotations and remarks, which was put by the papists in the number of heretical books of the first class; but the protestants held it in such high esteem that it passed through several editions. The most ample and the most scarce is that of Venice, 1546 and 1548, 3 vols. folio. Brucioli pretends to have made his translation from the Hebrew text: but the truth is, that, being but moderately versed in that language, he made use of the Latin version of Pagnini. His other works are, 1. Italian translations of the natural history of Pliny, and several pieces of Aristotle and Cicero. 2. Editions of Petrarch and Bocace, with notes. 3. “Dialogues,” Venice, 1526, folio. The year of his death is not known; but it is certain that he was still alive in 1554.

, a French writer of a singular character for versatility, was born at Aix, in

, a French writer of a singular character for versatility, was born at Aix, in 1640, and trained in the reformed religion, in defence of which he published some controversial pieces, particularly against Bossuet’s “Exposition de la Foi,” or Exposition of the faith; but the prelate, instead of answering, converted him. Brueys, become catholic, combated with the Protestant ministers, with Jurieu, Lenfant, and La Roche; but his airy spirit not rightly accommodating itself to serious works, he quitted theology for the theatre. He composed, jointly with Palaprat, his intimate friend, several comedies full of wit and gaiety. We have also of this writer a prosaic paraphrase or commentary on Horace’s art of poetry. In his latter years he became again a controversial writer, and, as his countrymen say, imitated Bellarmine and Moliere by turns. He died at Moritpellier in 1723, aged eighty -three; and all his dramatic pieces were collected, 1735, in 3 vols. 12mo. His comedies have some merit, but his tragedies and other works are deservedly sunk into oblivion.

, a celebrated French writer, was born at Rouen, Aug. 26, 1688, and commenced his noviciate

, a celebrated French writer, was born at Rouen, Aug. 26, 1688, and commenced his noviciate among the Jesuits of Paris, Sept. 8, 1704. In 1706, he began his philosophical course in the royal college, and in 1708 was sent to Caen to complete his studies that he might take orders. Some of his pieces are dated from that city in 1710 and 1712, and one from Bourges in 1719. He appears indeed to have passed several years in the country, where he taught rhetoric. In 1713, he returned to Paris to study theology, and in 1722 he was again at Paris, where he took the vows in the society of Jesuits, and was intrusted with the education of the prince of Talmont. About the same time he assisted in the “Memoirs of the Arts and Sciences,” and continued his labours in that journal until 1729, when he was obliged to leave Paris for some time for having assisted in publishing father Margat’s History of Tamerlane, which it appears had g=ven offence. His absence, however, was not long, and on his return, or soon after, he was employed in continuing the “History of the Gallican church,” of which six volumes had been published by fathers Longueval and Fontenay. In 1725, he was appointed professor of mathematics, and filled that chair for six years with much reputation. It was probably in this situation that he read his lecture, on the “use of mathematical knowledge in polite literature,” now printed in the second volume of his works, nor did his various public employments prevent his publishing many other works, which were well received by the public. In 1722 he published, but without his name, his “Morale Chretienne,” Paris, a small volume, of which four editions were soon bought up. In 1723, he also published the first of his three letters, entitled “Examen du poema (de M. Racine) sur la grace,” 8vo, and in 1724, “La vie de Timperatrice Eleonore,” taken from that by father Ceva; the same year, “Abreg des vertus de soeur Jeanne Silenie de la Motte des Goutes,” Moulins, 12mo; and a new edition of father Mourgues “Traite de la Poesie Francoise,” with many additions, 12mo. But the work which contributed most to his reputation was his “Greek Theatre,” entitled “Theatre des Grecs, contenant des traductions ct analyses des tragedies Grecques, des discours et des remarques concernant la theatre Grec, &c.1730, 3 vols. 4to, and often reprinted in 12mo, in France and Holland. This useful work, not now in such high reputation as formerly, is yet well known in this country by the translation published by Mrs. Charlotte Lennox in 1760, 3 vols. 4to; to which the earl of Corke and Orrery contributed a general preface, and translated the three preliminary discourses: Dr. Sharpe, Dr. Grainger, and Mr. Bourryau translated some other parts, and Dr. Johnson contributed a dissertation on the Greek comedy, and the general conclusion of the work, which, in this translation, is certainly highly polished and improved. “Brumoy,” says Dr. Warton, “has displayed the excellencies of the Greek tragedy in a judicious and comprehensive manner. His jtranslations are faithful and elegant; and the analysis of those plays, which on account of some circumstances in ancient manners would shock the readers of this age, and would not therefore bear an entire version, is perspicuous and full. Of all the French critics, he and the judicious Fenelon have had the justice to confess, or perhaps the penetration to perceive, in what instances Corneille and Racine have falsified and modernized the characters, and overloaded with unnecessary intrigues the simple plots of the ancients.

, an Italian writer to whom atheism has been generally, but unjustly, imputed, was

, an Italian writer to whom atheism has been generally, but unjustly, imputed, was born atNola in the kingdom of Naples, about the middle of the sixteenth century. His talents are said to have been considerable, but this is hardly discoverable from his works: he early, however, set up for an inquirer and innovator, and very naturally found many things in the philosophy and theology then taught in Italy, which he could not comprehend. Being fond of retirement and study, he entered into a monastery of Dominicans, but the freedom of his opinions, and particularly of his censures on the irregularities of the fraternity, rendered it soon necessary to leave his order and his country. In 1582, he withdrew to Geneva, where his heretical opinions gave offence to Calvin and Beza, and he was soon obliged to provide for his safety by flight. After a short stay at Lyons he came to Paris, and his innovating spirit recommended him to the notice of multitudes, who at this time declared open hostilities against the authority of Aristotle. In a public disputation, held in the royal academy, in 1586, he defended, three days successively, certain propositions concerning nature and the world, which, together with brief heads of the arguments, he afterwards published in Saxony, under the title of “Acrotismus,” or “Reasons of the physical articles proposed against the Peripatetics at Paris.” The contempt with which Bruno, in the course of these debates, treated Aristotle, exposed him to the resentment of the academic professors, who were zealous advocates for the old system; and he found it expedientto leave thekingdom of France. According to some writers, he now visited England, in the train of the French ambassador Castelneau, wherehe was hospitably received by sir Philip Sydney and sir Fulke Gre.ville, and was introduced to queen Elizabeth. But though it is certain from his writings that he was in England, he probably made this visit in some other part of his life, and we should suppose before this, in 1583 or 1584. For, about the middle of the same year in which he was at Paris, we find him, at Wittenburg, a zealous adherent of Luther. In this city he met with a liberal reception, and full permission to propagate his doctrines: but the severity with which he inveighed against Aristotle, the latitude of his opinions in religion as well as philosophy, and the contempt with which he treated the masters of the public schools, excited new jealousies; and complaints were lodged against him before the senate of the university. To escape the disgrace which threatened him, Bruno, after two years residence in Wittenburg, left that place, and took refuge in Helmstadt, where the known liberality of the duke of Brunswick encouraged him to hope for a secure asylum. But either through the restlessness of his disposition, or through unexpected opposition, he went next year to Francfort, to superintend an edition of his works, but before it was completed was obliged again, probably from fear of persecution, to quit that city. His next residence was at Padua; where the boldness with which h.e taught his new doctrines, and inveighed against the court of Rome, caused him to be apprehended and brought before the inquisition at Venice. There he was tried, and convicted of his errors. Forty days being allowed him to deliberate, he promised to retract them, and as at the expiration of that term, he still maintained his errors, he obtained a further respite for forty days. At last, it appearing that he imposed upon the pope in order to prolong his life, sentence was finally passed upon him on the 9th of February 1600. He made no offer to retract during the week that was allowed him afterwards for that purpose, but underwent his punishment on the 17th, by being burnt at a stake.

wered in “A Letter to Jacob Bryant, esq.” Dr. Priestley, indeed, was not likely to be persuaded by a writer who insinuated that his “necessity” of philosophers was no other

About this time was published Mr. Wood’s “Essay on. the original genius and writings of Homer.” Of this posthumous work, Mr. Bryant was the editor, the author having left his Mss. to his care; and in the same year, the “Vindiciae Flavians),” a tract on the much disputed testimony of Josephus to Christ, was printed, and a few copies sent to a bookseller in either university; but as the pamphlet appeared without the name of its author, and no attention was shewed it, Mr. Bryant recalled them, and satisfied himself with distributing the copies thus returned amongst a few particular friends. The new light, however, which Mr. Bryant threw upon the subject, and the acuteness with which the difficulties attending it were discussed, soon brought the work into notice, and Mr. Bryant published it with his name in 1780, and has effectually vindicated the authenticity of the passage in question. It is no mean testimony of his success in this undertaking, that Dr. Priestley confessed that Mr. Bryant had made a complete convert of him. That his conversion, however, extended no farther than the present subject, appeared in the same year, when Mr. Bryant published “An Address to Dr. Priestley, upon his doctrine of Philosophical Necessity illustrated,” 8vo, which the doctor with his usual rapidity, answered in “A Letter to Jacob Bryant, esq.” Dr. Priestley, indeed, was not likely to be persuaded by a writer who insinuated that his “necessity” of philosophers was no other than the “predestination” of Calvinists. With respect to the “Vindiciae Flavians,” it yet remains to be mentioned that there is a great affinity between this publication, and the observations on the same subject of a learned Frenchman. See a letter to Dr. Kippis, at the end of his life of Dr. Lardner, by Dr. Henley, where the arguments for and against the authenticity of the passage are distinctly stated.

, a law-writer and antiquary, son and heir of John Bry<lal, esq. of the Rolls

, a law-writer and antiquary, son and heir of John Bry<lal, esq. of the Rolls Liberty, was born in Somersetshire about 1635, and became a commoner of Queen’s college, Oxford, in Michaelmas term, 1651, where he took a degree in arts in -1655, but left the university without completing it by determination. He then settled in Lincoln’s inn, and after the usual course of law studies was admitted to the bar. After the restoration he became secretary to sir Harbottle Grirnston, master of the rolls. When he died is uncertain, as he survived the publication of Wood’s Athenae, from which we have extracted this brief notice of him, but he appears to have been living in 1704. He published several law treatises, some of which are still in estimation: 1. “Jus imaginis apud Anglos, or the Law of England relating to the Nobility and Gentry,1671, 1675, 8vo. 2. “Jus Sigilli; or the law of England touching the four principal Seals, the great seal, privy seal, exchequer seal, and the signet; also those grand officers to whose custody those seals are committed,1673, 24mo. 3. “Speculum Juris Anglicani; or a view of the Laws of England, as they are divided into statutes, common-law, and customs,1673, 8vo. 4. “Jus criminis, or an abridgment of the laws of treason, murther, conspiracies, poisonings, &c.1675, 1679, 8vo. 5. “Camera Regis, or a short view of Lon^ don, viz. antiquity, &c, officers, courts, customs, franchises,” &c. 1076, 8vo. 6. “Decus et tutamen; or a prospect of the laws of England, framed for the safeguard of the king’s majesty,1679, 8vo. 7. “Ars transferendi; of sure guide to the conveyancer,1697, 8vo. 8. “Non compos mentis; or, the law relating to natural fools, mad folks, and lunatic persons,1700, 8vo. 9. “Lex Spuriorum; or, the law relating to bastardy, collected from the common, civil, and ecclesiastical laws,1703, 8vo. 10. “Declaration of the divers preheminences or privileges allowed by the laws and customs of England, unto the firstborn among her majesty’s subjects the temporal lords in parliament,1704, fol. Wood adds another work, “Jura Coronae; or, his majesty’s royal rights and prerogatives asserted against papal usurpations, and all other antimonarchical attempts and practices,1680, 8vo.

, the last writer on music in the Greek language that has come to our knowledge,

, the last writer on music in the Greek language that has come to our knowledge, flourished under the elder Paiaeologus, about the year 1320, and it is probable that he was a descendant of the house of Brienne, an ancient French family, that went into Greece during the crusades, at the beginning of the thirteenth century. His work is divided into three books, all which are confined to harmonics: the first is a kind of commentary on Euclid; and the second and third little more than explanations of the doctrines of Ptolemy. Meibomius had promised a Latin translation of this book, but dying before it was finished, Dr. 'Wallis performed the task, and it now constitutes a part of the third volume of his works, published at Oxford, 1699, 3 vols. fol.

, a medical writer of great popularity, descended of a respectable family in R

, a medical writer of great popularity, descended of a respectable family in Roxburghshire, was born at Ancram in the year 1729. Having passed through the usual school education, he was sent to the university at Edinburgh. His inclination leading him to mathematics, he became so considerable a proficient in that branch of science, as to be enabled to give private lessons to many of the pupils. Having made choice of medicine for his profession, he attended the lectures of the several professors, necessary to qualify him for practice;, and as he was of a studious turn of mind, his progress ia knowledge may be supposed to have been equal to his application. After having passed a period of not less than nine years at the university, he first settled in practice at Sheffield, in Yorkshire. He was soon afterwards elected physician to a large branch of the Foundling hospital then established at Ackworth. In the course of two years he reduced the annual number of deaths among the children from one half to one in fifteen; and by the establishment of due regulations for the preservation of health, greatly diminished the previously burthensome expense of medical attendance. In this situation, he derived from experience that knowledge of. the complaints, and of the general treatment of children, which was afterwards published in “The Domestic Medicine,” and in the “Advice to Mothers;” works which, considering their very general diffusion, have no doubt tended to ameliorate the treatment of children, and consequently to improve the constitutions of the present generation of the inhabitants of this country. When that institution was dissolved, in consequence of parliament withdrawing their support from it, Dr Buchan returned to Edinburgh, where he became a fellow of the royal college of physicians, and settled in the practice of his profession, relying in some measure on the countenance and support of the relations of the lady he married, who was of a respectable family in that city. On the death of one of the professors, the doctor offered himself as a candidate for the vacant chair, but did not succeed.

