sion were apt to stretch the prerogative too far, and to injure liberty; but charged him, if he ever came to any eminence in his profession, never to sacrifice the laws and liberty of his country to his own interest, or the will of his prince: He repeated his advice twice, and immediately falling into a fit of apoplexy, died in a few hours: and this circumstance had a lasting in. fluence upon him.

The first open attack upon him was made by the earl of Bristol, who, in 1663, exhibited against him a charge of high treason in the House of Lords.There had been a long friendship between the chancellor and this nobleman; but as they gradually fell into different measures, both with respect to religion and politics, and the chancellor had refused a small boon as the earl took it to be, which was said to be the passing of a patent in favour of a court lady, the latter thought himself so disobliged, that he let loose his fiery temper and resolved upon nothing but revenge. His accusation, however, contained so many inconsistent charges, that the prosecution terminated greatly to the chancellor's honour, notwithstanding which, his enemies advanced very considerably by it in their designs to make him less gracious to his master, less respected in parliament, and less beloved by the people.

In August 1667, he was removed from his office of lord chancellor, and in November following impeached of high treason and other high crimes and misdemeanors by the House of Commons, upon which he retired into France, when an act of banishment was passed against him, He resided at Rouen in Normandy, and, dying there, 9th Dec. 1673, his body was brought to England and interred in Westminster abbey. Anne, his eldest daughter, was married, as we have already observed, to the king's brother, the Duke of York, afterwards King James II. by which match, she became mother of two daughters, Mary and Anne, who were successively queens of England.

He wrote 1st, A History of the rebellion, 3 vols. folio. 2d, A Letter to the Duke of York, and ano ther to the Dutchess, upon the occasion of their em bracing the Romish religion. 3d, An answer to Hobbes's Leviathan. 4th, A History of the rebellion and civil wars in Ireland, octavo. He was also the author of several other valuable works.

The Rev. Mr. Granger, in his Biographical History of England, observes, that "the virtue of the earl of Clarendon was of too stubborn a nature for the age of Charles II. Could he have been content, says he, to have enslaved millions, he might have been more a monarch than an unprincely king. But he did not only look upon himself as the guardian of the laws and liberties of his country, but had also a pride in his nature that was above vice; and chose rather to be a victim himself than sacrifice his integrity. He had only one part to act, which was that of an honest man. His enemies allowed themselves a much greater latitude; they loaded him with calumnies, blamed him even for their own errors and misconduct, and helped to ruin him by such buffoonries as he despised. He was a much greater, perhaps a much happier, man, alone, and in exile, thair Charles II. upon the throne.

And the following character of this nobleman is... given by Mr. Walpole, "Sir Edward Hyde," says he, "who opposed an arbitrary court, and embraced the party of an afflicted one, must be allowed to have acted conscientiously. A better proof was his behav iour on the restoration, when the torrent of an infatuafed nation intreated the king and his minister to be absolute. Had Clarendon sought nothing but powe er, his power had never ceased. A corrupted court and a blinded populace were less the causes of the chancellor's fall than an ungrateful king, who could not pardon his lordship's having refused to accept for him the slavery of his country. Like justice herself, he held the balance between the necessary power of

the supreme magistrate and the interests of the people. This never dying obligation his cotemporaries were taught to overlook and clamour against, till they removed the only man, who, if he could, would have corrected his master's evil government. Almost every virtue of a minister made his character venerable. Ás an historian he seems more exceptionable. His majesty and eloquence, his power of painting characters, and his knowledge of his subject, rank him in the first class of writers: yet he has both great and little faults. Of the latter his stories of ghosts and omens are not to be defended. His capital fault is his whole work being a laboured justification of king Charles. If he relate faults, some palliating epithet always slides in; and he has the art of breaking his darkest shades with gleams of light that take off all impression of horror. One may pronounce on my lord Clarendon, that he acted for liberty, but wrote for prerogative."

HYDER (ÁLLY) was a soldier of fortune, and the son of a person who had served in quality of governor of a small fortress, to one of the kings of Mysore also father of the late formidable Tippoo Sultan. He is said to have acquired the rudiments of war in the French camps; and, in the year 1753, he distinguished himself as their auxiliary, in the plains of Tritchinopoly. About ten years after, being then at the head of the Mysore army, he dethroned his sovereign, and governed the kingdom under the title of Regent. Soon after he extended his dominions on every side, the Carnatic excepted, until, at last, he was at the head of a state, which produced an annual revenue of about eighteen millions of dollars.

In the years 1767, 1768, and 1769, Hyder was engaged in a war with the English, in the management of which, he discovered great skill and ability;

for, making a sudden irruption into the Carnatic, with an army consisting principally of cavalry, he came within seven miles of Madras, and dictated a peace to the government of that place. But, in 1771, Hyder sustained a total defeat from the Mahrattah army, within a few miles of his capital; into which he escaped with great difficulty, with a small remnant of his army, and afterwards defied the attacks of his numerous enemies, who possessed neither the skill, nor the ordinary requisites for a siege. He waited in patience till the enemy, by desolating the country, were compelled to leave it. A few years of peace not only restored matters to their former state, but improved both his revenues and army to a degree beyond probability; and, at the same time, the distractions, which prevailed among the Mahrattahs, enabled him to extend his territory at their expence.

In 1780, during the war which was then carried on between France and Great-Britain, Hyder Ally made a second irruption into the Carnatic, at the head of 100,000 troops, both horse and foot, the very best of their kind that had ever been disciplined by a native of India. His success in cutting to pieces Col. Baillie's detachment, and the consequent retreat of the Carnatic army, occasioned the British interests in that quarter, to be given up for lost. But Mr. Hastings, then governor general of Bengal, and the late Sir Eyre Coote, commander in chief of the B tish forces in India thought otherwise, and this last officer soon put a stop to the victorious progress of Hyder Ally. With a force scarcely exceeding 7000 men, he compelled that indefatigable warrior to raise the siege of several fortresses; and on the 1st of July, 1781, he gained a complete victory over his vast army, which was said to consist of 150,000 men. Hyder sustained six defeats successively. That of the 7th of June 1782 was the last, in which these two great commanders were destined to meet each other; nor was either of them afterwards present at any action VOL. III. No. 19. P

of importance. Each died a natural death within five months of the other; Hyder towards the end of 1782, and Coote in April 1783.

HOPKINSON, (FRANCIS) was born in Pennsyl vania, in the year 1738, but with respect to the circumstances of his early life, we have no particular infor mation, only that he studied law under Benjamin Chew, Esq. then attorney general of Pennsylvania.

Mr. Hopkinson possessed an uncommon share of genius of a peculiar kind. He excelled in music and poetry and had some knowledge in painting. But these arts were far from monopolizing all the powers of his mind. He was well skilled in many practical and useful sciences, particularly in mathematics and natural philosophy, and he had a general acquain tance with the principles of anatomy, chemistry and natural history. But his forte was humour and satire, in both of which, he was not surpassed by Lucian, Swift or Rabellais. These extraordinary pow ers were consecrated to the advancement of the interests of patriotism, virtue and science. It would fill many pages to mention his numerous publications during the late revolution, all of which are directed to these important objects. He began in the year 1775, with a small tract, which he entitled "A Pretty History," in which he exposed the tyranny of Great Britain, in America, by a most beautiful Allegory, and he concluded his contributions to his country, in his way, with the history of "The New Roof," a performance, which for wit, humour and good sense, must last as long as the citizens of Ame. rica continue to admire, and to be happy under the present national government of the United States.

News-paper scandal frequently, for months together, disappeared or languished, after the publication of several of his irresistible satires upon that disgrace