"When the Divine Legation first came out, one of the opponents being convinced of misrepresenting it, began to relent and retract. Upon which a Letter was inserted in the Daily Memoirs of those times, whether from the Author or his Friends I will not pretend to say, in words to this effect; the very identity of the last I am sure of. "Near that famed place where the City Naïads disembogue their sable streams into the silver Thames, a good woman sat crying oysters. What! all the good people go by, says she, and none of them buy my oysters? At length a surly porter passing on with bended shoulders, and with emphatic voice, cries out, NO COAXING, YOU BITCH.' Good Moderato, beware! Z. Z.” "SIR, April 26. "Il Moderato, in your paper of April 22, discovers, in the letters of a learned Prelate lately published, an openness and generosity of temper which charms him. Private correspondence, it must be owned, lays open the dispositions of the respective writers; but sets them in a different light to different readers. However, where two correspondents keep copies of the letters they send (as one did here, and probably both), they write with caution and under restraint; and when such are published, there is little breach of confidence, for none subsisted between them. Let us see what conclusions may be fairly drawn from one or two of the Letters which II Moderato calls upon us to admire. "From Letters III. and IV. it appears, that Mr. Lowth (the father of the late Professor) sent some notes to Mr. Reading, to be inserted in his edition of the Ecclesiastical Historians; in which he had charged Basnage with wilfully suppressing the unexceptionable evidence of Ammianus Marcellinus, concerning the destruction of the Temple by lightning; and had likewise made an application of the meteoric appearance of crosses, from Casaubon's Adversaria, to this subject.. Both these circumstances the Bishop likewise had taken notice of in his Julian, without knowing that they were pre-occupied by Mr. Lowth, till he was informed of it by Dr. Jortin, when, it seems, he had finished his book, and it was half printed off. Query 1. Was this notice imparted by Dr. Jortin, while the first edition of Julian was printing, or before the second was put to the press? If the latter, why was no mention made of it in the second edition at least? For (2), it was communicated time enough for his Lordship to charge Mr. Lowth, very undeservedly, with an uncharitable reflection on Basnage, in Julian, second edition, p. 256, but too late, it seems, to acknowledge that Mr. Lowth had made the two observations above, which makes so great a figure in the Bishop's work: so easy is it with some persons to find occa sion for censure! so hard to find room for praise! (3). The censure on Mr. Lowth is manifestly proved to be unjust. Does his Lordship any where retract it? No; he promises, indeed, to strike it out in a future edition. But why? Not because he was himself in an error, but out of a tender regard to the filial piety of the late Professor. Credo, præ amore excludet hinc foras. But (4), when his Lordship, in his Julian, censured Mr. Lowth, why were we not referred to the place where Mr. Lowth was guilty of what he is charged with? It would have been but fair to have referred us to the note in Reading's edition of the Ecclesiastical Historians, which a common reader was at a loss to know, till this private correspondence laid it open. I know of no good reason for this procedure with the publick; unless it was, that, had he cited Reading's edition, we should there have discovered the observations on Casaubon's narration, and en Basnage's omitting the testimony of Ammianus Marcellinus, which the Bishop descants upon, already anticipated. But, for fear that should appear, he lets off his random censure of Mr. Lowth, and conceals from us where the foundation of it is laid. "But Il Moderato is charmed, I suppose, with the delicacy of the Bishop, who declares, no Author was ever more averse to take to himself what belonged to another.' "Shall I tell him a secret? The buskined prose which Dr. Lowth has cited [Letters, p. 66] from another work of the Bishop's, is taken from Milton's Areopagitica, Works, 4to, vol. I. p. 168, only somewhat mangled, and in a good measure spoiled. The words of Milton run thus: "Methinks I see, in my mind, a noble puissant nation rousing herself like a strong man after sleep, and shaking her invincible locks. Methinks I see her as an eagle nursing her mighty youth, and kindling her undazzled eyes at the full mid-day beam; purging and unsealing her long-abused sight at the fountain itself of heavenly radiance; while the whole noise of timorous and flocking birds, with those also that love the twilight, flutter about, amazed at what she mourns, and in their envious gabble would prognosticate a year of sects and schisms. PARRASIUS." "We have heard of the patience of Job, and almost as much of the dogmatical superciliousness of Dr. Bentley; but two