gested, at a future period, the project of compiling his Hiftory: a task which he undertook, not from a wish to detail battles, and exhibit a tedious fuc ceffion of political broils, but for the more dignified purpose of tracing the progress of legislation and civility.

As Hume was a younger brother, his patrimony, according to the custom of his country, was very flender; and this, combined with his difinclination to the business of a lawyer, and the reprefentations of his friends, induced him to repair to Bristol in 1734, with a defign to engage in the commercial line. He carried with him letters of recommendation to feveral eminent merchants of that city; but from his confirmed love of literature, or fome other caufe now unknown, he found himself, in a few months, totally unequal to the buftle incident to his new fituation. He therefore abandoned it, and went to France.

His motive for this journey, as he himself informs us, was to profecute his ftudies in a rural retreat; but that was an object which he might have attained more readily and completely by continuing in his own country. It is believed, that he did not chufe to return to Ninewells, as his relations muft, by this time, have regarded him as young man, whofe habits of indolence were repulfive to all their exertions in his behalf. The cheapnefs of living in France fuited the fmallness of the fortune he inherited; and this feems to have been,

if

if not the inducement, at least the excufe for his retiring into that country. Hume was, at an early period, fenfible of the inadequacy of his income to fupport the eafy enjoyments of a literary life; and he, at the fame time, formed a refolution to remedy this misfortune, as far as he was able. After mentioning his journey to France, he adds, in the biographical sketch formerly alluded to,"I there laid that plan of life, which I have steadily " and fuccessfully pursued. I refolved to make a very rigid frugality fupply my deficiency of fortune, to maintain unimpaired my independency, "and to regard every object as contemptible, except the improvement of my talents in literature."

66

On his arrival in France, he established his refidence at Rheims, but foon afterwards removed to La Fleche in Anjou. During his abode there, he completed his Treatife on Human Nature, the plan of which he had formed while at the Univerfity of Edinburgh; and after spending three years in these agreeable labours, and acquiring an intimate knowledge of the French language, he returned to London in 1737. In the end of the following year he printed and published, in octavo, the two first volumes of his work under the title of A TREATISE OF (ON) HUMAN NATURE: being an Attempt to introduce the experimental Method of Reasoning into Moral Subjects".

The

* This work bears the year 1739 in the imprint. It may be neceffary to apprife the reader, that bookfellers generally fet B +

The first volume of this performance treats of the Understanding, and the second of the Paffions. From a diffidence in his own abilities, or from a wish to hear the opinion of the public before he acknowledged himself to be the author of the work, it was published without his name. The third volume, which comprises the subject of Morals, did not appear until the year 1740. It was fold by a different bookfeller; a circumftance owing probably to the discouraging reception of the two firft. Annexed to the laft volume is AN APPENDIX, wherein fome paffages of the foregoing volumes are illuftrated and explained.

Mr. Hume, it has been stated, formed the plan of his Treatife, while he was at college; and although, from the very imperfect manner in which it was executed, a fevere critic might be inclined to condemn the prefumption of a ftripling in thus venturing to enter the lifts with a formidable body of metaphysicians, whofe elaborate works were the matured productions of advanced life, it must be confeffed, that the boldnefs of the undertaking was worthy of the future reputation of the author. That a lad of only twenty-feven years of age fhould fail in accomplishing a task, which had baffled the labours of fo many philofophers, eminent for their erudition and fagacity, cannot excite furprise. It

down the enfuing year in the title-pages of all books ready for fale in or after the month of November. Hence a work actually printed during that month in the year 1738, will bear, in the imprint, the date of 1739.

would

would indeed have been a rare inftance of early precocity, if he had fucceeded in a branch of science in which even the primary rules of investi gation have not yet been fatisfactorily settled.

On the fate of this performance our author is extremely candid. "Never literary attempt," says he, "was more unfortunate than my Treatife on "Human Nature. It fell dead-born (ftill-born) "from the prefs, without reaching fuch distinction, "as even to excite a murmur among the zealots."

In reviewing this firft effay of Mr. Hume's talents, and inquiring whether the neglect it experienced was warrantable on the part of thofe literati who intereft themfelves in metaphyfical difcuffions, it is neceffary to premife, that he afterwards melted down his Treatife into two other tracts, which he fucceffively published. To a new edition of these he prefixed an advertisement, in which, after alluding to the early period of life when he wrote and published his Treatife on Human Nature, he informs us, that, not finding his work fuccessful, he was fenfible of his error in going too foon to prefs. Under this impreffion he thought proper to newmodel the whole, and in doing fo to correct fome negligences into which he had fallen in his former reasoning, and particularly the inaccuracies in his language. He complains, that feveral writers, who had honoured his philofophical tenets with answers, had directed all their efforts against his juvenile and anonymous production, and affected to tri

umph

umph in their imaginary advantages. This conduct he condemns as inconfiftent with candour and fair-dealing, and as a striking instance of the polemical artifices, which a bigoted zeal thinks itself warranted to employ. He concludes with defiring, that his two laft tracts only fhall hereafter be regarded as containing his philofophical fentiments and principles.

Thefe expreffions are obviously dictated by peevishness; for as ten years elapfed between the publication of his unfortunate Treatife on Human Nature, and the Enquiry concerning the Human Understanding; and as the Enquiry concerning Morals did not appear until three years afterwards, how was it poffible for writers, who animadverted on his doctrines, to notice, during the intervening period, any other than thofe in the Treatife, which was the only performance in existence?-And did not Mr. Hume himself, by re-cafting that work, and fo amply curtailing it, virtually acknowledge that the metaphyfical opinions it contained were untenable? In his Enquiries, he did not even allude to any former work by him on the fubject: he did not intimate an adherence to, or retraction of former fentiments; but left every one, acquainted with his first performance, to conclude, that the two laft productions were merely supplementary to it. The reprehenfion, therefore, which he bestowed on his opponents, was unjuft; and the vagueness of his language does not authorife us to fuppofe, that his cenfure was intended to apply to authors whofe

8