him by the Sicilians, when he was ædile; by the king of Cappadocia, when proconful; and his friends preffed him to receive their benefactions, when in exile; yet, as we have already obferved, he refused them all.

The banishment of Demofthenes reflected infamy upon him for he was convicted of taking bribes; that of Cicero, great hoDour; because he fuffered for deftroying traitors who had vowed the ruin of their country. The former, therefore, departed without exciting pity or regret for the latter, the fenate changed their habit, continued in mourning, and could not be perfuaded to pafs any act till the people had recalled him. Cicero, indeed, fpent the time of exile in an inactive manner in Macedonia; but with Demofthenes it was a bufy period in his political character. Then it was (as we have mentioned above) that he went to the several cities of Greece, strengthened the common intereft, and defeated the defigns of the Macedonian ambaffadors. In which refpect he difcovered a much greater regard for his country, than Themistocles and Alcibiades, when under the fame misfortune. After his return, he purfued his former plan of government, and continued the war with Antipater and the Macedonians. Whereas Lælius reproached Cicero in full fenate, with fitting filent, when Cæfar, who was not yet come to years of maturity, applied for the confulfhip contrary to law. And Brutus, in one of his letters, charged him with having reared a "greater and more infupportable tyranny, than that which they had destroyed."

As to the manner of their death; we cannot think of Cicero's, without a contemptuous kind of pity. How deplorable to fee an old man, for want of proper refolution, fuffering himfeif to be carried about by his fervants, endeavouring to hide himself from death, which was a meffenger that nature would foon have fent him, and overtaken notwithstanding, and flaughtered by his enemies! The other, though he did difcover fome fear, by taking fanctuary, is, nevertheless, to be admired for the provifion he had made of poifon, for the care with which he had preferved it, and his noble manner of ufing it. So that, when Neptune did not afford him an afylum, he had recourse to a more inviolable altar, rescued himself from the weapons of the guards, and eluded the cruelty of Antipater.'

Plutarch, with all his excellencies, has defects from which human powers were never exempted. His tranfitions are frequently abrupt, and difgufting; his writings are strongly tinctured with fuperftition; and he is apt to prejudice a common reader against a life at its beginning, by a tedious investigation into the minuteneffes of antiquity. When to these circumftances we add the gravity of his fentiments, we may venture to pronounce, that the utmost efforts of arts and genius in a translator, could not make this author popular. It is true, he is always bought for a fashionable library. But what is the confequence? He refts upon the fhelf, and grows as dufty as Potter's Antiquities of Greece. He who admires Plutarch must be a scholar, and a lover of fevere philofophy.

This work of Dr. Langhorne, and his brother, as much exceeds the wretched performances which difhonour Plutarch,

as

as it is inferior to the original strain and energy of Dryden's tranflations. It is much to be regretted, that capital authors are often tranflated by thofe who are inadequate to what they undertake; by the pioneers, or huffars of literature; by laborious dullness, or fuperficial vivacity.

IX. The Minfirel: or the Progress of Genius. A Poem. Book I. 410. s. 6d. Dilly.

HE author of these beautiful ftanzas acquaints the public,

THE

that he has formed the plan of a poetical work, in which he proposes to trace the progress of a poetical genius, born in a rude and illiterate age, from the firft dawnings of fancy and reason, till that period at which he may be fuppofed capable of fupporting the character of a Minstrel, that is, of an itinerant poet and musician; a character, which, according to the notions of our forefathers, was not only refpectable, but facred. A poetical illuftration of this fubject promifed, he thought, variety of amufement, and even fome topics of moral and philofophical inftruction.

With a modesty and diffidence which make genius amiable, he fubmits this first book to the judgment of the public. In deference to their opinion, he is determined to reprefs, or indulge his imagination. If this fpecimen fhould not meet with a favourable reception from them, he will cease to invoke his inaufpicious muse; if it has the fanction of their approbation, he will complete his poem.

The pursuits and amusements of the Minstrel's chilhood, and early youth, are defcribed in this first book; the incidents that qualify him for his profeffion, and determine him to enter upon it, will be the subjects of the books that are to follow.

