lished as a writer, and the profits of his historical volumes, to use his own words, "rendered him not only independent but opulent." In 1763 he accompanied the earl of Hertford's embassy to Paris. He received much attention from the literary circles of that metropolis, and appears to have been highly gratified with his reception. On the departure of Lord Hertford to assume the vice-royalty of Ireland, in 1766, Mr Hume was left chargé d'affaires in Paris until the arrival of the duke of Richmond. In 1767 he accepted of an under-secretaryship of state; but in 1769 retired into private life, and fixed his residence in Edinburgh. He spent the remainder of his days in lettered ease and tranquillity. He died on the 25th of August, 1766.

His friend, Dr Adam Smith, has given an account of his latter moments in a letter to Mr Strahan, which is usually appended to the autobiographical sketch of the author attached to his History of England.' It is an interesting but a melancholy document, representing as it does a mind of great and unquestionable powers making idle sport of all the tremendous uncertainties which must, even to Hume's sceptical mind, have enveloped the article death.

Mr Hume's merits as an historian are now pretty generally understood, and he is daily losing possession of the public ear. It is impossible to deny to his narrative the praise of great elegance, perspicuity, and seductiveness; but he has been proved to be deficient in the higher qualities of the historian,-in all that enables us to repose confidence in his graceful narrative. We now read every page of his once popular history with extreme suspicion, and a constant watchfulness against being led into error by his artful and insidious eloquence. "Mr Hume's summaries," says the critic already quoted in this article, "Mr Hume's summaries of the conflicting views of different parties at particular eras, have been deservedly admired for the singular clearness, brevity, and plausibility with which they are composed: but, in reality, they belong rather to conjectural than to authentic history; and any one who looks into contemporary documents will be surprised to find how very small a portion of what is there imputed to the actors of the time had actually occurred to them, and how little of what they truly maintained is there recorded in their behalf. The object of the author being chiefly to give his readers a clear idea of the scenes he described, he seems to have thought that the conduct of the actors would be best understood by ascribing to them the views and motives, which, upon reflection, appeared to himself most natural in their situation. In this way, he has often made all parties appear more reasonable than they truly were; and given probability and consistency to events, which, as they actually occurred, were not a little inconceivable. But in so doing he has undoubtedly violated the truth of history, and exposed himself to the influence of the most delusive partialities. Such a hypothetical integration of the opinions likely to prevail in any particular circumstances, seems at all times to have been a favourite exercise of his ingenuity. Very early in life, for example, he composed four Essays, to which he gave the names of the Epicurean, the Stoic, the Platonist, and the Sceptic, and prefixed to them the following very characteristic notice: The intention of these Essays is not so much to explain accurately the sentiments of the ancient sects of philosophy, as to deliver the sentiments of sects which naturally form themselves in the world, and

entertain different ideas of human life and human happiness. I have given each of them the name of the philosophical sect to which it bears the greatest affinity.' These very words, we think, might be applied, with very little variation, to most of the summaries of which we have been speaking. They, too, are mere conjectural views of the different sentiments that may be supposed naturally to arise in the world at particular periods; and they are given under the name of the historical party to which they bear the greatest affinity."

Walter Harte.

BORN A. D. 1700.-DIED A. D. 1774.

WALTER HARTE, a respectable miscellaneous writer, was born about the year 1700, but the precise date cannot now be ascertained. His father was a respectable clergyman of the church of England. Young Harte received his early education at Marlborough school under a Mr Hildrop, to whom he afterwards dedicated some pieces of poetry. He went from this school to Oxford, where he graduated in 1720.

His first publication was a volume of poetry, which appeared in 1727. It attracted Pope's attention, who honoured the author with his friendship and patronage, and prefixed his encomiastic lines amongst others, to the Dunciad." It is said that Harte's reputation was so high amongst his contemporaries as to make it appear a probable thing to not a few of them that he was the author of the Essay on Man,' which was first published anonymously. In 1730 he published a poetical Essay on Satire,' and in 1735 an Essay on Reason.' Pope contributed some lines to both these productions. He afterwards published two sermons preached before the university of Oxford, which were much admired. Betwixt the years 1746 and 1750 he travelled on the continent with Lord Chesterfield's son.