The genius and erudition of Buchanan have procured him, as a writer, the applause even of his enemies: but, as a man, he has been

The genius and erudition of Buchanan have procured him, as a writer, the applause even of his enemies: but, as a man, he has been the subject of the most virulent invectives. Far from confining themselves to truth, they have not even kept within the bounds of probability; and some of the calumnies which have been published against him, related by Bayle, are calculated only to excite our risibility. The learned John Le Clerc has very ably shewn, that there is much reason to conclude, that many of the severe censures which have been thrown out against Buchanan, were the result of ignorance, of prejudice, and of party animosity. That he was himself influenced by some degree of partiality to the party with which he was connected, that he was sometimes deceived by the reports of others, and that in the earlier part of his History, his zeal for the honour of his country has led him into some misrepresentations, may be admitted: but we do not apprehend that he wilfully and intentionally violated the truth, or that there is any just ground for questioning his integrity. Le Clerc observes, that as to the share which Buchanan had in public affairs, it appears even from the Memoirs of sir James Melvil, who was of the opposite party, that “he distinguished himself by his probity, and by his moderation.” The prejudices of many writers against him have been very great: he had satirized the priests, and many of them therefore were his most inveterate enemies; he was generally odious to the bigotted advocates for the Romish church, and to the partisans of Mary; and his free and manly spirit rendered him extremely disagreeable to court flatterers and parasites, and the defenders of tyranny. His dialogue " De Jure Regni/' which certainly contains some of the best and most rational principles of government, whatever may be thought of some particular sentiments, and which displays uncommon acuteness and extent of knowledge, has been one source of the illiberal abuse that has been thrown out against him. But it is a performance that really does him great honour; and the rather, because it was calculated to enforce sound maxims of civil policy, in an age in which they were generally little understood. Some farther testimonies of authors concerning him may be found in our references.

, esq. a very ingenious but unfortunate writer, was born at St. Thomas, near Exeter, about 1685, and educated

, esq. a very ingenious but unfortunate writer, was born at St. Thomas, near Exeter, about 1685, and educated at Christ-church, Oxford. His father, Gilbert Budgell, D. D. descended of an ancient family in Devonshire; his mother, Mary, was only daughter of Dr. William Gulston, bishop of Bristol, whose sister Jane married dean Addison, and was mother to the famous Addison. After some years stay in the university, Mr. Budgell went to London, and was entered of the Inner Temple, in order to study law, for which his father always intended him; but his inclinations led him more to study polite literature, and keep company with the genteelest persons in town. During his stay at the Temple, he contracted a strict intimacy and friendship with Addison, who was first cousin to his mother; and when Addison was appointed secretary to lord Wharton, lord-lieutenant of Ireland, he offered to make his friend Eustace one of the clerks of his office, which Mr. Budgell readily accepted. This was in April 1710, when he was about twenty-five years of age. He had by this time read the classics, the most reputed historian^ and the best French, English, and Italian writers, and became concerned with Steele and Addison, not in writing the Tatler, as has been asserted, but the Spectator, which was begun in 1711. Ail the papers marked with an X were written by him, and the whole eighth volume is attributed to Addison and himself, without the assistance of Steele. Several little epigrams and songs, which have a good deal of wit in them, together with the epilogue to the “Distressed Mother,” which had a greater run than any thing of the kind before, were also written by Mr. Budgell near this time; all which, together with the known affection of Addison for him, raised his character so much as to give him considerable consequence in the literary and political world. Upon the laying down of the Spectator, the Guardian was set up; and to this work our author contributed, along with Addison and Steele. In the preface it is said, that those papers marked with an asterisk were written by Mr. Budgell.

Mr. Budgell, as a writer, is very agreeable; not argumentative, or deep, but ingenious

Mr. Budgell, as a writer, is very agreeable; not argumentative, or deep, but ingenious and entertaining; and his style was thought peculiarly elegant, and almost ranked with Addison’s, and it is certainly superior to that of most English writers. Besides what are above mentioned, he published: “Memoirs of the Lives and Characters of the family of the Boyles,1737, 8vo, third edition, a work of unquestionable authority, in most of the facts. Except this and his papers in the Spectator, none of his works are now in request; but his life is interesting and instructive. His wayward temper; indulgence of passion and spleen; irregular ambition; and his connection with Tindal, which ended in a dereliction of moral and religious principle, sufficiently explain the causes of his unhappiness, and afford an important lesson.

, a learned metaphysician, and voluminous writer, was born in Poland, of French parents, May 25, 1661. His parents

, a learned metaphysician, and voluminous writer, was born in Poland, of French parents, May 25, 1661. His parents having removed to Rouen, he was educated there, and afterwards entered among the Jesuits at Paris in 1679, and took the four vows “in 1695. In 1698 he went to Rome, not at the invitation of the general of his order, as has been asserted, but merely to see that celebrated city, in which he remained about four months, and then returned to Paris, where he passed the greater part of his life in the Jesuits college. Here he was first employed on the” Memoires de Trevoux,“and afterwards wrote his numerous separate publications. He died May 17, 1737. His eloge appeared in the” Memoires“in the same year, but principally regards his writings, as his life appears to have passed without any striking or characteristic circumstances, being entirely devoted to the composition of works of learning or piety, of which the following is supposed to be a correct list: 1. Some French verses on the taking of Mons and Montmelian, inserted in the” Recueil de vers choisis,“Paris, 1701, 12mo. 2.” La vie de PHermite de Compiegne,“Paris, 1692, 1737, 12mo. 3.” Vie de Dominique George,“abbot of Valricher, Paris, 1696, 12mo. 4.” Pratique de la memoire artificielle pour apprendre et pour retenir la chronologic, Phistoire universeile, c.“Paris, 1701, 3 vols. and often reprinted and extended to 4 vols. 5.” Verites consolantes du Christianisme,“ibid. 1718, 2d edit. 16mo. 6.” Histoire de Porigine du royaume de Sicile et de Naples,“ibid. 1701, 12mo. 7.” La pratique des devoirs des cures,“from the Italian, Lyons, 1702, 12mo. 8.” Abrege de l‘histoire d’Espagne,“Paris, 1704, 12mo. 9.” Examen de prejuges vulgaires pour disposer F esprit a juger sainement detout,“ibid. 1704, 12mo. 10.” Les Abeilles,“a fable. 11.” Le degat du Parnasse, ou La Fausse litterature,“a poem, ibid. 1705. 12.” La vie du comte Louis de Sales,“ibid. 1708, 12mo, afterwards translated into Italian, and often reprinted. 13.” Grammaire Franchise sur un plan nouveau,“ibid. 1709, 12mo, often reprinted. 14. e6 Le veritable esprit et le saint emploi des fetes de l'eglise,” ibid. 1712, 12mo. 15. “Les prlncipes du raisonnement exposes en deu:: logiques nouvelles, avec des remarques sur les logiques,” &c. ibid. 1714, 12mo. 16. “Geographic universelle avec le secours des vers artificiels et avec des cartes,” ibid. 1715, 2 vols. 12mo. 17. “Homere en arbitrage,” ibid. 1715; two letters addressed to the marchioness Lambert, on the dispute between madame Dacier and de la Motte, on Homer. 18. “Hist, chronologique da dernier siecle, e.” from the year 1600, ibid. 1715, 12mo. 19. “Introduction a l‘histoire de maisons souveraines de l’Europe,” Paris, 1717, 3 vols. 12mo. 20. “Exercice dela piete,” &c. ib. 1718, often reprinted. 21. “Tableau chronologique de l'histoire universelle en forme de jeu,” Paris, 1718. 22. “Nouveau x elomens d'histoire et de geographic,” Paris, 1718. 22. “Sentimens Chretien sur les principales verites de la religion,” in prose and verse, and with engravings, 1718, 12mo. 24. “Traite* des premieres verites,” Paris, 1724, 12mo. A translation of this, one of father Buffer’s most celebrated works, was published in 1781, under the title of “First Truths, and the origin of our opinions explained; with an inquiry into the sentiments of moral philosophers, relative to our primary notions of things,” 8vo. The author has proved himself to be a metaphysician of considerable abilities, and with many it will be no diminution of his merit, that he starts some principles here, which were afterwards adopted and expanded by Drs. Reid, Oswald, and Beattie, under the denomination of common sense. To prove how much these gentlemen have been indebted to him, appears to be the sole object of this translation, and especially of the preface, which, says one of the literary Journals, “though it is not destitute of shrewdness, yet is so grossly illiberal, that we remember not to have read any thing so offensive to decency and good manners, even in the rancorous productions of some of the late controvertists in metaphysics. The writer hath exceeded Dr. Priestley in the abuse of the Scotch doctors; but with a larger quantity of that author’s virulence, hath unluckily too small a portion of his ingenuity and good sense, to recompense for that shameful affront to candour and civility which is too flagrant in every page, to escape the notice or indignation of any unprejudiced reader.

es, a famous anabaptist preacher; Dr. Lewis Du Moulin, an independent; and by M. De Marets, a French writer, who tells us, “that the author, though a professed priest of

Whilst he remained minister of this parish, the providence of God wonderfully interposed for the preservation of his life; for his lodgings being near a powder-mill, Mr. Morgan, a gentleman of the parish, represented to him. the danger of his situation, and at the same time invited him to his own house. Mr. Bull, at first, modestly declined the offer, but after some importunity accepted it; and, not many days after his removal to Mr. Morgan’s, the mill was blown up, and his apartment with it. In this part of his life he took a journey once a year to Oxford, where he stayed about two months, to enjoy the benefit of the public libraries. In his way to and from Oxford, he always paid a visit to sir William Masters, of Cirencester, by which means he contracted an intimacy with Mr. Alexander pregory, the minister of the place, and after some time married Bridget, one of his daughters, on the 20th of May, 1658. The same year he was presented by the lady Pool, to the rectory of Suddington St. Mary, near Cirencester, in Gloucestershire. The next year, 1659, he was made privy to the design of a general insurrection in favour of king Charles II. and several gentlemen of that neighbourhood who were in the secret, chose his house at Suddington for one of the places of their meeting. Upon the restoration, Mr. Bull frequently preached for his father-in-law, Mr. Gregory, at Cirencester, where there was a large and populous congregation; and his sermons gave such general satisfaction, that, upon a vacancy, the people were very solicitous to have procured for him the presentation; but the largeness of the parish, and the great duty attending it, deterred him Trom consenting to the endeavours they were making for that purpose. In 1662, he was presented by the lord high-chancellor, the earl of Clarendon, to the vicarage of Suddington St. Peter, which lay contiguous to Suddington St. Mary, at the request of his diocesan Dr. Nicholson, bishop of Gloucester, both livings not exceeding 100l. a year. When Mr. Bull came first to the rectory of Suddington, he began to be more open in the use of the liturgy of the church of England, though it was not yet restored by the return of the king; for, being desired to marry a couple, he performed the ceremony, on a Sunday morning, in the face of the whole congregation, according to the form prescribed by the book of common -prayer. He took the same method in governing these parishes, as in that of St. George’s, and with the same success; applying himself with great diligence to the discharge of his pastoral functions, and setting the people an admirable example in the government and œconomy of his own family. During his residence here, he had an opportunity of confirming two ladies of quality in the protestant communion, who were reduced to a wavering state of mind by the arts and subtleties of the Romish missionaries. The only dissenters he had in his parish were quakers; whose extravagances often gave him no small uneasiness. In this part of his life, Mr. Bull prosecuted his studies with great application, and composed most of his works during the twenty-seven years that he was rector of Suddington. Several tracts, indeed, which cost him much pains, are entirely lost, through his own neglect in preserving them; particularly a treatise on the posture used by the ancient Christians in receiving the Eucharist; a letter to Dr. Pearson concerning the genuineness of St. Ignatius’ s epistles; a long one to Mr. Glanvil, formerly minister of Bath, concerning the eternity of future punishments; and another, on the subject of popery, to a person of very great quality. In 1669, he published his Apostolical Harmony, with a view to settle the peace of the church, upon a point of the utmost importance to all its members; and he dedicated it to Dn William Nicholson, bishop of Gloucester. This performance was greatly disliked, at first, by many of the clergy, and others, on account of the author’s departing therein from the private opinions of some doctors of the church, and his manner of reconciling the two apostles St. Paul and St. James, as to the doctrine of justification. It was particularly opposed by Dr. Morley, bishop of WinChester; Dr. Barlow, Margaret-professor of divinity at Oxford; Mr. Charles Gataker, a presbyterian divine; Mr. Joseph Truman, a non-conformist minister; Dr. Tully, principal of St. Edmund’s-hall; Mr. John Tombes, a famous anabaptist preacher; Dr. Lewis Du Moulin, an independent; and by M. De Marets, a French writer, who tells us, “that the author, though a professed priest of the church of England, was more addicted to the papists, remonstrants, and Socinians, than to the orthodox party.” Towards the end of 1675, Mr. Bull published his “Examen Censuræ,” &c. in answer to Mr. Gataker, and his “Apologia pro Harmonia,” &c. in reply to Dr. Tully. Mr. Bull’s notion on this subject was “That good works, which proceed from faith, and are conjoined with faith, are a necessary condition required from us by God, to the end that by the new and evangelical covenant, obtained by and sealed in the blood of Christ the Mediator of it, we may be justified according to his free and unmerited grace.” In this doctrine, and throughout the whole book, Mr. Bull absolutely excludes all pretensions to merit on the part of men; but the work nevertheless excited the jealousy of many able divines both in the church and among the dissenters, as appears from the above list. About three years after, he was promoted by the earl of Nottingham, then lord chancellor, to a prebend in the church of Gloucester, in which he was installed the 9th of October, 1678. In 1680, he finished his “Defence of the Nicene Faith,” of which he had given a hint five years before in his Apology. This performance, which is levelled against the Arians and Socinians on one hand, and the Tritheists and Sabellians on the other, was received with universal applause, and its fame spread into foreign countries, where it was highly esteemed by the best judges of antiquity, though of different persuasions. Five years after its publication, the author was presented, by Philip Sheppard, esq. to the rectory of Avening in Gloucestershire, a very large parish, and worth two hundred pounds per annum. The people of this parish, being many of them very dissolute and immoral, and many more disaffected to the church of England, gave him for some time great trouble and uneasiness; but, by his prudent conduct and diligent discharge of his duty, he at last got the better of their prejudices, and converted their dislike iuto the most cordial love and affection towards him. He had not been long at Avening, before he was promoted, by archbishop Sancroft, to the archdeaconry of Landaff, in which he was installed the 20th of June, 1686. He was invited soon after to Oxford, where the degree of doctor in divinity was conferred upon him by that university, without the payment of the usual fees, in consideration of the great and eminent services he had done the church. During the reign of James II. the doctor preached very warmly against popery, with which the nation was then threatened. Some time after the revolution, he was put into the commission of the peace, and continued in it, with some little interruption, till he was made a bishop. In 1694, whilst he continued rector of Avening, he published his “Judicium Ecclesia? Catholicse, &c.” in defence of the “Anathema,” as his former book had been of the Faith, decreed by the first council of Nice. The last treatise which Dr. Bull wrote, was his “Primitive Apostolical Tradition,” &c. against Daniel Zwicker, a Prussian. All Dr. Bull’s Latin works, which he had published by himself at different times, were collected together, and printed in 1703, in one volume in folio, under the care and inspection of Dr. John Ernest Grabe, the author’s age and infirmities disabling him from undertaking this edition. The ingenious editor illustrated the work with many learned annotations, and ushered it into the world with an excellent preface. Dr, Bull was in the seventy-first year of his age, when he was acquainted with her majesty’s gracious intention of conferring on him the bishopric of St. David’s; which promotion he at first declined, on account of his ill state of health and advanced years; but, by the importunity of his friends, and strong solicitations from the governors o*f the church, he was at last prevailed upon to accept it, and was accordingly consecrated in Lambeth-chapel, the 29th of April, 1705. Two years after, he lost his eldest son, Mr. George Bull, who died of the small-pox the 11th of May, 1707, in, the thirty-seventh year of his age. Our prelate took his seat in the house of lords in that memorable session, when the bill passed for the union of the two kingdoms, and spoke in a debate which happened upon that occasion, in favour of the church of England. About July after his consecration, he went into his diocese, and was received with all imaginable demonstrations of respect by the gentry and clergy. The episcopal palace at Aberguilly being much out of repair, he chose the town of Brecknock for the place of his residence; but was obliged, about half a year before his death, to remove from thence to Abermarless, for the benefit of a freer air. He resided constantly in his diocese, and carefully discharged all the episcopal functions. Though bishop Bull was a great admirer of our ecclesiastical constitution, yet he would often lament the distressed state of the church of England, chiefly owing to the decay of ancient discipline, and the great number of lay-impropriations, which he considered as a species of sacrilege, and insinuated that he had known in* stances of its being punished by the secret curse which hangs over sacrilegious persons. Some time before his last sickness, he entertained thoughts of addressing a circular letter to all his clergy; and, after his death, there was found among his papers one drawn up to that purpose. He had greatly impaired his health, by too intense and unseasonable an application to his studies, and, on the 27th of September, 1709, was taken with a violent fit of coughing, which brought on a spitting of blood. About the beginning of February following, he was seized with a distemper, supposed to be an ulcer, or what they call the inward piles; of which he died the 17th of the same month, and was buried, about a week after his death, at Brecknock/ leaving behind him but two children out of eleven.