I have endeavoured (fays he) to imitate Spenfer, not in his allegory, or antiquated dialect, which, though graceful in him, appear fometimes aukward in modern writers, but in the measure, and harmony of his verfe, and in the fimplicity and variety of his compofition. To thofe who may be difpofed to ask what could-induce me to write in fo difficult a measure, I can only anfwer that it pleafes my ear, and feems from its Gothic ftructure and original, to bear fome relation to the fubject and spirit of the poem. It admits both fimplicity, and magnificence of found, and language, beyond any other ftanza that I am acquainted with.'

We shall not object to this gentleman, his adopting of Spenfer's ftanza, as he animates it with the true fpirit of poetry. But we fhall take the liberty to observe, that, in his opinion of that poet, he feems to join in the implicit homage which is generally paid to authors of old and established reputation. It will not be eafy to prove, that the old dialect, which is grace

graceful in Spenfer, is aukward in modern writers. If a modern poet should affect the language of Elizabeth's reign, he would justly be charged with a vitiated tafte; why then might Spenfer offend with impunity? Was it not equally abfurd in him to use a language which was obfolete when he wrote it ?-Antiquated words give a real dignity to no compofition. The following ftanzas, in which the poet warns the man of genius against a defire of wealth and luxury, are characterized with a delicacy of imagination, and harmony of numbers, which enliven and embellifh the whole book.

Canft thou forego the pure ethereal foul
In each fine fenfe fo exquifitely keen,
On the dull couch of Luxury to loll,
Stung with disease, and ftupified with spleen;
Fain to implore the aid of Flattery's fcreen,
Even from thyfelf thy loathfome heart to hide,
(The mansion then no more of joy serene),
Where fear, diftruft, malevolence, abide,
And impotent defire, and difappointed pride?

O how canft thou renounce the boundless store
Of charms which Nature to her votary yields !
The warbling woodland, the refounding thore,
The pomp of groves, and garniture of fields;
All that the genial ray of morning gilds,
And all that echoes to the fong of even,
All that the mountain's fheltering bofom fhields,
And all the dread magnificence of heaven,

how canft thou renounce, and hope to be forgiven!

Thefe charms fhall work thy foul's eternal health,

And love, and gentleness, and joy, impart.

But these thou must renounce, if luft of wealth
E'er win its way to thy corrupted heart;

For, ah! it poifons like a fcorpion's dart;

Prompting th' ungenerous with, the selfish scheme,
The ftern refolve unmoved by pity's fmart,
The troublous day, and long diftrefsful dream.-

Return, my rambling Mufe, refume thy purposed theme.*

The characters of the young Minstrel's parents, his difpofition, education, and employments in his tender years, are happily imagined, and elegantly and expreffively described.

The moral reflexions of this author are juft and nervous; and his imagery deferves as much praise for the effects which it produces, as for its propriety and animation. It excites a love of innocence, nature, and virtue.

We hope the author of this Firft Book of the Minstrel will be encouraged by the public to continue, and complete his poem.

X. Letters

a man rushed from a hedge mafked, caught her in his arms, and was going to carry her to a houfe, but that lord Mofs coming up in a gallop to her affiftance, the monster quitted her, mounted his horfe and rode off: that my lord conducted her to a coach in which were lady Mofs, Mifs Montague, and Mr. Heartfree: that they placed her between them, while lord Mofs rode after the man in the mafk; that Mrs. Heartfree being on horfeback alfo, and pretending to be frighted, the ladies preffed her to come into the coach; but that the excufed herself by faying that any thing of a flight (quere, what is meant here by flight; or fhould not the word have been fright?) always occafioned a violent pain in her head, and that she would, therefore, go home. Mifs Somerfet congratulates the young lady upon her happy efcape, who appears ftill to be extremely uneafy, and promifes to relate her hiftory. She then continues to tell Meliora, that when they came to M-castle and enquired how Mrs. Heartfree did, the fervants all looked surprized, and declared they had not seen her or her fervant; adding that lady Mofs faid the was gone off with my lord.