In 1759 he published a History of Gustavus Adolphus.' This work, which formed two volumes 4to, was industriously compiled, but its success by no means answered the expectations of the author. His style was rugged and pedantic in an extreme; but when Hawkins, the publisher, ventured to point out some uncouth expressions and phrases, Harte would smile contemptuously at his want of taste, and say"George, that's what we call writing!" It was also unfortunate for poor Harte that this work should have come out nearly about the same time with historical pieces from the pens both of Hume and Robertson. His last publication, entitled 'The Amaranth,' contains some very pleasing pieces of poetry of a serious cast.

FRANCIS FAWKES, a very minor name in English literature, was born in Yorkshire, and educated at Leeds and Cambridge. He took orders, and was first settled at Bramham in his native county, from

which place he removed to the curacy of Croydon, in Surrey, whence Archbishop Herring collated him to the vicarage of Orpington with St Mary Cray, in Kent. In 1774 he exchanged his vicarage for the rectory of Hayes. His first poetical publication was a descriptive poem, entitled Bramham Park,' which appeared in 1747. In 1761 he published a volume of 'Original Poems and Translations; and in 1767 a translation of Theocritus very respectably executed. It is said that Pearce, Jortin, Johnson, Warton, and several other eminent scholars and critics, contributed to the Theocritus. He died in August, 1777.

John Armstrong.

BORN A. D. 1709.-DIED A. D. 1779.

THIS minor English poet was born in the parish of Castleton in Roxburghshire. He studied medicine in the university of Edinburgh, and practised, with considerable repute, in London for several years previous to his death. His literary reputation is chiefly founded on a didactic poem, entitled The Art of Preserving Health,' which was published in 1744. He wrote several other pieces both on professional and non-professional subjects; and enjoyed a fair average reputation among the scholars of his day, though his writings are seldom referred

to now.

Thomas Amory.

BORN A. D. 1692.-Died A. D. 1789.

THOMAS AMORY, the son of Counsellor Amory, who attended King William in Ireland, was born in the county of Clare in the year 1692. He is believed to have studied medicine for the purpose of practising as a physician; his design, however, if intended, was never put in execution. In 1755 he published a very remarkable work, entitled 'Memoirs, containing the Lives of several Ladies of Great Britain; a History of Antiquities, Productions of Nature, and Monuments of Art; Observations on the Christian Religion, as professed by the Established Church and Dissenters of every Denomination; Remarks on the writings of the greatest English Divines, and a Review of the Works of the Writers called Infidels, from Lord Herbert of Cherbury to the late Lord Viscount Bolingbroke; with a variety of disquisitions and opinions relative to criticism and manners; and many extraordinary actions: in several Letters,' Lond. 8vo. A second volume was promised, but it never appeared. In 1756 he published the first volume of the life of John Buncle, and the second in 1766, in which it is thought the author intended to sketch his own picture. It is in some sort a continuation of the Memoirs.' Mr Amory was likewise author of a letter to the Monthly Reviewers, as also of various religious tracts, poems, and songs. He died in 1789, at the advanced age of ninety-seven.

James Harris.

BORN A. D. 1709.-DIED A. D. 1780.

THIS celebrated philological and grammatical writer was the eldest son of James Harris, Esq. of Salisbury, and the lady Elizabeth Ashley, sister to the celebrated author of the Characteristics.' He received his early education at Salisbury, whence he was sent to Oxford at the age of sixteen. Having spent the usual term of study at Wadham college, he became a member of Lincoln's inn, though with no view towards the bar.

In his twenty-fourth year he succeeded, by the death of his father, to a handsome property, and immediately gave himself up to the pursuit of literature, especially the Greek philosophy. In 1744 he published three treatises on Art, the Fine Arts, and Happiness, distinguished by their elegance of style, profound and varied learning, and general correctness of thought and sentiment. In 1751 he published a work, entitled Hermes, or a Philosophical Inquiry concerning Universal Grammar.' This is a work of much research and fine taste, although it does not perhaps deserve so high a commendation as has been passed upon it by Lowth and some others. Horne Tooke attacked it with great virulence.