As a writer he has conferred some obligations on the profession. His “Introduction

As a writer he has conferred some obligations on the profession. His “Introduction to the law relative to Trials at Nisi Prius,1772, 4to, has passed through six editions, with occasional corrections and additions, the last of which was printed in 1793, and is considered as a standard work.

, a learned French writer, member of the academies of Besanc, on, Lyons, and Dijon, and

, a learned French writer, member of the academies of Besanc, on, Lyons, and Dijon, and a corresponding member of the academy of inscriptions, was born in 1699, and was professor of divinity in the university of Besangon from the year 1728; and afterwards dean. He had a surprising memory, and although devoted to controversial -studies, was of a mild and affable disposition. His works are of two kinds; some turning on religious matters, and others on literary inquiry. They are all accurate and solid; but we are not to look in them for elegance of style. The principal of them are: 1 “History of the establishment of Christianity, taken from Jewish and Pagan authors alone,1764, 4to. 2. “The existence of God demonstrated by nature,” 2 vols. 8vo. 3. “Answer to some objections of unbelievers to the Bible,” 3 vols. 12mo. 4. “De apostolica ecclesise Gallicanae origiue,1752, 12mo. 5. “Memoirs on the Celtic tongue,1754—59, 3 vols. fol. 6. “Researches into the history of Cards,1757, 8 vo. 7. “A dissertation on the history of France,1757, 8vo.

dness, but not without frequent checks of conscience. One day being at play with his companions (the writer of his life tells us), a voice suddenly darted from heaven into

, author of the justly-admired allegory of the “Pilgrim’s Progress,” was born at Elstow, near Bedford, 1628. His parents, though very mean, took care to give him that learning which was suitable to their condition, bringing him up to read and write, both which he quickly forgot, abandoning himself to all manner of wickedness, but not without frequent checks of conscience. One day being at play with his companions (the writer of his life tells us), a voice suddenly darted from heaven into his soul, saying, “Wilt thou leave thy sins and go to heaven, or have thy sins and go to hell!” This put him into such a consternation, that he immediately left his sport; and looking up to heaven, thought he saw the Lord Jesus looking down upon him, as one highly displeased with him, and threatening him with some grievous punishment for his ungodly practices. At another time, whilst he was uttering many oaths, he was severely reproved by a woman, who was herself a notorious sinner: she told him he was the ugliest fellow for swearing that ever she heard in all her life, and that he was able to spoil all the youth of the town, if they came but into his company. This reproof coming from a woman, whom he knew to be very wicked, filled him with secret shame; and made him, from that time, very much refrain from it. His father brought him up to his own business, which was that of a tinker. Being a soldier in the parliament army, at the siege of Leicester, in 1645, he was drawn out to stand sentinel; but another soldier of his company desired to take his place, to which he agreed, and thus escaped being shot by a musket-ball, which took off his comrade. About 1655 he was admitted a member of a baptist congregation at Bedford, and soon after was chosen their preacher. In 1660, being convicted at the sessions of holding unlawful assemblies and conventicles, he was sentenced to perpetual banishment, and in the mean time committed to gaol, from which he was discharged, after a confinement of twelve years and an half, by the compassionate interposition of Dr. Barlow, bishop of Lincoln. During his imprisonment, his own hand ministered to his necessities, making many an hundred gross of long-tagged thread laces, a trade which he had learned since his confinement. At this time he also wrote many of his tracts, particularly the “Pilgrim’s Progress.” Afterwards, being at liberty, he travelled into several parts of England, to visit and confirm the brethren, which procured him the epithet of Bishop Bunyan. When the declaration of James II. for liberty of conscience was published, he, by the contributions of his followers, built a meeting-house in Bedford, and preached constantly to a numerous audience. He died in London of a fever, 1688, aged sixty. He had by his wife four children, one of whom, named Mary, was blind. This daughter, he said, lay nearer his heart whilst he was in prison, than all the rest; and that the thought of her enduring hardship would be sometimes almost ready to break his heart, but that God greatly supported him by these two texts of scripture, “Leave the fatherless children, I will preserve them alive; and let the widows trust in. me. The Lord said, Verily it shall be well with thy remnant; verily I will cause the enemy to entreat thee well in the time of evil.” Jer. xlix. 11. and chap. xv. 11. His works are collected in two volumes in folio, printed at London in 1736-7, and reprinted in 1760, and often since in various forms. The continuator of his life, in the second of those volumes, tells us, that “he appeared in countenance to be of a stern and rough temper, but in his conversation mild and affable; not given to loquacity, or much discourse in company, unless some urgent occasion required it; observing never to boast of himself or his parts, but rather seem low in his own eyes, and submit himself to the judgment o others; abhorring lying and swearing; being just in all that lay in his power to his word; not seeking to revenge injuries, loving to reconcile differences, and making friendship with all. He had a sharp quick eye; accompanied with an excellent discerning of persons, being of good judgment and quick wit. As for his person, he was tall of stature, strong boned, though not corpulent: somewhat of a ruddy face, with sparkling eyes, wearing, his hair oil his upper lip, after the old British fashion; his hair reddish, but in his latter days time had sprinkled it with gray; his nose well-set, but not declining or bending, and his mouth moderately large; his forehead something high, and his habit always plain and modest.

, a moral and political writer, was born at Madderty, in Perthshire, Scotland, in the latter

, a moral and political writer, was born at Madderty, in Perthshire, Scotland, in the latter end of the year 1714. His father was minister of that parish, and his mother was aunt to the celebrated historian Dr. Robertson. His grammatical education he received at the school of the place which gave him birth, where he discovered such a quickness and facility in imbibing literary instruction, that his master used to say, that his scholar would soon acquire all the knowledge that it was in his power to communicate. In due time young Burgh was removed to the University of St. Andrew’s, with a view of becoming a clergyman in the church of Scotland; but he did not continue long at the college, on account of a bad state of health, which induced him to lay aside the thoughts of the clerical profession, and enter into trade, in the linen, way; which he was enabled to do with the greater prospect of advantage, as he had lately obtained a handsome fortune by the death of his eldest brother. In business, however, he was not at all successful; for, by giving injudicious credit, he was soon deprived of his property. Not long after this misfortune, he came to London, where his first employment was to correct the press for the celebrated Mr. Bowyer; and at his leisure hours he made indexes. After being engaged about a year in this way, during which, he became acquainted with some friends who were highly serviceable to him in his future plans of life, he removed to Great Marlow, in Buckinghamshire, as an assistant at the free grammar-school of that town; and whilst he continued in this situation, the school is said to have been considerably increased. During his residence at Marlow, he met with only one gentleman who was suited to his own turn of mind. With that gentleman, who was a man of piety, and of extensive reading in divinity, though no clas* sicai scholar, he contracted a particular friendship. At Marlow it was that Mr. Burgh first commenced author, by writing a pamphlet, entitled Britain’s Remembrancer," and which was published, if we mistake not, a little after the beginning of the rebellion, in 1745. This tract contained an enumeration of the national blessings and deliverances which Great Britain had received; with pathetic exhortations to a right improvement of them, by a suitable course of piety and virtue. It appeared without Mr. Burgh’s name, as was the case with his works in general, and was so much read and applauded by persons of a religious temper, that it went through five editions in little more than two years, was reprinted in Scotland, Ireland, and America, and again in London 1766. Mr. Barker, at that time one of the most eminent ministers among the protestant dissenters in London, spoke highly of it, in a sermon preaghed at Salters’-hall and publicly thanked the unknown author, for so seasonable and useful a performance.

the enjoyment of a long and pleasant old age. In his youth he passed some time in Holland, and was a writer in the Journal de l'Europe. On his return he was much caressed

, was born at Rheims in 1691, and was member of the academy of belles-lettres at Paris, He died in that city Oct. 8, 1785, at the age of ninetyfour, at that time the father of French literature, and perhaps the oldest author in Europe. His great tranquillity of mind, and the gentleness of his disposition, procured him the enjoyment of a long and pleasant old age. In his youth he passed some time in Holland, and was a writer in the Journal de l'Europe. On his return he was much caressed by the learned, and in his latter days had a pension of 2000 livres granted, without any application, by the last king of France. At ninety-two his health was robust, his memory extensive, and he composed and wrote with facility. His works are, 1. “A treatise on the Authority of the Popes,1720, 4 vols. 12mo. 2.“History of the Pagan Philosophy,1724, 12mo, a learned performance, published in 1754 under the title of “The*ologie pa'ienne.” 3. “General History of Sicily,1745, 2 vols. 4to. 4. “Porphyry on Abstinence from Meats,1747, 12mo. 5. “History of the Revolutions of Constantinople,” 3 vols. 12mo, 1750. 6. “Life of Grotius,1754, 2 vols. 12mo. 7. “Life of Erasmus,1757, 2 vols. 12mo. 8. Life of Bossuet,“1761, 12mo. 9.” Life of cardinal du Perron," 1768, 12mo. The historical works of M. de Burigny are esteemed for the accuracy and abundance of the facts they contain. But he is a cold narrator; has but little force and expression in his portraits, and is sometimes rather prolix in his details. His Life of Grotius is a very valuable work, and was published in English in 1754, 8vo. For that of Erasmus, Dr. Jortin may be consulted.

entitled “A Vindication of Natural Society,” 1756, 8vo. To assume the style and character of such a writer, who had passed through all the high gradations of official