By a letter from Mifs Knightly Mifs Somerset is informed that her fifter had been married a month to Sir Peter Obrian Ruefull, and that Mr. Padftow was returned from abroad; that he was at Knightly-court,; that he had expreffed great tenderness for her; that he had not encouraged a paffion for her till he had been very fuccefsful abroad; that he flattered himself his proposals would not now be rejected by her friends; that he had wrote to Mr. Somerfet, not knowing of his death, and inclosed a letter for his daughter; but that, having received no answer, he was refolved to come to England: that he had spoken with much affection of a fifter who had been educated in a convent, and that he had fent for her to a coufin Blane in France. Mr. Foxchace is prefented to Mifs Somerfet by her aunt. He behaves in fuch a manner that even Mifs Montague is afhamed of him. Sir Harry and lady Frankford come, at the fame time, to dine at M-caftle and introduce lord Freeman, of whom Mifs Somerfet has heard a moft favourable character.

Mifs Knightly acquaints her friend with her troubles, and tells her that Mr. Plaftow had just heard of his fifter's being fled from France, nobody knew whither. Sir Harry and lady Frankford take Mifs Somerset to see Mr. Allen's houfe: there they discover lord Freeman fitting in an arbour, in a penfive attitude. Lady Frankford and Meliora, foon afterwards, find a pocket book of his lordship's, from which drops the picture of a beautiful woman. He returns in search of VOL. XXX, Auguft, 1770. his

L

But it keeps them exprefsly in force against all Papists, oppugners of the Trinity, and perfons of no religion at all; and only exempts from their rigour fuch ferious, fober-minded Diffenters, as fhall have taken the oaths, and fubfcribed the declaration at the feffions, and fhall regularly repair to fome licenfed (registered) place of religious worship, &c.'

The question, fays Dr. Furneaux, then is, whether nonconformity be a crime in thofe, who, complying with the toleration-act, have approved themfelves no Papists, oppugners of the Trinity, or perfons of no religion at all? Or, what is the state of mere nonconformifts under that act? Are they in the eye of the law criminal, though the penalties are fufpended? Or, are they reftored to a legal capacity, and to a freedom from all crime as well as penalty, in virtue of the tolération-act

In my opinion, continues this writer, to represent nonconformity as a crime, the penalties of which are merely fufpended, is a defective and erroneous account of the state of the Diffenters, under the toleration act. And to fhew this,

The FIRST obfervation I would make is: That fufpenfion of penalty is not the language of that act. The title of the act indeed ufes the phrafe, exemption from penalty: it is stiled, An act for exempting their majefties Proteftant fubjects, diffenting from the church of England, from the penalties of certain laws. But the act itself uses a comprehenfive and forcible expreffion, which excludes the crime as well as the penalty; it leaves these penal statutes no operation at all, with refpect to the Diffenters who are under the toleration act; it repeals and annihilates those statutes with regard to fuch Diffenters. The words of the toleration-act are, that thofe statutes shall not be conftrued to EXTEND to fuch perfons. And if they are not to be conftrued to extend to them, nothing can be plainer, than that they are not to be construed to affect them at all, either as to crime, or penalty. Now, if the ftatute-law doth not make this a crime, it is certain, it is no crime at all by the common◄ las; because the conftitution of the church, and its peculiar doctrine, worthip, difcipline, and government, are founded wholly upon the ftatute-law, and not at all upon the common-law.

Inftead, therefore, of faying in the Commentaries, that the penalties are all of them fufpended by the toleration act, which exempts all Diffenters, except Papists, and fuch as deny the Trinity, from all penal laws, &c. should it not have been said, that all penal laws for nonconformity are repealed, with regard to thofe Diffenters, who are qualified as the act directs? And would it not have been proper to mention, that the Diffenters are freed from profecution in the ecclefiaftical courts? And that there is nothing, therefore, in the law of England, which can make mere nonconformity a crime, any more than liable to penalty?"

Here our author feems to mifreprefent the commentator. Does the latter mean any thing more, than that nonconformity in general is confidered as a crime, and fubject to penalties by the laws; but that in a particular cafe, namely, that of Proteftant