In 1761, Mr Harris was returned one of the representatives for Christ church. In 1763 he became a lord of the treasury, but resigned office with the rest of the ministry in 1765. In 1775 he published a work entitled 'Philosophical Arrangements,' being a portion of a meditated larger work on the Peripatetic logic. His last work was entitled Philological Inquiries.' It contains a summary of the critical philosophy of the ancients.

Mr Harris died in 1780. His son, Lord Malmesbury, published a splendid edition of his works in 1801, in two quarto volumes, with a Memoir prefixed. His lordship seems to have formed a pretty just estimate of his respected parent's literary character. He says: "The distinction by which he was most generally known, and by which he is likely to survive to posterity, is that of a man of learning." Mr Harris's treatises will always be admired for their taste and erudition; though little regarded, perhaps, as profoundly philosophical tracts.

Richard Wilson.

BORN A. D. 1713.-DIED A. d. 1782.

THIS artist was of Welsh extraction. He was born in the year 1713. At thirty-five years of age we find him a portrait-painter of some repute in London, for he was employed in 1748 to execute likenesses of the prince of Wales and the duke of York, for their tutor the bishop of Norwich. Edwards says, that in drawing a head Wilson was not excelled by any of his contemporaries,-which is, after all, not saying much for his genius in this line of the art; for, with the excep

tion of Reynolds-and he was now only rising into notice-all the portrait-limners of the day were wretched daubers.

A visit to Italy, which Wilson was enabled to make in his thirty-sixth year, proved the means of leading him into that department wherein his better genius lay. At first, says Allan Cunningham, "he continued the study and practice of portrait-painting, and, it is said, with fair hopes of success, when an accident opened another avenue to fame, and shut up the way to fortune. Having waited one morning, till he grew weary, for the coming of Zucarelli the artist, he painted, to beguile the time, a scene upon which the window of his friend looked, with so much grace and effect that Zucarelli was astonished, and inquired if he had studied landscape. Wilson replied that he had not. ‹ Then I advise you,' said the other, to try, for you are sure of great success.' The counsel of one friend was confirmed by the opinion of another. This was Vernet, a French painter,-a man whose generosity was equal to his reputation, and that was very high. One day, while sitting in Wilson's painting-room, he was so struck with the peculiar beauty of a newly-finished landscape that he desired to become its proprietor, and offered in exchange one of his best pictures. This was much to the gratification of the other; the exchange was made, and with a liberality equally rare and commendable, Vernet placed his friend's picture in his exhibition-room, and when his own productions happened to be praised or purchased by English travellers, the generous Frenchman used to say, 'Don't talk of my landscapes alone, when your own countryman, Wilson, paints so beautifully.' These praises, and an internal feeling of the merits of his new performances, induced Wilson to relinquish portrait-painting, and proceed with landscape. He found himself better prepared for this new pursuit than he had imagined; he had been long insensibly storing his mind with the beauties of natural scenery, and the picturesque mountains and glens of his native Wales had been to him an academy when he was unconscious of their influence. He did not proceed upon that plan of study, much recommended, but little practised, of copying the pictures of the old masters, with the hope of catching a corresponding inspiration; but he studied their works, and mastered their methods of attaining excellence, and compared them carefully with nature. By this means he caught the hue and the character of Italian scenery, and steeped his spirit in its splendour. His landscapes are fanned with the pure air, warmed with the glowing suns, filled with the ruined temples, and sparkling with the wooded streams and tranquil lakes of that classic region. His reputation rose so fast that he obtained pupils. Mengs, out of regard for his genius, painted his portrait; and Wilson repaid this flattery with a fine landscape."

Wilson returned to England after a six years' residence abroad. The sure road to fame now lay before him: landscape painting, in its true principles, was yet unknown in England, and none were better qualified to become the founder of a new school in that delightful branch of the art than Wilson. But he had to inspire his countrymen with a new taste, before he could hope to cultivate a branch of the art in which he was so eminently qualified to excel with advantage to himself; and this he found no small difficulty in accomplishing. His easy, artless, truthful style, failed to win the attention of such purchasers as gloated on the productions of Barret's easel, and the equally worthless daubs of