before his death. The reader will find in him no incentives to vice, no tampering with crime, no leniency towards faults or foibles because found on his own side; no tenderness for hypocrisy on account of rank or station; no sparing of pretence or assumption even among men with whom he must have associated, and very likely esteemed, except for that particular defect.* He unfalteringly lays human nature bare: it is not a pleasing picture-it is sometimes harsh and severe-but it is inflexibly honest.

A confirmation of this view is afforded by Butler's Miscellaneous Works, in which he has taken a greater latitude than was afforded him by the nature of his work in his Hudibras: the vices of the court and the faults and foibles of the courtiers, as well as the various defects into which the fashions of the age precipitated men of literature and men of science, are all unsparingly castigated, though, as they contain many personalities, it is probable his good feeling prevented their being published during his life; for, though not ill-natured, he may have been aware that his laugh could not have been pleasant to those with whom he associated, and he was contented to conceal the smile he could not altogether repress.

It has been remarked, also, that Butler's life was not in unison with the principles he professed; that so warm a partisan as he appears in his works should not have lived in quiet submission to what he at least considered an unjust usurpation, or have consented to hold even a subordinate office under such a government. How he was to have served the cause he approved of we do not know he was no soldier, indeed he seems to have had no very high opinion of fighting or fighters; he had no public influence, nor were his writings, supposing they had been of the character of Hudibras, likely to acquire him any. He may have considered he did his duty best in his humble capacity by contributing his aid to the

* We allude to his repeated attacks on the members of the Royal Society, who it must be acknowledged were very unlucky at their commencement; and it was only the pretence to superior knowledge that he ridiculed.

preservation of social order as far as he could; and, like many others, submitted quietly to what he could not prevent, however he might lament. He has also shown a strong disgust to the busy interference of unqualified persons in political matters which they could not understand, and has strongly satirised the mobs of 'prentice_boys who besieged and influenced the divisions of the House of Commons; the women who presented petitions and remonstrances, and "the oyster women," who

"Lock'd their fish up,

And trudg'd away to cry, 'No Bishop!'”

He may have been, we think he was, wrong in his estimate of the utility of general political discussion and feeling, and the wisdom residing in the "vox populi ;' we are more inclined to believe that no people deserve their freedom who are not eager to understand and willing to maintain it. At a period of great excitement the mass of the people must follow leaders, and the leaders of what for want of a better name was called the Puritan party, were worthy of the cause they supported, however it may have been disgraced or disfigured by some of its adherents. But this acknowledgment should not lead us to the injustice of insisting upon the same conviction in Butler, or to deny to him the right of triumphing when his side was successful, or to blind us to the spirit with which he has seized upon and depicted the errors of his adversaries, or to deny the truth of much of the vice and hypocrisy he has castigated. It would be worse than folly-it would be a crime-to imagine that such a man was actuated by any other than honest, even though in some degree mistaken, motives. He is, indeed, a man of whom his country may be justly proud; and his reputation, though his works scarcely admit of translation, has been acknowledged throughout Europe.

SOME men are rather more indebted for their fame to the iniquities of their enemies, than to their own virtues and eminent abilities; and, after all that has been said and written about him, and with due consideration paid to his domestic worthiness, we cannot but be of opinion that such is the case with the much-famed subject of the present memoir.

Mr., or by courtesy-Lord William Russell, was born in September, 1639, three years before the commencement of the war between Charles I. and his Parliament. His father was William, Fifth Earl of Bedford, who, however, did not succeed to the title and family estates until 1641; his mother was Lady Anne Carr, or Ker, daughter of the infamous Countess of Somerset, formerly Countess of Essex, who had instigated the foul murder of Sir Thomas Overbury in the Tower. But crime is not hereditary; and Lady Anne, like other persons descended from a bad stock, was a