late writers have made little use of the former, and (I think) have aggravated the latter beyond measure. The Bishop indeed has sometimes set Dr. Bentley in a more favourable light; but, as he tells us he suggested to the Poet the plan of the Fourth Dunciad, we may attribute the outlines of that character to him. If the inhumanity with which that great Critic is charged is owing to the stigma fixed on him by the Honourable Mr. Boyle, every one who reads the Preface to his Remarks on Phalaris must acquit him. And I will venture to say there is not a Librarian now living who would equal the candour and prudence of his behaviour at that juncture. With regard to his superciliousness in his writings on that controversy, they speak for themselves; and let posterity judge of them. But I will mention one particular*, where he owns an error with such openness as does honour to humanity; and I would recommend the example to the two late writers, who have left abundant occasion for it. Z. Z." This alludes to the epigram of Callimachus, which both Bentley and Madam Dacier bad misunderstood, as he ingenuously acknowledges in the Preface to his "Dissertation," p, lix. ed. 1699. The Two following Letters to the Printer of "The St. James's Chronicle" are ascribed to Mr. Archdeacon BLACKBURNE on the authority of the late Mr. LOCKYER DAVIS, who was deep in the Secrets of that respectable Literary Journal. "SIR, Thursday, Oct. 16, 1766. "There is a tribute of candid report due to the memory of men of genius and learning, how unfortunate soever they may have been in the application of their talents, or however they may have fallen short of that approbation which the publick has given to men of much inferior abilities, at the same time that it hath been denied to them. I would endeavour to apply this reflection to the case of the unhappy Leucophæus *, who has just finished his mortal course in a way which some people may think has fully justified the world in the unfavourable sentiments that were so generally entertained of his literary conduct. Leucophæus is now out of the reach of every man's resentment, as well as of every man's envy; and I would willingly hope, that a few dispassionate reflections upon his fortunes and his fate, from a person who knew something of him at different times of his life, may not be offensive to those who have candour enough to make the requisite allowances for errors and frailties, which have been excused in others who had but a small portion of his merit to qualify them. Merit he certainly had, and merit will be allowed him by the capable readers, even of such of his writings as convey the most striking idea of the Author's mental infirmities. "Few men have given earlier proofs of capacity and erudition than Leucophæus. His rising genius was marked and distinguished by the tendered patronage of some who had gained, and of others who thought they were gaining, the summit of fame in the republic of letters. With certain of the latter Leucophæus entered into the most intimate connection, upon the assurance of being conducted, in virtue of that alliance, to as much reputation, and as great a proportion of enolument, as he had reason to look for, A fatal step! which he never afterward could retrieve, when he most desired it. Had he preserved his independency, he had preserved his probity and honour; but he had parts, and he had ambition The former might have eclipsed a jealous competition for fame; the latter laid him open to practices proper to prevent it. No arts or allurements were omitted to attach him to a party, which easily found the means to consign him to contempt the moment it was suspected that he was uneasy in his bonds, and that he was meditating expedients to break them. "An intimate friend spent a long evening with him, when he was literally on the road to his ruint; that is to say, when he ** The learned but unhappy Dr. John Brown; of whom see the "Literary Anecdotes," vol. II. p. 211. . + Alluding, perhaps, to his Poem prefixed to Pope's Works, or his Essays on the Characteristics," was was going to confirm and cultivate the alliance abovementioned. Leucophæus's prospects were then talked over. He was warned to be aware of consequences; but the connexion was formed, and must be adhered to; and they who had heard Leucophæus harangue on that occasion, concerning the world with which he was going to engage, and concerning what would become him in his commerce with it, would have sworn that nothing could surprize his prudence, nothing pervert his integrity. "Splendid and decorated guide-posts, promising straight and easy roads, often stand at the head of dirty, crooked lanes. These were pointed out to Leucophæus at his first setting forwards. He soon found them fallacious indexes: he had the satisfaction, however, to have one example immediately before him, that shewed how well it might be worth the while of an aspirant to turn and wind about, and even to be a little bemired, in order to come at a