It is certain, however, that about 1753 he came to London, and entered himself, as already noticed, as a student of the Middle Temple, where he is said to have studied, as in every other situation, with unremitting diligence. Many of his habits and conversations were long remembered at the Grecian coffee-house (then the great rendezvous of the students of the Middle Temple), and they were such as were highly creditable to his morals and his talents. With the former, indeed, we should not know jhow to reconcile a connection imputed to him at this time with Mrs. Woffington, the actress, if we gave credit to the report; but it is not very likely, that one in Mr. Burke’s narrow circumstances would have been admitted to more than a slight acquaintance with a lady of that description. Though by the death of his elder brother, he was to have succeeded to a very comfortable patrimony, yet as his. father was living, and had other children, it could not be supposed that his allowance was very ample. This urged him to draw upon his genius for the deficiency of fortune, and we are told that he became a frequent contributor to the periodical publications. His first publication is said to have been a poem, which did not succeed. There is no certain information, however, concerning these early productions, unless that he found it necessary to apply with so much assiduity as to injure his health. A dangerous illness ensued, and he resorted for medical advice to Dr. Nugent, a physician whose skill in his profession was equalled only by the benevolence of his heart. He was, if we are not mistaken, a countryman of Burke’s, a Roman catholic, and at one time an author by profession. This benevolent friend, considering that the noise and various disturbances incidental to chambers, must retard the recovery of his patient, furnished him with apartments in his own house, where the attention of every member of the family contributed more than medicine to the recovery of his health. It was during this period that the amiable manners of miss Nugent, the doctor’s daughter, made a deep impression on the heart of Burke; and as she could not be insensible to such merit as his, they felt for each, other a mutual attachment, and were married soon after his recovery. With this lady he appears to have enjoyed uninterrupted felicity. He often declared to his intimate friends, “That, in all the anxious moments of his public life, every care vanished when he entered his own house.” Mr. Burke' s first known publication, although not immediately known, was his very happy imitation of Bolingbroke, entitled “A Vindication of Natural Society,1756, 8vo. To assume the style and character of such a writer, who had passed through all the high gradations of official knowledge for near half a century, a fine scholar, a most ready and eloquent speaker, and one of the best writers of his time, was, perhaps, one of the boldest attempts ever undertaken, especially by a young man, a stranger to the manners, habits, and connections of the literati of this country, who could have no near view of the great character he imitated, and whose time of life would not permit of those long and gradual experiments by which excellence of any kind is to be obtained. Burke, however, was not without success in his great object, which was to expose the dangerous tendency of lord Bolingbroke’s philosophy. When this publication first appeared, we are told that almost every body received it as the posthumous work of lord Bolingbroke, and it was praised up to the standard of his best writings. “The critics knew the turn of his periods; his style; his phrases; and above all, the matchless dexterity of his nietaphysical pen: and amongst these, nobody distinguished himself more than the lately departed veteran of the stage, Charles Macklin; who, with the pamphlet in his hand, used frequently to exclaim at the Grecian coffee-house (where he gave a kind of literary law to the young Templars at that time),” Oh! sir, this must be Harry Bolingbroke: I know him by his cloven foot." But much of this account is mere assumption. Macklin, and such readers as Macklin, might be deceived; but no man was deceived whose opinion deserved attention. The public critics certainly immediately discovered the imitation, and one at least of them was not very well pleased with it. We are told, indeed, that lord Chesterfield and bishop Warburton were at first deceived; but this proves only the exactness of the imitation; a more attentive perusal discovered the writer’s real intention.

Mr. Burke’s fame as a writer was now established; and what added another wreath to this character

Mr. Burke’s fame as a writer was now established; and what added another wreath to this character were some pamphlets written before the peace of 1763. These introduced him to the acquaintance of the late Mr. Fitzherbert, father of the present lord St. Helen’s; a gentleman who esteemed and protected men of letters; and who possessed, with a considerable share of elegant knowledge, talents for conversation which were very rarely equalled. Through the medium of Mr. Fitzherbert, and owing to some political essays in the Public Advertiser, he became acquainted with the late marquis of Rockingham, and the late lord Verney; events which opened the first great dawn of his political life: and soon after his acquaintance with lord Rockingham, a circumstance took place which gave this nobleman an opportunity to draw forth Mr. Burke' s talents. The administration formed in 1763, under the honourable George Grenville, becoming unpopular from various causes, his majesty, through the recommendation of his uncle, the duke of Cumberland, appointed a new ministry, of which the duke of Grafton and general Conway were secretaries of state, and the marquis of Rockingham first lord of the treasury. In this arrangement, which took place in 1765, Mr. Burke was appointed private secretary to the marquis of Rockingham, and soon after, through the interest of lord Verney, was returned one of the representatives in parliament for the borough of Wendover in Buckinghamshire. On this he prepared himself for becoming a public speaker, by studying, still more closely than he had yet done, history, poetry, and philosophy; and by storing his mind with facts, images, reasonings, and sentiments. He paid great attention likewise to parliamentary usage; and was at much pains to become acquainted with old records, patents, and precedents, so as to render himself complete master of the business of office. That he might communicate without embarrassment the knowledge which he had thus acquired, he frequented, with many other men of eminence, the Robin Hood society; and, thus prepared, he delivered in the ensuing session his maiden speech, which excited the admiration of the house, and drew very high praise from Mr. Pitt, afterwards earl of Chatham. The proceedings of the administration with which Mr. Burke was connected, belong to history; and it may be sufficient here to notice, that the principal object which engaged their attention was the stamp-act, which had excited great discontents in America. Mr. Grenville and his party, under whose auspices this act was passed, were for inforcing it by coercive measures; and Mr. Pitt and his followers denied that the parliament of Great Britain had a right to tax the Americans. By Mr. Burke’s advice, as it has been said, the marquis of Rockingham adopted a middle course, repealing the act to gratify the Americans, and passing a law declaratory of the right of Great Britain to legislate for America in taxation, as in every other case. But by whatever advice such a measure was carried, it argued little wisdom, the repeal and the declaratory act being inconsistent with each other. The ministry were therefore considered as unfit to guide the helm of a great empire, and were obliged to give way to a new arrangement, formed under the auspices of Mr. Pitt, then earl of Chatham. This change created a considerable deal of political commotion; and the public papers and pamphlets of that day turned their satire against the newly-created earl of Chatham; they charged him with weakening and dividing an interest which the public wished to be supported; and lending his great name and authority to persons who were supposed to be of a party which had been long held to be obnoxious to the whig interest of the country. Though these charges were afterwards fully refuted by the subsequent conduct of the noble earl, the late ministry were entitled to their share of praise, not only for being very active in promoting the general interests of the state by several popular acts and resolutions, but by their uncommon disinterestedness; as they shewed, upon quitting their places, that they retired without a place, pension, or reversion, secured to themselves or their friends. This was a stroke which the private fortune of Mr. Burke could ill bear; but he had the honour of being a member of a virtuous administration; he had the opportunity of opening his great political talents to the public; and, above all, of shewing to a number of illustrious friends (and in particular the marquis of Rockingham) his many private virtues and amiable qualities, joined to a reach of mind scarcely equalled by any of his contemporaries.

d in the Public Advertiser, and had been preceded by many other anti-ministerial letters by the same writer, under other signatures. They were at that time, and have often

The parliament being dissolved in 1768, Mr. Burke was re-elected for Wendover. The opposition to the duke of Graf ton’s administration consisted of two parties, that of the marquis of Rockingham, and that of Mr. Grenville, but these two parties had nothing in common except their dislike of the ministry. This appeared very strikingly in a pamphlet written by Mr. Grenville, entitled “The present state of the Nation,” which was answered by Burke, in “Observations on the present state of the Nation.” One of the first subjects which occupied the attention of the new parliament was the expulsion of Wilkes for various libels, and the question, whether, after being so expelled, he was eligible to sit in the same parliament. Burke, on this occasion, endeavoured to prove that nothing but an act of the legislature can disqualify any person from sitting in parliament who is legally chosen, by a majority of electors, to fill a vacant seat. It is well known that his friend Dr. Johnson maintained a contrary doctrine in his “False Alarm;” but in this as well as other occasions during the American war, difference of opinion did not prevent a cordial intercourse between two men whose conversation during their whole lives was the admiration and ornament of every literary society. The question itself can hardly be said to have ever received a complete decision. All that followed was the expulsion of Wilkes during the present parliament, and the rescinding of that decision in a future parliament, without argument or inquiry, in order to gratify those constituents who soon after rejected Wilkes with unanimous contempt. The proceedings on this question gave rise to the celebrated letters signed Junius, which appeared in the Public Advertiser, and had been preceded by many other anti-ministerial letters by the same writer, under other signatures. They were at that time, and have often since been attributed to Mr. Burke, and we confess we once, and indeed for many years, were strongly of this opinion, but after the recent publication of these celebrated Letters, with Junius’s private correspondence with Mr. Henry Woodfall, the printer of the Public Advertiser, and with Mr. Wilkes r it is as impossible to attribute them to Burke, as it is at present to discover any other gentleman to whom they may, from any reasonable grounds, be ascribed. It may be added too, that in a confidential conversation with Dr. Johnson, he spontaneously denied them, which, as the doctor very prpperly remarks, is more decisive proof than if he had denied them on being asked the question.

As a writer he is still higher; and judging of him from his earliest to

As a writer he is still higher; and judging of him from his earliest to his latest productions, he must be considered as one of those prodigies which are sometimes given to the world to be admired, but cannot be imitated; he possessed all kinds of styles, and gave them to the head and heart in a most exquisite manner: pathos, taste, argument, experience, sublimity, were all the ready colours of his palette, ani from his pencil they derived their brightest dyes. He was one of the few whose writings broke the fascinating links of party, and compelled all to admire the brilliancy of his pen. He was a firm professor of the Christian religion, and exercised its principles in its duties; wisely considering, “That whatever disunites man from God, disunites man from man.' 7 He looked within himself for the regulation of his conduct, which was exemplary in all the relations of life; he was warm in his affections, simple in his manners, plain in his table, arrangements, &c. &c. and so little affected with the follies and dissipations of what is called” the higher classes," that he was totally ignorant of them; so that this great man, with all his talents, would be mere lumber in a modern drawing-room; not but that he excelled in all the refinements as well as strength of conversation, and could at times badinage with great skill and natural ease; but what are these to a people where cards and dice constitute their business; and fashionable phrases, and fashionable vices, their conversation?

er of this illustrious body, he continued to serve his fellow-citizens till his death, in 1750. As a writer, he was distinguished less by his originality than by his clear

, an eminent civilian, descended from one of those noble families of Lucca, which, upon their embracing the Protestant religion, were obliged, about two centuries and a half since, to take refuge in Geneva, was born at Geneva in 1694, where he became honorary professor of jurisprudence in 1720. After travelling into France, Holland, and England, he commenced the exercise of his -functions, and rendered his school famous and flourishing. One of his pupils was prince Frederic of Hesse-Cassel, who, in 1734, took him to his residence, and detained him there for some time. Upon his return to Geneva, he surrendered his professorship; and in 1740 entered into the grand council, and, as a member of this illustrious body, he continued to serve his fellow-citizens till his death, in 1750. As a writer, he was distinguished less by his originality than by his clear and accurate method of detailing and illustrating the principles of others; among whom, are Grotius, PufTendorf, and Barbeyrac. His works are: “Principles of Natural Law, 77 Geneva, 1747, 4to, often reprinted, translated into various languages, and long used as a text-book in the university of Cambridge; and” Political Law,“Geneva, 1751, 4to, a posthumous work, compiled from the notes of his pupils, which was translated into English by Dr. Nugent, 1752, 8vo. His” Principles of Natural Law“were re-published in the original by Professor de Felice, Yverdun, 1766, 2 vols. with additions and improvements. Another posthumous work of our author, was his” Elemens du Droit Naturel," being his text-book on the Law of Nature, and admirable for perspicuity and happy arrangement. Burlamaqui was much esteemed in private life, and respected as a lover of the fine arts, and a patron of artists. He had a valuable collection of pictures and prints; and a medal of him was executed by Dassier, in a style of superior excellency.

, an eminent law-writer, was born at Winton in Westmoreland some time about the beginning

, an eminent law-writer, was born at Winton in Westmoreland some time about the beginning of the last century; he was educated at Queen’s college, Oxford, which university conferred on him March 22. 1762, the honorary degree of LL. D. He died at Orton, of which place he had been vicar forty-nine years, Novembet 20, 1785. He was one of his majesty’s justices of the peace for the counties of Westmorland and Cumberland, and was made by bishop Lyttelton chancellor of the diocese of Carlisle. In 1755, he first published his “Justice of Peace and Parish Officer, upon a plan entirely new, and comprehending all the law to the present time, 57 2 vols. 8vo, reprinted in the same form in 1756, and in the same year in folio, in 1757, 3 vols. 8vo, &c. The fourteenth edition was enlarged to 4 vols. 8vo, in which form it has passed, with gradual amendments and improvements, through various editions; the last of which is the twentyfirst. In 1760 he published his” Ecclesiastical Law,“2 vols. 4to, which afterwards was reprinted in 4 vols. 8vo. Both works were strongly recommended by Judge Blackstone, and both are extraordinary examples of unrivalled popularity and permanence. In 1764 he wrote” A History of the Poor Laws,“8vo, and in 1776” Observations on the Bill proposed in parliament for erecting County Workhouses.“He likewise published” The History and Antiquity of the two counties of Westmoreland and Cumberland, " in conjunction with Joseph Nicolson, esq. nephew to the bishop of Carlisle, 1771, 2 vols. 4to, in which work he has given the above brief notices of himself.

ish plot was in agitation. This book procured our author an honour never before or since paid to any writer: he had the thanks of both houses of parliament, with a desire

About six months after he returned to Scotland, where he declined accepting the living of Saltoun, offered him by sir Robert Fletcher of that place, resolving to travel for some time on the continent, in 1664, he went over into Holland; where, after he had seen what was remarkable in the Seven Provinces, he resided for some time at Amsterdam, and afterwards at Paris. At Amsterdam, by the help of a learned Rabbi, he increased his knowledge in the Hebrew language, and likewise x became acquainted with the leading men of the different persuasions tolerated in that country: among each of whom, he used frequently to declare, he had met with men of such real piety and virtue, that he contracted a strong principle of universal charity. At Paris he conversed with the two famous ministers of Charenton, Dailie and Morus. His stay in France was the longer, on account of the great kindness with which he was treated by the lord Holies, then ambassador at the French court. Towards the end of the year he returned to Scotland, passing through Londo/rr, where he was introduced, by the president sir Robert Murray, to be a member of the royal society. In 1665, he was ordained a priest by the bishop of Edinburgh, and presented by sir Robert Fletcher to the living of Saitoun, which had been kept vacant during his absence. He soon gained the affections of his whole parish, not excepting the presbyterians, though he was the only clergyman in Scotland that made use of the prayers in the liturgy of the church of England. During the five years he remained at Saitoun, he preached twice every Sunday, and once on one of the week-days; he catechized three times a-week, so as to examine every parishioner, old or young, three times in the compass of a year: he went round the parish from house to house, instructing, reproving, or comforting them, as occasion required: the sick he visited twice a day: he administered the sacrament four times a year, and personally instructed all such as gave notice of their intention to receive it. All that remained above his own necessary subsistence (in which he was very frugal), he gave away in charity. A particular instance of his generosity is thus related: one of his parishioners had been in execution for debt, and applied to our author for some small relief; who inquired of him, how much would again set him up in his trade: the man named the sum, and he as readily called to his servant to pay it him: “Sir,” said he, “it is all we have in the house.” “Well,” said Mr. Burnet, “pay it this poor man: you do not know the pleasure there is in making a man glad.” This may be a proper place to mention our author’s practice of preaching extempore, in which he attained an ease chiefly by allotting many hours of the day to meditation upon all sorts of subjects, and by accustoming himself, at those times, to speak his thoughts aloud, studying always to render his expressions correct. His biographer gives us here two remarkable instances of his preaching without book. In 1691, when the sees, vacant by the deprivation of the nonjuring bishops, were filled up, bishop Williams was appointed to preach one of the consecration -sermons at Bow-church; but, being detained by some accident, the archbishop of Canterbury desired our author, then bishop of Sarum, to supply his place; which he readily did, to the general satisfaction of all present. In 1705, he was appointed to preach the thanksgiving-sermon before the queen at St. Paul’s; and as it was the only discourse he had ever written before-hand, it was the only time that he ever made a pause in preaching, which on that occasion lasted above a minute. The same year, he drew up a memorial of the abuses of the Scotch bishops, which exposed him to the resentments of that order: upon which, resolving to confine himself to study, and the duties of his function, he practised such a retired and abstemious course, as greatly impaired his health. About 1668, the government of Scotland being in the hands of moderate men, of whom the principal was sir Robert Murray, he was frequently consulted by them; and it was through his advice that some of the more moderate presbyterians were put into the vacant churches; a step which he himself has since condemned as indiscreet. In 1669, he was made professor of divinity at Glasgow; in which station he executed the following plan of study. On Mondays, he made each of the students, in their turn, explain a head of divinity in Latin, and propound such theses from it as he was to defend against the rest of the scholars; and this exercise concluded with our professor’s decision of the point in a Latin oration. On Tuesdays, he gave them a prelection in the same language, in which he proposed, in the course of eight years, to have gone through a complete system of divinity. On Wednesdays, he read them a lecture, for above an hour, by way of a critical commentary on St. Matthew’s Gospel;' which he finished before he quitted the chair. On Thursdays, the exercise was alternate; one Thursday, he expounded a Hebrew Psalm, comparing it with the Septuagint, the Vulgar, and the English version; and the next Thursday, he explained some portion of the ritual and constitution of the primitive church, making the apostolical canons his text, and reducing every article of practice under the head of one or other of those canons. On Fridays, he made each of his scholars, in course, preach a short sermon upon some text he assigned; and, when it was ended, he observed upon any thing that was defective or amiss in the handling of the subject. This was the labour of the mornings: in the evenings, after prayer, he every day read some parcel of scripture, on which he made a short discourse; and, when that was over, he examined into the progress of their several studies. Ail this he performed during the whole time the schools were open; and, in order to acquit himself with credit, he was obliged to study hard from four till ten in the morning; the rest of the day being of necessity allotted, either to the care of his pupils, or to hearing the complaints of the clergy, who, rinding he had an interest with men of power, were not sparing in their applications to him. In this situation he continued four years and a half, exposed, through his principles of moderation, to the censure both of the episcopal and presbyterian parties. The same year he published his “Modest and free Conference between a Conformist and a Nonconformist.” About this time he was entrusted, by the duchess of Hamilton, with the perusal and arrangement of all the papers relating to her father’s and uncle’s ministry; which induced him to compile “Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton,” and occasioned his being invited to London, to receive farther information, concerning the transactions of those times, by the earl of Lauderdale; between whom and the duke of Hamilton he brought about a reconciliation. During his stay in London, he was offered a Scotch bishopric, which he refused. Soon after his return to Glasgow, he married the lady Margaret Kennedy, daughter of the earl of Cassilis. In 1672, he published his “Vindication of the Authority, Constitution, and Laws, of the Church and State of Scotland,” against the principles of Buchanan and others; which was thought, at that juncture, such a public service, that he was again courted to accept of a bishopric, with a promise of the next vacant archbishopric, but he persisted in his refusal of that dignity. In 1673, he took another journey to London; where, at the express nomination of the king, after hearing him preach, he was sworn one of his majesty’s chaplains in ordinary. He became likewise in high favour with his majesty and the duke of York . At his return to Edinburgh, finding the animosities between the dukes of Hamilton and Lauderdale revived, he retired to his station at Glasgow; but was obliged the next year to return to court, to justify himself against the accusations of the duke of Lauderdale, who had represented him as the cause and instrument of all the opposition the measures of the court had met with in the Scotch parliament. Thus he lost the favour of the court; and, to avoid putting himself into the hands of his enemies, he resigned the professor’s chair at Glasgow, and resolved to settle in London, being now about thirty years of age. Soon after, he was offered the living of St. Giles’s Cripplegate, which he declined accepting, because he heard that it was intended for Dr. Fowler, afterwards bishop of Gloucester. In 1675, our author, at the recommendation of lord Holies, and notwithstanding the interposition of the court against him, was appointed preacher at the Rolls chapel by sir Harbottle Grimstone, master of the Rolls. The same year he was examined before the house of commons in relation to the duke of Lauderdale, whose conduct the parliament was then inquiring into. He was soon after chosen lecturer of St. Clement’s, and became a very popular preacher. In 1676, he published his “Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton;” and the same year, “An account of a Conference between himself, Dr. Stillingfleet, and Coleman.” About this time, the apprehensions of popery increasing daily, he undertook to write the “History of the Reformation of the Church of England.” The rise and progress of this his greatest and 'most useful work, is an object of too great curiosity to require any apology on account of its length. His own account of it is as follows: “Some time after I had printed the ‘ Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton,’ which were favourably received, the reading of these got me the acquaintance and friendship of sir William Jones, then attorney-general. My way of writing history pleased him; and so he pressed me to undertake the History of England. But Sanders’s book, that was then translated into French, and cried up much in France, made all my friends press me to answer it, by writing the History of the Reformation. So now all my thoughts were turned that way. I laid out for manuscripts, and searched into all offices. I got for some days into the Cotton Library. But duke Lauderdale hearing of my design, and apprehending it might succeed in my hands, got Dolben, bishop of Rochester, to divert sir John Cotton from suffering me to search into his library. He told him, I was a great enemy to the prerogative, to which Cotton was devoted, even to slavery. So he said, I would certainly make an ill use of all 1 had found. This wrought so much on him, that I was no more admitted, till my first volume was published. And then, when he saw how I had composed it, he gave me free access to it.” The first volume of this work lay near a year after it was finished, for the perusal and correction of friends; so that it was not published tiii the year 1679, when the affair of the popish plot was in agitation. This book procured our author an honour never before or since paid to any writer: he had the thanks of both houses of parliament, with a desire that he would prosecute the undertaking, and complete that valuable work. Accordingly, in less than two years after, he printed the second volume, which met with the same general approbation as the first: and such was his readiness in composing, that he wrote the historical part in the compass of six weeks, after all his materials were laid in order. The third volume, containing a supplement to the two former, was published in 1714. “The defects of Peter Heylyn’s” History of the Reformation,“as bishop Kicolson observes,” are abundantly supplied in our author’s more complete history. He gives a punctual account of all the affairs of the reformation, from its beginning in the reign of Henry VIII. to its final establishment under queen Elizabeth, A. D. 1559. And the whole is penned in a masculine style, such as becomes an historian, and is the property of this author in all his writings. The collection of records^ which he gives at the end of each volume, are good vouchers of the truth of what he delivers in the body of the history, and are much more perfect than could reasonably be expected, after the pains taken, in queen Mary’s days, to suppress every thing that carried the marks of the reformation upon it.“Our author’s performance met with a very favourable, reception abroad, and was translated into most of the European languages; and even the keenest of his enemies, Henry Wharton, allows it to have” a reputation firmly and deservedly established.“The most eminent of the French writers who have attacked it, M. Varillas and M. Le Grand, have received satisfactory replies from -the author himself. At home it was attacked by Mr. S. Lowth, who censured the account Dr. Burnet had given of some of archbishop Cranmer’s opinions, asserting that both our historian and Dr. Stillingfleet had imposed upon the world in that particular, and had” unfaithfully joined together“in their endeavours to lessen episcopal ordination. Our author replied to Mr. Lowth, in some” letters. in answer“to his book. The next assailant was Henry Wharton, who, under the name of Anthony Harrner, published” A specimen of some Errors and Defects in the History of the Reformation,“1693, 8vo, a performance of no great candour; to which, however, our historian vouchsafed a short answer, in a” Letter to the Bishop of Lichfield.“A third attack on this History was made by Dr. Hickes in” Discourses on Dr. Burnet and Dr. Tillotson;“in which the whole charge amounts to no more than this, that,” in a matter of no great consequence, there was too little care had in copying or examining a letter writ in a very bad hand,“and that there was some probability that Dr. Burnet” was mistaken in one of his conjectures.“Our author answered this piece, in a” Vindication“of his History. The two first parts were translated into French by M. de Rosemond, and into Latin by Melchior Mittelhorzer. There is likewise a Dutch translation of it. In 1682, our author published” An abridgment of his History of the Reformation," in 8vo, in which he tells us, he had wholly waved every thing that belonged to the records, and the proof of what he relates, or to the confutation of the falsehoods that run through the popish historians; all which is to be found in the History at large. And therefore, in this abridgment, he says, every thing is to be taken upon trust; and those who desire a fuller satisfaction, are referred to the volumes he had before published.

es, in disposing of ecclesiastical Benefices and Church-lands;” which being attacked bv an anonymous writer, Dr. Burnet published, the same year, “An answer to the Animadversions

During the affair of the popish plot, Dr. Burnet was often consulted by king Charles, upon the state of the nation; and, about the same time, refused the vacant bishopric of Chichester, which his majesty offered him, “provided he vvould entirely come into his interest.” But, though his free access to that monarch did not procure him preferment, it gave him an opportunity of sending his majesty a most remarkable letter , in which, with great freedom, he reprehends the vices and errors both of his private life and his government The unprejudiced part he acted during the time the nation was inflamed with the discovery of the popish plot; his candid endeavours to save the lives of Staley and the lord Stafford, both zealous papists; his temperate conduct in regard to the exclusion of the duke of York; and the scheme of a prince regent, proposed by him, in lieu of that exclusion; are sufficiently related in his “History of his own Time.” In 1682, when the administration was wholly changed in favour of the duke of York, he continued steady in his adherence to his friends, and chose to sacrifice all his views at court, particularly a promise of the mastership of the Temple, rather than break off his correspondence with them. This year our author published his “Life of sir Matthew Hale,” and his “History of the Rights of Princes, in disposing of ecclesiastical Benefices and Church-lands;” which being attacked bv an anonymous writer, Dr. Burnet published, the same year, “An answer to the Animadversions on the History of the Rights of Princes.” As he was about this time much resorted to by persons of all ranks and parties, as a pretence to avoid the returning of so many visits, he built a laboratory, and, for above a year, went through a course of chemical experiments. Upon the execution of the lord Russel, with whom he was familiarly acquainted, he was examined before the house of commons, with respect to that lord’s speech upon the scaffold, in the penning of which he was suspected to have had a hand. Not long after, he refused the offer of a living of three hundred pounds a year, in the gift of the earl of Halifax, who would have presented him, on condition of his residing *till in London. In 1683, he went over to Paris, where he was well received by the court, and became acquainted with the most eminent persons, both popish and protestant. This year appeared his “Translation and Examination of a Letter, writ by the last General Assembly of the Clergy of France to the Protestants, inviting them to return to their Communion, &c.;” also his “Translation of Sir Thomas More’s Utopia,” with a “Preface concerning the Nature of Translations.” The year following, the resentment of the court against our author was so great, that he was discharged from his lecture at St, Clement’s, by virtue of the king’s mandate to Dr. Hascard, rector of that parish; and in December the same year, bv an order from the lord-keeper North to sir Harbottle Grimstone, he was forbidden preaching any more at the Rolls chapel. In 1685 came out our author’s “Life of Dr. William Bedell, Bishop of Kilmore in Ireland.” Upon the death of king Charles, and accesion of king James, having obtained leave to go out of the kingdom, he went first to Paris, where he lived in great retirement, to avoid being involved in the conspiracies then forming in favour of the difke of Monmbuth. But, having contracted an acquaintance with brigadier Stouppe, a protestant officer in the French service, he was prevailed upon to take a journey with him into Italy, and met with an agreeable reception at Rome and Geneva. After a tour through the southern parts of France, Italy, Switzerland, and many places of Germany, of which he has given an account, with reflections on their several ojovernments, &c. in his “Travels,” published in 1687, he me to Utrecht, and intended to have settled in some quiet retreat within the Seven Provinces; but, being invited to the Hague by the prince and princess of Orange, he repaired thither, and had a great share in the councils then carrying on, concerning the affairs of England. In 1687, our author published a “Translation of Lactantius, concerning the Death of the Persecutors.” The high favour shewn him at the Hague disgusting the English court, king James wrote two severe letters against him to the princess of Orange, and insisted, by his ambassador, on his being forbidden the court; which, at the king’s importunity, was done; though our author continued to be employed and trusted as before. Soon after, a prosecution for high-treason was commenced against him, both in Scotland and England; but the States refusing, at the demand of the English court, to deliver him up, designs were laid of seizing his person, and even destroying him, if he could be taken. About this time Dr. Burnet married Mrs. Mary Scott, a Dutch lady of large fortune and noble extraction. He had a very important share in the whole conduct of the revolution in 1688; the project of which he gave early notice of to the court of Hanover, intimating, that the success of this enterprise must naturally end in an entail of the British crown upon that illustrious house. He wrote also several pamphlets in support of the prince of Orange’s designs, which were reprinted at London in 1689, in 8vo, under the title of “A Collection of eighteen Papers relating to the affairs of Church and State during the Reign of King James II. &c.” And when his highness undertook the expedition to England, our author accompanied him as his chaplain, notwithstanding the particular circumstances of danger to which he was thereby exposed. At Exeter, after the prince’s landing, he drew up the association for pursuing the ends of his highness’s declaration. During these transactions, Dr. Crew, bishop of Durham, who had rendered himself obnoxious by the part he had acted in the high-commission court, having proposed to the prince of Orange to resign his bishopric in favour of Dr. Burnet, on condition of an allowance of 1000l. per annum out of the revenue, our author refused to accept it on those terms. But king William had not been many days on the throne before Dr. Burnet was advanced to the see of Salisbury, and consecrated March 31, 1689 . Our prelate had scarcely taken his seat in the house of lords, when he distinguished himself by declaring for moderate measures with regard to the clergy who scrupled to take the oaths, and for a toleration of the protestant dissenters; and when the bill for declaring the rights and privileges of the subject, and settling the succession of the crown, was brought into parliament, he was the person appointed by king William to propose naming the duchess (afterwards electress) of Brunswick, next in succession after the princess of Denmark and her issue; and when this succession afterwards took place, he had the honour of being chairman of the committee to whom the hill was referred. This made him considered by the house of Hanover as one firmly attached to their interests, and engaged him in an epistolary correspondence with the princess Sophia, which lasted to her death. This year bishop Buruet addressed a “Pastoral Letter” to the clergy of his diocese, concerning the oaths of allegiance and supremacy to king Wiliiam and queen Mary; in which having grounded their majesties title to the crown upon the right of conquest, some members of both houses took such offence at it, that about three years after, they procured an order for burning the book by the hands of the common executioner. After the session of parliament was over, the bishop went down to his diocese, where, by his pious, prudent, and vigilant discharge of the episcopal functions, he gained universal esteem.