comfortable lodging, clean linen, and a complete change of raiment. "But these were blessings which were not intended for Leucophæus. The tempter could have given the clue, which would have led his pupil through all difficulties; but that might have spoiled his own game. He contented himself therefore with escorting Leucophæus to the thickest of the filth, and there he fairly left him to the scorn and derision of lookers-on; calmly observing, with a shrug, If a man will expose himself, who can help it? It happened, however, that out of this piteous condition Leucophæus emerged, and with that vigour as in a great measure to recover his estimation. And here the Tempter saw it necessary to strike in again. A little coaxing procured an act of oblivion for one of the cruelest insults that could be offered to an ingenuous mind; and to shew the sincerity of his reconciliation, the first thing Leucophæus did was to disfigure one of his capital performances, by copying the ungracious manner of the Grand Exampler. "At what period Leucophæus lost himself with the publick every one knows. At the same instant was he deserted by the alliance; and so apprehensive were they, lest he should once more find such encouragement for his powers as might throw their importance into obscurity, that some pains were taken to have one door of preferment shut against him, even where the recommendation of the alliance would have been of no service to him had it been kept open. But they succeeded; and in that success added one more to the many instances upon record, of the power and proclivity of many a man to do mischief, where he has neither the power nor the inclination to do good. Certain fragments in the last thing Leucophæus committed to the press, throw some faint light upon this part of his history. * "Leucophæus now found himself in a wide world at enmity with him on every side. What was he to do? Should he return "Thoughts on Civil Liberty, Licentiousness, and Faction." to to the paths of truth and probity, to which he had been so long a stranger? Alas! his credit, his weight was gone. His early connexions had left a stain upon his character, which the afterconduct of an Angel could hardly have discharged from the minds of honest men. It appeared by some very remarkable evidence that he was suspected to be the scout of the alliance, even to the very last. It has since appeared that his most zealous remon→ strances against the imputation could not perfectly clear him of that suspicion. What remained then for him, but to do— what numbers (perhaps a majority) of his brethren had done before him-what his original patrons and conductors were then doing what the dexterous part of mankind generally find their account in doing? In one word, he temporized, but with this difference from the calmer speculators of the ground before them-he made his evolutions too quick and visible. Unhappily for him, the changes in the upper regions were frequent, sudden, and unforeseen. To these he accommodated himself without hesitation; and it was impossible that so immediate and so nimble transitions in so conspicuous a character, should not give the cue to the publick to mark him, rather than an hundred others, who really temporized no less than he, but who had the discretion not to notify it upon paper, or (if that was unavoidable in an occasional sermon or so) who had the art to balance so cleverly as to leave matters in that sort of see-saw way, which affords the publick no clear indications of their present attachments.-Common fame says, that the last effort of Leucophæus's genius was a panegyric on the Earl of Chatham *. This, probably, the sad catastrophe of the Author broke off abruptly; otherwise the publick had been favoured with it ere this. What the brotherhood in general think of the noble Earl, we shall hardly be informed in print before the end of January. Such is the difference between impetuosity and discretion in committing the same sin. "The last province allotted to Leucophæus was of a sort which implied a civil dismission from all his expectations at home. It is said to have been planned in a consultation of casuists, upon the same considerations which induce physicians to send their patients to Bath, when they chuse not to be longer troubled with their hypochondriacal complaints in town. Leucophæus was evidently contemptuously, unaccountably neglected; and the publick was eternally asking Why? He was a temporizer. What then? is not temporizing the cardinal virtue of the age? is it not almost the singular merit of that class of men to which Leucophæus belonged? To whomsoever his trimming character was obnoxious, it should not have been so to those who denounce utter exclusion against all who are inflexibly tenacious of unpolite truths. Is an obsequious blockhead a greater credit to the cause he espouses, or a greater ornament to the master who employs him, than an obsequious genius? No. But the former *See Dr. Brown's "Estimate," vol. II, |