ly spent in dissipation; for, being warmly devoted to the cause of the whigs, he commenced political writer against the administration of the four last years of queen Anne.

, the third and youngest son of the bishop, had an education equally advantageous with that of his two elder brothers. When he had acquired a sufficient preparation of grammatical learning, he was sent to the university of Oxford, where he becam^a commoner of Merton-college. After this, he studied two years at Leyden, from whence he seems to have made a tour through Germany, Switzerland, and Italy. Having chosen the profession of the law, he was entered at the Temple, where he appears to have contracted wildness of disposition, and irregularity of conduct. To this part of his character there are frequent allusions in the satirical publications of the times; and particularly in Dr. Arbuthnol’s notes and memorandums of the six days preceding the death of a right reverend prelate. Mr. Thomas Burnet was even suspected of being one of the Mohocks mentioned in the Spectator, whose extravagant and cruel exploits made much noise, and excited no small degree of terror at that period. Swift, in one of his letters to Stella, has the following passage: “Young Davenant was telling us, how he was set upon by the Mohocks, and how they ran his chair through with a sword. It is not safe being in the streets at night. The bishop of Salisbury’s son is said to be of the gang. They are all whigs. A great lady sent to me, to speak to her father, and to lord treasurer, to have a care of them, and to be careful likewise of myself; for she heard they had malicious intentions against the ministry and their friends. I know not whether there be any thing in this, though others are of the sante opinion.” The report concerning Mr. Burnet might be groundless; but it is certain that his time was not wholly spent in dissipation; for, being warmly devoted to the cause of the whigs, he commenced political writer against the administration of the four last years of queen Anne. No less than seven pamphlets of this kind, though without his name, were written by him, in 1712 and 1713. His first was entitled “A Letter to the People, to be left for them at the Booksellers; with a word or two of the Bandbox Plot.” This small tract is drawn up in short paragraphs, after the manner of Mr. Asgill; but not in ridicule of that author, who is spoken of in terms of high commendation. Another piece of Mr. Burnet’s was: “Our Ancestors as wise as we, or ancient Precedents for modern Facts, in answer to a Letter from a noble Lord;” which was followed by “The History of Ingratitude, or a second Part of ancient Precedents for modern Facts,” wherein many instances are related, chiefly from the Greek and Roman histories, of the ungrateful treatment to which the most eminent public characters have been exposed; and the whole is applied to the case of the duke of Marlborough. A subsequent publication, that had likewise a reference to the conduct of the ministry towards the same great general, and which was dedicated to him, was entitled “The true Character of an honest Man, especially with relation to public Affairs.” Another of Mr. Burnet’s tracts, which was called “Truth, if you can find it; or a Character of the present Ministry and Parliament,” was entirely of an ironical nature, and sometimes the irony is well supported. But our author’s principal political pamphlet, during the period we are speaking of, was, “A certain Information of a certain Discourse, that happened at a certain Gentleman’s House, in a certain County: written by a certain Person then present; to a certain Friend now at London; from whence you may collect the great Certainty of the Account.” This is a dialogue in defence of the principles and conduct of the whigs; and it gave such offence to queen Anne’s Tory ministry, that on account of it, Mr. Burnet was taken into custody in January 1712—13. He wrote, also, “Some new Proofs by which it appears that the Pretender is truly James the Third;” in which, from the information, we suppose, of his father, he gives the same account, in substance, of the Pretender’s birth, that was afterwards published in the bishop’s History of his own Time. What Mr. Burnet endeavours to make out is, that three supposititious children Vol. VII. C c were introduced; and consequently, that the “Pretender was James the Third;” or, to put it more plainly, “the third pretended James.” Whilst our young author, notwithstanding his literary application and engagements, still continued his wild courses, it is related, that his father one day seeing him uncommonly grave, asked what he was meditating. “A greater work,” replied the son, “than your lordship’s History of the Reformation.” “What is that, Tom?” “My own reformation, my lord.” “I shall be heartily glad to see it,” said the bishop, “but almost despair of it.” This, however, was happily accomplished, though, perhaps, not during the life of the good prelate, and Mr. Burnejt became not only one of the best lawyers of his time, but a very respectable character. After the accession of king George the First, he wrote a letter to the earl of Halifax, on “the Necessity of impeaching the late Ministry,” in which he urges the point with great zeal and warmth, and shews the utmost dislike of treating with any degree of lenity, a set of men whose conduct, in his opinion, deserved the severest punishment. He insists upon it, that the makers of the treaty of Utrecht ought to answer for their treasons with their heads. The letter to the earl of Halifax, which appeared with Mr. Burnet’s name, was followed by an anonymous treatise, entitled “A second Tale of a Tub; or the History of Robert Powel the Puppet-Showman.” This work, which is a satire on the earl of Oxford and his ministry, and is far from being destitute of wit and humour, hath never had the good fortune (nor, indeed, did it deserve it,) of being read and admired like the original “Tale of a Tub.” The author himself, in the latter part of his life, wished it to be forgotten; for we are well informed that he sought much for it, and purchased such copies as he could meet with, at a considerable price. Soon after his father’s death, he published “A Character of the right reverend father in God, Gilbert lord bishop of Sarum; with a true copy of his last Will and Testament.” In ridicule of this publication, was printed in Hudibrastic verse, and with a very small portion of merit, “A certain dutiful Son’s Lamentation for the Death of a certain right reverend; with the certain Particulars of certain Sums and Goods that are bequeathed him, which he will most certainly part with in a ctrtain time.” In 1715, Mr. Burnet, in conjunction with Mr. Ducket, wrote a truvestie of the first book of the Iliad, under the title of “Homerides;” which exposed him to the lash of Mr. Pope, and occasioned that great poet to give him a place, though not with remarkable severity, in the Dunciad. He was likewise concerned in a weekly paper, called “The Grumbler.” He was, however, soon, taken from these literary occupations, by being appointed his majesty’s consul at Lisbon, where he continued several years. Whilst he was in this situation, he had a dispute with lord Tyrawley, the ambassador, in which the merchants sided with Mr. Burnet. During the continuance of the dispute, the consul took an odd method of affronting-' his antagonist. Employing the same taylor, and having learned what dress his lordship intended to wear on a birthday, Mr. Burnet provided the same dress as liveries for his servants, and appeared himself in a plain suit. It is said, that in consequence of this quarrel (though how truly, may, perhaps, be doubted), the ambassador and consul were both recalled. Upon Mr. Burnet’s return to his country, he resumed the profession of the law. In 1723, he published, with a few explanatory notes, the first volume of his father’s “History of his own Time;” and, in 1732, wrote some remarks in defence of that history, in answer to lord Lansdowne’s letter to the author of the “Reflections historical and political.” When Mr. Burnet gave to the public, in 1734, the second volume of the bishop’s history, he added to it the life of that eminent prelate. In Easter term 1736 he was called to the degree of serjeant at law; and, in May 1740, was appointed king’s serjeant, in the room of serjeant Kyre > deceased. When, in 1741, judge Fortescue was raised to the mastership of the rolls, Mr. Burnet, in the month of October in that year, succeeded him as one of the justices of the court of common-pleas. On the 23d of No-/ vember, 1745, when the lord chancellor, the judges, and the associated gentlemen of the law, waited on the king, with their address on occasion of the rebellion, his majesty conferred upon him the honour of knighthood. He was also a member of the royal society. Sir Thomas Burnet continued in the court of common -pleas, with great reputation, to his death, which happened on the 5th of January, 1753. He died of the goat in his stomach, and left behind nim the character of an ab<e and upright judge, a sincere friend, a sensible and agreeable companion, and a munificent benefactor to the poor. Dr. Ferdinando Warner, in his dedication of sir Thomas More’s Life to the then lord keeper Henley, haying mentioned that Mr. justice Burnet recommended to him the translation of the Utopia, adds: “of whom I take this opportunity to say with pleasure, and which your lordship, I am sure, will allow me to say with truth, that for his knowledge of the world, and his able judgment of things, he was equalled by few, and excelled by none of his contemporaries.” The following clause in our learned judge’s will was the subject of conversation after his decease, and was inserted in the monthly collections, as being somewhat extraordinary. “I think it proper in this solemn act to declare, that as I have lived, so I trust I shall die, in the true faith of Christ as taught in the Scriptures; but not as taught or practised in any one visible church that I know of; though I think the church of England is as little stuffed with the inventions of men as any of them; and the church of Rome is so full of them, as to have destroyed all that is lovely in the Christian religion.” This clause gave occasion to the publication of a serious and sensible pamphlet, entitled: “The true Church of Christ, which, and where to be found, according to the Opinion of the late judge Burnet; with an Introduction concerning divine worship, and a caution to gospel preachers; in which are contained, the Reasons for that Declaration in his last Will and Testament.” A judgment may be formed of his abilities in his profession, from his argument in the case of Ryal and Rowls. In 1777 were published in 4to, “Verses written on several occasions, between the years 1712 and 1721.” These were the poetical productions of Mr. Burnet in his youth, of whom it is said by the editor, that he was connected in friendship and intimacy with those wits, which will for ever signalise the beginning of the present century; and that himself shone with no inconsiderable lustre amidst the constellation of geniuses which then so illustriously adorned the British hemisphere.

, lord Monboddo, a learned writer of the eighteenth century, was descended from the ancient family

, lord Monboddo, a learned writer of the eighteenth century, was descended from the ancient family of the Burnetts of Leys, in Kincardineshire, and was born at the family seat of Monboddo, in October or November, 1714. He was first educated at the parish school of Laurencekirk, whence he went to King’s college, Aberdeen, and after the usual courses there, studied civil law at Groningen. On his return in 1738, he was admitted to the Scotch bar, where he acquired considerable practice. During the rebellion in 1745, when the administration of justice was interrupted, he went to London, where he became acquainted with some of the literati of the time, particularly Mallet, Thomson, and Armstrong. These visits he often repeated, and enlarged his acquaintance and correspondence with the succeeding generations of learned men, most of whom he survived. During his practice at the Scotch bar, he was particularly distinguished for the part he took in the celebrated Douglas cause, and was eminently instrumental in assisting the family of Douglas, in the prosecution of a suit which was finally determined in their favour. On the death of his relation lord Milton, in 1767, he was promoted to the bench by the title of lord Monboddo, which political intrigue delayed for some time.

, a most ingenious and learned writer, was born at Croft, in Yorkshire, about the year 1635. His first

, a most ingenious and learned writer, was born at Croft, in Yorkshire, about the year 1635. His first education was at the free-school of North-­Alverton, in that county, from whence he was removed in June 1651, to Clare-hall in Cambridge, where he had Dr. Tillotson for his tutor. Dr. Cud worth was at that time master of Clare-hall, but removed from it to the mastership of Christ’s college, in 1654; and thither our author followed him. Under his patronage he was chosen fellow in 1657, commenced M. A. in 1658, and became senior proctor of the university in 1661; but it is uncertain how long after ward she continued his residence there. He was afterwards governor to the young earl of Wiltshire, son of the marquis of Winchester, with whom he travelled abroad ^ and gave such satisfaction, that, soon after his return to England, he was invited and prevailed on by the first duke of Ormond, to travel in the same capacity with the young earl of Ossory, his grace’s grandson and heir-apparent. These honourable connections introduced him into what may properly be called the world: in which he afterwards confirmed the reputation he already had for talents ad learning, by the publication of his “Telluris theoria sacra, orbis nostri originem & mutationes generales, quas olim subiit et subiturus est, complectens.” This Sacred Theory of the Earth was originally published in Latin, in 2 vols. 4to, the two first books concerning the deluge, and paradise, 1681; the two last, concerning the burning of the world, and the new heavens and new earth, in 1689. The uncommon approbation this work met with, and the particular encouragement of Charles II. who relished its beauties, induced the author to translate it into English. Of this translation he published the two first books in 1684, folio, with an elegant dedication to the king; and the two last in 1689, with a no less elegant dedication to queen Mary. “The English edition,” he tells us, “is the same in substance with the Latin, though, he confesses, not so properly a translation, as a new composition upon the same ground, there being several additional chapters in it, and several new moulded.

unfortunately, the most objectionable in the whole work; and being immediately adopted by an infidel writer, gave such support to the complaints of the clergy, that it

But all this proved insufficient; and the storm raised against him was rather increased than abated, by the encomium which Mr. Charles Blount, the deistical author of the “Oracles of Reason,” thought proper to bestow upon his work. Blount, in a letter to his friend Gildon, tells him, that “according to his promise, he has sent him a translation of the seventh and eighth chapters, and also the appendix, of the great and learned Dr. Burnet’s” Arehseologiae philosophic^," &c. a piece which he thinks one of the most ingenious he ever read, and full of the most acute as well as learned observations. The* seventh and eighth chapters, here translated for Mr. Gildon’s use, were, unfortunately, the most objectionable in the whole work; and being immediately adopted by an infidel writer, gave such support to the complaints of the clergy, that it was judged expedient, in that critical season, to remove him from his place of clerk of the closet. He withdrew accordingly from court; anc if Mr. Oldmixon can be credited, ac-. tually missed the see of Canterbury, upon the death of Tillotson, on account of this very work, which occasioned him to be then represented by some bishops as a sceptical writer. He then retired to his studies in the Charter-house, without seeking, or perhaps desiring, any farther preferment; for he does not appear to have been a man of ambition; and there he lived, in a single state, to a good old age, dying Sept. 27, 1715.

n, in 1699, wrote a Latin ode in its praise, which has been prefixed to many editions of it. An able writer, Dr. Warton, in his “Essay on Pope,” has not scrupled, from

Of the Sacred Theory of the Earth, which is the principal of all his productions, the substance is this: between the beginning and end of the world, he supposes several intermediate periods, in which he conceives that nature undergoes various changes. Those which resp'ect this terraqueous globe, he believes to have been recorded in the sacred Scriptures. From these compared with profane history, he attempts to prove, that the primaeval earth as it rose out of chaos, was of a different form and structure from the present, and was such, that from its dissolution would naturally arise an universal deluge. Such a change in the state of the globe, he infers from the general aspect of its surface in the present day; and he argues, that since it is the nature of fluids to form a smooth surface, the earth, which was at first a chaotic mass in a fluid state, as it gradually became solid by the exhalation of the lighter particles of air and water, would still retain its regular superficies, so that the new earth would resemble an egg. The earth, in this paradisaical state, he supposes to be capable of sending forth its vegetable productions without rain, and to enjoy a perpetual serene and cloudless atmosphere. In process of time, he conceived that the surface of the earth, by the continual action of the rays of the sun, would become so parched, as to occasion vast fissures, through which the waters of the great abyss, contained within the bowels of the earth, would be sent forth by means of elastic vapours, expanded by heat, and acting with irresistible force upon their surface; whence a universal deluge would ensue, and in the violent concussion, lofty mountains, craggy rocks, and other varieties in the external form of the earth, would appear. Our theorist also conjectures, that the earth, in its original state, owed its universal spring to th*e coincidence of the plane of the ecliptic with that of the equator; and supposes that, at the deluge, the pole of the ecliptic changed its position, and became oblique to the plane of the equator. From similar causes he conceives that the final conflagration will be produced. This theory is well imagined, supported with much erudition, and described with great elegance of diction; but it can only be considered as an ingenious fiction, which rests upon no other foundation than mere conjecture. Yet it would be endless to transcribe all the encomiums passed on it. Mr. Addison, in 1699, wrote a Latin ode in its praise, which has been prefixed to many editions of it. An able writer, Dr. Warton, in his “Essay on Pope,” has not scrupled, from this single work, to rank Dn Burnet with the very few, in whom the three great faculties of the understanding, viz. judgment, imagination, and memory, have been found united. According to him, there have existed but few transcendant geniuses, who have been singularly blessed with this rare assemblage of different talents; and Burnet, in his Theory, he thinks has displayed an imagination very nearly equal to that of Milton.

time entertained the highest opinion of the Author. “I acknowledge him (says he) to be an ingenious writer; and if he had taken a right method, and had made a considerable

But, notwithstanding these encomiums on Burnet, it cannot be Affirmed that his Theory is built upon principles of mathematics and sound philosophy; on the contrary, men of science were displeased at him for presuming to erect a theory, which he would have received as true, with* out proceeding on that foundation. Flamstead is reported to have told him, somewhat peevishly, that “there went more to the making of a world, than a fine-turned period,” and that “he was able to overthrow the Theory in one sheet of paper.” Others attacked it in form. Mr. Erasmus Warren, rector of Worlington, in Suffolk, published two pieces against it soon after its appearance in English, and Dr. Burnet answered them; which pieces, with their answers, have been printed at the end of the later editions of the Theory. Mr. John Keill, Savilian professor of geometry in Oxford, published also an Examination of it in 1698, to which Dr. Burnet replied; and then Mr. Keill defended himself. Burnet’s reply to Keill is subjoined to the later editions of his Theory; and KeilPs Examination and Defence, together with his “Remarks and Defence upon Whiston’s Theory,” were reprinted together in 1734, 8vo. It is universally allowed that Keill has solidly confuted the Theory; and it is to be lamented that he did it in the rough way of controversy; yet there are many passages in his confutation, which shew, that he at the same time entertained the highest opinion of the Author. “I acknowledge him (says he) to be an ingenious writer; and if he had taken a right method, and had made a considerable progress in those sciences that are introductory to the study of nature, I doubt not but he would have made a very acute philosopher. It was his unhappiness to begin at first with the Cartesian philosophy; and not having a sufficient stock of geometrical and mechanical principles to examine it rightly, he too easily believed it, and thought that there was but little skill required 'in those sciences to become a philosopher; and therefore, in imitation of Mons. Des Cartes, he would undertake to shew how the world was made; a task too great, even for a mathematician.

The character of Burns will still be incomplete, without some notice of his abilities as a prose-writer; for of these we have ample proofs in his familiar correspondence.

The character of Burns will still be incomplete, without some notice of his abilities as a prose-writer; for of these we have ample proofs in his familiar correspondence. That his letters were never intended for the public eye, that many of them are mutilated, and that some, perhaps, might have been suppressed, are deductions which do not affect their merit as the effusions of a very uncommon mind, enriched with knowledge far beyond what could have been reasonably expected in his situation. He appears to have cultivated English prose with care, and certainly wrote it with a sprightly fluency. His turns of expression are various and surprizing, and, when treating the most common topics, his sentiments are singular and animated. His letters, however, would have attained a higher portion of graceful expression, and would have been more generally pleasing, had they not been too frequently the faithful transcripts of a disappointed mind, gloomily bent on one set of indignant and querulous reflections. But with this, and another exception which might be made to these letters, from a frequent imitation of the discursive manner of Sterne, they must ever be considered as decided proofs of genius. They contain many admirable specimens of critical acumen, and many flights of humour, and observations on life and manners, which fully justify our belief that, had he cultivated his prose talents only, he might have risen to very high distinction in epistolary or essay writing. Upon the whole, Burns was a man who undoubtedly possessed great abilities with great failings. The former he received from nature, he prized them highly, and he improved them; the latter were exaggerated by circumstances less within his controul, and by disappointments which, trusting to the most liberal encouragement ever offered to genius, he could not have foreseen. They may yet serve to guard ambitious and ardent minds from similar irregularities and wanderings, and to explain why such a man, after the first burst of popular applause was past, lived and died more unhappily than would probably have been the case had he never known what it was to be caressed and admired.

healths proposed to him, drawn up with all the virulence of disappointment for a verdict against the writer. Long before these events, he published “A Treatise on the

, M.D. and F. R. S. and F. S.A. an eminent antiquary, of whom our accounts are very scanty, was born at Rjppon in Yorkshire 1697, and educated hi Christ church college in Oxford for some time, but took his degree in some foreign university; and on his settling at York, became very eminent in his profession. In 1745 it is said that he proposed joining himself to the pretender, then at Manchester; but that his friends had interest sufficient to dissuade him from a measure which must have terminated in his ruin. His conduct, therefore, appears to have unjustly exposed him to censure, if his own account may be relied on, to this purpose, that “going out of York, with leave of the mayor, &c. to take care of his estates, on the approach of the rebels, he was taken by them, and in consequence of that was apprehended Dec. 3, 1745, and detained till March 25, 1746—7.” This is explained in “British liberty endangered, demonstrated by the following narrative, wherein is proved from facts, that J. B. has hitherto been a better friend to the English constitution, in church and state, than his persecutors. Humbly dedicated to the most reverend and worthy the archbishop of Canterbury, late of York (Herring). With a proper preface, by John Burton, of York, M. D.” London, 3 749. There was afterwards published “An account of what passed between Mr. George Thomson of York, and doctor John Burton of that city, physician and manmidwife, at Mr. sheriff Jubb’s entertainment, and the consequences thereon, by Mr. George Thomson,” London, 1756, 8vo, a narrative, in the lowest and most abusive language, says Mr. Gough, of a quarrel and assault, for the doctor’s refusing to drink certain healths proposed to him, drawn up with all the virulence of disappointment for a verdict against the writer. Long before these events, he published “A Treatise on the Non-naturals, in which the great influence they have on human bodies is set forth, and mechanically accounted for. To which is subjoined, a short Essay on the Chin-Cough, with a new method of treating that obstinate distemper,” York, 1738, 8vo. In the title of this work, he calls himself “M. B. Cant, and M. D. Rhem.” by which it would appear that his bachelor’s was a Lambeth degree, and that he graduated as doctor at Rheims. In 1751, he published “An Essay towards a complete new system of Midwifery,” 8vo, and in 1753, “A Letter to William Smellie, M. D. containing critical and practical remarks upon his Treatise on the theory and practice of Midwifery,” 8vo. But the work by which he is principally known, and for which he was employed in making collections during his latter years, was, his “Monasticon Eboracense; and the Ecclesiastical History of Yorkshire, &c.” the first volume of which was published in 1758, folio. This is in all respects a most valuable work; and it is to be regretted that it was not completed by a second volume, for which he had ample materials. Mr. Gough seems to intimate that his conduct in 1745 was a check both to encouragement and the means for publishing his second volume. Previously to that period, his zeal for illustrating the antiquities of his native country, and his indefatigable researches, met with due encouragement from those who had many important materials in their hands; and he was himself possessed of an invaluable and unparalleled collection for illustrating the history and antiquities of that county, which before his death in 1771, he sold for a sum of money and an annuity for himself and wife to William Constable, esq. of Burton Constable, in whose, or his family’s hands, they probably now remain. Mr. Gough has given an ample list of them.

ons in folio, so that the bookseller acquired an estate by it. This book was compiled by our learned writer with a view of relieving his own melancholy; but it encreased

, author of the “Anatomy of Melancholy,” the younger brother of William Burton, the antiquary, the subject of the next article but one, was born at Lindley, Feb. 8, 1576, and had his grammatical education at Sutton-Colfield; after which, in 1593, he was admitted a commoner of Brazen-nose college, and elected a student of Christ church, in 1599, under the tuition (though only for form’s sake) of Dr. John Bancroft, afterwards bishop of Oxford. He took the degree of B. D. in 16 14, and was in that year admitted to the reading of the sentences. In 1616, the dean and chapter of Christ church presented him to the Vicarage of St. Thomas in Oxford, in which parish he always gave the sacrament in wafers; and George lord Berkeley bestowed upon him the rectory of Segrave in Leicestershire. Both these preferments he held till his decease, which happened at Christ church, January 25, 1639—4O. He was a curious calculator of nativities, and among others, of his own; and the time of his death answering exactly to his own predictions, it was whispered in the college, that (to use Anthony Wood’s language), rather than there should be any mistake in the calculation, he sent up his soul to heaven through a slip about his neck; but for this insinuation there appears little foundation. He was a general scholar and severe student, of a melancholy yet humourous disposition, and appears to have been a man of extensive learning, which his memory enabled him to produce upon every subject. In his moral character, he was a man of great integrity, plain-dealing, and chanty. He was principally known as the author of a very celebrated and popular work, entitled “The Anatomy of Melancholy,” published first in quarto, and which afterwards went through several editions in folio, so that the bookseller acquired an estate by it. This book was compiled by our learned writer with a view of relieving his own melancholy; but it encreased to such a degree, that nothing could divert him but going to the bridge foot, and hearing the ribaldry of the bargemen, which seldom failed to throw him into a violent fit of laughter. In the intervals of his vapours, he was one of the most facetious companions in the university. The “Anatomy of Melancholy” is for the greater part a cento, though a very ingenious one. The quotations, which abound in every page, are pertinent; but if the author had made freer use of his invention, and less of his common -place book, his work, perhaps, would have been more valuable. However, he generally avoids the affected language, and ridiculous metaphors, which were common in that age. On Mr. Burton’s monument in Christ church is his bust, with his nativity, and this description by himself, put up by his brother: “Faucis notus, paucioribus ignotus, hie jacet Democritusjunior, cui vitam dedit et mortem Melancholia. Obiit viii. Id. Jan. A. C. MDCXXXIX.” He left behind him a choice collection of books, many of which he bequeathed to the Bodleian library, and that of Brazen-nose college. He left also a hundred pounds, for a fund to purchase five pounds’ worth of books, every year, for the library of Christ church.

rriar of Manchester, who, in his” Illustrations of Sterne,“has ingeniously pointed out how much that writer owes to Burton. Mr. T. Warton, in his History of Poetry, had

Burton upon Melancholy,” says archbp. Herring (Letters, 1777, 12mo), is an author, the pleasantest, the most learned, and the most full of sterling sense. The wits of queen Anne’s reign, and the beginning of George I. were, he adds, not a little beholden to him:“but for nearly a century, the perusal of it was confined to those readers who are called” The Curious;“and within our memory it was usually rejected from the catalogues of eminent booksellers, as a work fitter for the stalls. Of late years, however, its reputation has revived in an uncommon degree, partly by incidental notices of it by Dr. Johnson, Messrs. Steevens and Malone, and the other annotators of Shakspeare, and partly by the attention paid to it by Dr. Ferriar of Manchester, who, in his” Illustrations of Sterne,“has ingeniously pointed out how much that writer owes to Burton. Mr. T. Warton, in his History of Poetry, had also frequently referred to the” Anatomy." All this not only raised the price of the old editions, but encouraged the publication of a new one in 1800, which sold rapidly; yet Burton is a writer so much above the common level, that we suspect that, even now, he has acquired more purchasers than readers.

, an eminent teacher and writer on commerce, was born Jan. 3, 1728, in the district of Lunebourg,

, an eminent teacher and writer on commerce, was born Jan. 3, 1728, in the district of Lunebourg, and was for thirty years director of the commercial academy at Hamburgh, to which young men from all parts of Europe resorted for education in that branch. This establishment was indeed the only one of its kind, as professor Busch not only instructed his pupils in the theory, but afforded them opportunities of being introduced to the practice of commerce, for which purpose he had connexions with the first houses in Hamburgh, and himself acquired that experience which gives a peculiar value to his writings; these are all in the German language: 1. “The Theory of Commerce,” Hamburgh, 1799, 3Vols. 8vo. 2. “On Banks,” ibid. 1801, 8vo. 3. “On the Circulation of Money,” ibid. 1800, 3 vols. 8vo. 4. “Various Essays on Commerce,” ibid. 2 vols. 8vo. 5. “On Mathematical Studies as applicable to the business of civil life,” 8vo. 6. “Encyclopædia of Mathematics,” ibid. 1795. 7. “Experience and observations,” ibid. 1794, 5 vols. 8vo. In 1778 he published, also in German, “A circumstantial account of the Commercial Academy of Hamburgh,” 12mo; and in 1783, along w.th his partner Ebeling, published the first number of “The Merchant’s Library,” eight numbers of which were to be published annually, which perhaps is the work noticed above, “Experience,” &c.

n in 1607, either at Villa Franca in Beaujolais, or at Lyons, and became a very frequent and admired writer, although little of his fame has reached modern times. He died

, a French Jesuit, was born in 1607, either at Villa Franca in Beaujolais, or at Lyons, and became a very frequent and admired writer, although little of his fame has reached modern times. He died in 1678. His French poetry is now forgot, but his Latin poetry published at Lyons in 1675, 8vo, still has some admirers; and in his “Scanderbeg,” an epic poem, and his “Rhea,” are some animated passages. He published also an abridgment of the History of France, and another, in Latin, of the universal history, called “Floscoli Historiarum,” which he afterwards translated into French, under the title “Parterre historique,” Lyons, 1672, 12nio; the ridiculous dedication of which to the Virgin Mary may be seen in Seward’s Anecdotes. He wrote also “Memoires de Ville Tranche en Beaujolais,1671, 4to; and a history of Spain, still in manuscript.

, an ingenious writer of the seventeenth century, was born in 1559, at High Wycomb,

, an ingenious writer of the seventeenth century, was born in 1559, at High Wycomb, in Buckinghamshire; and entered a student into Magdalen hall, Oxford, in 1579, where he took a degree in arts; and was translated to Magdalen college, and made one of the bible clerks. Soon after, he became master of the free school at Basingstoke in Hampshire; and had the cure of a small church in the neighbourhood. About 1600 he was promoted to the vicarage of Lawrence Wotton, in Hampshire; which Wood thinks a very inadequate preferment for a scholar of his abilities. There, however, he appears to have remained until his death, March 29, 1647, in his eighty-eighth year. He wrote: 1. “The Feminine Monarchy; or a Treatise on Bees,” Oxon. 1609, 8vo, and Lond. 1623, Oxon. 1634, 4to; a work not more curious for its matter, than for the manner of printing, abounding in new characters, which appear to have been cast on purpose, and a very singular mode of orthography. It was afterwards translated into Latin by Rich. Richardson, of PJmanuel college, Cambridge, Lprid. 1673, 8vo. 2. “Rhetoricee libri duo,” Oxon. 1618; often reprinted. 3. “De propinquitate matrimonium impediente regula generalis,” on the marriage of cousin-germans, a work much approved by Dr. Prideaux, Oxon. 1625, 4to. 4. “Oratoriae libri duo,” Oxon. 1633, 4to, Lond. 1635, 8vo. 5. “English Grammar,” Oxon. 1634, 4to. 6. “The Principles of Music,” Lond. 1636, 4to. Dr. Johnson, in the preface to his Dictionary, gives an account of his “Grammar/' with a specimen of his orthography from his” Treatise on Bees.“Of his” Principles uf Music," Dr. Burney says* that it was the only theoretical or didactic work published on the subject of music during the reign of king Charles I. and that it contains more knowledge in a small compass than any other of the kind in our language; but the Saxon and new characters he uses, in order to explode such letters as are redundant, or of uncertain powers, render this musical tract somewhat difficult to peruse.

one of the king’s chaplains, and obtained a prebend in Winchester cathedral. Commencing a political writer, he espoused the cause of lord North in all the measures of

, late bishop of Hereford, was born at Hamburgh, probably of English parents, Dec. 1717. In his early days he acted as private tutor in the family of Mr. Child the banker. He was then a popular preacher in London, and possessed of sound parts, indefatigable industry, a good figure, and agreeable manners. Being introduced to Mr. Bilson Legge, he assisted that gentleman in the political controversy with lord Bute^ and rendered him farther services in calculations on public finance. It was probably through this connection that Dr^Hayter, bishop of London, appointed Mr. Butler his first chaplain, who obtained also the living of Everley in Wiltshire, about the same time. On the recommendation of lord Onslow, he was constituted one of the king’s chaplains, and obtained a prebend in Winchester cathedral. Commencing a political writer, he espoused the cause of lord North in all the measures of administration, and particularly in that of the American war, which he endeavoured to justify in several pamphlets. In reward of these services, he was n^ade archdeacon of Surrey, and procured-a Lambeth degree of D. D. from the archbishop of Canterbury. His next promotion was to the see of Oxford, which was given him by the minister (lord North) in 1777, on the advancement of Dn Lowth to the bishoprick of London; and the living of Cuddesden was held by Dr. Butler at the same time, being annexed to the see of Oxford; but this preferment was rendered locally unpleasant from the circumstance of his not having been regularly graduated at either of the universities. He, however, retained it till 1788, when he was advanced to the bishopric of Hereford, over which he presided until his death at his palace at Hereford, Dec. 10, 1802. He was twice married. His first wife was the mistress of a boarding-school in Westminster; his second, the sister and one of the coheiresses of sir Charles Vernon, of Farnham in Surrey; but he had issue by neither. He underwent the operation of lithotomy at the age of sixty, which he long survived, although in his latter days he was kept alive by great care and attention. Although charitable and even munificent in his lifetime, he left a very considerable fortune to his executors and friends. He was an eloquent, pleasing, and impressive preacher, always from short-hand notes, and very distinct and audible in his delivery, although his voice was weak.

ance, in a certain degree, the cause of superstition. 'Under that apprehension, an able and spirited writer, who was understood to be a clergyman of the church of England,

Dr. Butler being thus brought back into the world, his merit and talents soon introduced him to particular notice, and paved the way for his rising to those high dignities which he afterwards enjoyed. In 1736, he was appointed clerk of the closet to queen Caroline; and, in the same year, he presented to her majesty a copy of his celebrated treatise, entitled “The Analogy of Religion, natural and revealed, to the constitution and course of Nature.” His attendance upon his royal mistress, by her especial command, was from seven to nine in the evening every day; and though this was interrupted by her death in 1737, yet he had been so effectually recommended by her, as well as by the late lord chancellor Talbot, to his majesty’s favour, that, in the next year, he was raised to the highest order of the church, by a nomination to the bishopric of Bristol; to which see he was consecrated on the 3d of December, 1738. King George II. not being satisfied with this proof of his regard to Dr. Butler, promoted him, in 1740, to the deanry of St. Paul’s London; into which he was installed on the 24th of May in that year, and finding the demands of this dignity to be incompatible with his parish duty at Stanhope, he immediately resigned that rich benefice. Besides our prelate’s unremitted attention to his peculiar obligations, he was called on to preach several discourses on public occasions, which were afterwards separately printed, and have since been annexed to the later editions of the Sermons at the Rolls chapel. In 1746, upon the death of Dr. Egerton, bishop of Hereford, Dr. But> ler was made clerk of the closet to the king; and in 1750, he received another distinguished mark of his majesty’s favour, by being translated to the see of Durham on the 16th of October in that year, upon the decease of Dr. Edward Chandler. Our prelate, being thus appointed to preside over a diocese with which he had long been connected, delivered his first, and indeed his last charge to his clergy, at his primary visitation in 1751. The principal subject of it was, “External Religion.” The bishop having observed, with deep concern, the great and growing neglect of serious piety in the kingdom, insisted strongly on the usefulness of outward forms and institutions, in fixing and preserving a sense of devotion and duty in the minds of men. In doing this, he was thought by several persons to speak too favourably of pagan and popish ceremonies, and to countenance, in a certain degree, the cause of superstition. 'Under that apprehension, an able and spirited writer, who was understood to be a clergyman of the church of England, published in 1752, a pamphlet, entitled “A serious inquiry into the use and importance of External Religion: occasioned by some passages in the right reverend the lord bishop of Durham’s Charge to the Clergy of that diocese; humbly addressed to his lordship.” Many persons, however, and, we believe, the greater part of the clergy of the diocese, did not think our prelate’s charge so exceptionable as it appeared to this author. The charge, which was first printed at Durham, was afterwards annexed to Dr. Butler’s other works, by Dr. Halifax. By his promotion to the see of Durham, our worthy bishop was furnished with ample means of exerting the virtue of charity, the exercise of which was his highest delight. But this gratification he did not long enjoy. He had been but a short time seated in his new bishopric, when his health began visibly to decline; and having been complimented, during his indisposition, upon account of his great resignation to the divine will, he is said to have expressed some regret, that he should be taken from the present world so soon after he had been rendered capable of becoming much more useful in it. In his last illness, he was carried to Bristol, to try the waters of that place; but, these proving ineffectual, he removed to Bath, where, being past recovery, he died on the 16th of June, 1752. His corpse was conveyed to Bristol, and interred in the cathedral there, where a monument, with an inscription, is erected to his memory. On the greatness of bishop Butler’s intellectual character we need not enlarge; for his profound knowledge, and the prodigious strength of his mind, are amply displayed in his incomparable writings. His piety was of the most serious and fervent, and perhaps somewhat of the ascetic kind. His benevolence was warm, generous, and diffusive. Whilst he was bishop of Bristol, he expended, in repairing and improving the episcopal palace, four thousand pounds, which is said to have been more than the whole revenues of the bishopric amounted to, during his continuance in that see. Indeed he used to say that the deanery of St. Paul’s paid for it. Besides his private benefactions, he was a contributor to the' Infirmary at Bristol, and a subscriber to three of the Hospitals at London. He was, likewise, a principal promoter, though not the first founder, of the Infirmary at Newcastle, in Northumberland. lu supporting the hospitality and dignity of the rich and powerful diocese of Durham, he was desirous of imitating the spirit of his patron, bishop Talbot. In this spirit, he set apart three clays every week for the reception and entertainment of the principal gentry of the country. Nor were even the clergy who had the poorest benefices neglected by him. He not only occasionally invited them to dine with him, but condescended to visit them at their respective parishes. By his will, he left five hundred pounds to the society for propagating the gospel in foreign parts, and some legacies to his friends and domestics. His executor was his chaplain, the rev. Dr. Nathaniel Forster, a divine of distinguished literature, who was especially charged to destroy all his manuscript sermons, letters, and papers. Bishop Butler was never married. The bishop’s disposition, which had in it a natural ca’st of gloominess, was supposed to give a tincture to his devotion. As a proof of this, and that he had even acquired somewhat of a superstitious turn of mind, it was alleged, that he had put a. cross in his chapel at Bristol. The cross was a plain piece of marble inlaid. This circumstance, together with the offence which some persons had taken at his charge delivered at Durham, might possibly give rise to a calumny, that, almost fifteen years after his death, was advanced concerning him, in an obscure and anonymous pamphlet, entitled “The Root of Protestant Errors examined.” It was there said, that our prelate died in the communion of the church of Rome. Of this absurd and groundless charge, we shall take no other notice, than to transcribe what the worthy and learned Dr. Porteus has written concerning it, in his Life of Archbishop Seeker. “This strange slander, founded on the weakest pretences and most trivial circumstances that can be imagined, no one was better qualified to confute than the archbishop; as well from his long and intimate knowledge of bishop Butler, as from the information given him at the time by those who attended his lordship in his last illness, and were with him when he died. Accordingly, by an article in a newspaper, signed Misopseudes, his grace challenged the author of that pamphlet to produce his authority for what he had advanced; and in a second article defended the bishop against him; and in a third (all with the same signature) confuted another writer, who, under the name of ‘A real Protestant,’ still maintained that ridiculous calumy. His antagonists were effectually subdued, and his superiority to them was publicly acknowledged by a sensible and candid man, who signed himself, and who really was ‘A dissenting Minister.’ Surely, it is a very unwise piece of policy, in those who profess themselves enemies to popery, to take so much pains to bring the most respectable names within its pale; and to give it the merit of having gained over those who were the brightest ornaments and firmest supports of the protestant cause.

Previous Page

Next Page