have thought proper to bestow upon them both the one and the other. It is much to be regretted, that the Life of Timour, written by himfelf, is not to be found in Europe: if that, and the Inftitutes could be tranflated and published together, fuch is the accuracy of the narrative, fuch is the importance of the matter, and fuch the lights that they would mutually reflect on each other, that it would, I conceive, be impoffible for any one to read them, without acquiescing in their authenticity from the internal Evidence aloné. Yours, moft affuredly,

WILLIAM DAVY.” With regard to the Inftitutes they are fuch as do honour to their noble founder: though we could wish to defer giving an extract, till we fee a continuation of them.

S

A Differtation upon English Typographical Founders and FoundeBy Edward Rowe Mores, A. M. & A.Š. S. 8vo.

ries.

6s. Nichols.

We fhould have been at a lofs to determine the mode of reviewing this extraordinary performance, if the Appendix, which is by another hand, had not in fome degree elucidated its obfcurities:

"The fübject of it; fays the writer of the Appendix, is in fome degree new to the world, and of more importance than at first it may appear to be: Thofe, who were acquainted with Mr. Mores, know that he would not willingly have facrificed fo large a portion of time, expence, and labour, in purfuit of an uninteresting object; nor need it be added, that his extenfive abilities and steady perfeverance rendered him perhaps of all others the propereft for fo difficult an undertaking. He had alfo the advantage of perufing the MSS. of the late Mr. James, whence he derived the knowledge of the feveral Dutch anecdotes he has related. One general remark must naturally occur to the most fuperficial reader. The author's whimfical peculiarities in abreviations and in punctuation deform his pages, and too frequently involve an otherwise clear fentence in obfcurity. Mr. Mores, it is true, has atoned for this inconvenience, by the manly ftrength of thought and acuteness of obfervation with which this little work abounds. But the reader, whether for amusement or instruction, expects his cafe to be confulted, if it can be done conveniently; and is apt to lay afide a book in which many unneceffary impediments are thrown in his way."

Mr. Mores begins by obferving that "the hiftory of English printers has been copioufly handled by thofe who with commendable zeal and diligence have delivered to us the typographical an tiquities of the nation. But little or no notice has hitherto been

VOL. IX.

I i

taken

taken of the FOUNDER, although he is a first and principal mover in this curious art.”

That the early printers were their own founders, may be taken for granted with Mr. Mores, whofe enumeration of them is equally faithful and entertaining. It would neither be agreeable to ourselves, nor perhaps amufing to the generality of our readers, to enter deeply into the abftrufer parts of this differtation; but it will be certainly amufing to extract from it a few ftriking particulars.

"The introduction of the study of the oriental languages,” Mr. Mores fays," cannot well be dated higher than the year 1635, in which year that great promoter of learning, Archbishop Laud, gave his noble pretent of oriental manufcripts to the University of Oxford."

By a decree of Starchamber, 1637, it was decreed that there fhould be four letter-founders, and no more. It is fomewhat remarkable, that four fhould be the number of letter-founders in London at this prefent time.

The benefactions of Junius and Bishop Fell to the Univerfity of Oxford are duly noticed; and a curious hiftory given of types of the feveral learned languages, which are clofed by the Etrufcan; "cut, Mr. Mores fays, by the late Mr. Caflon for the use of that very learned linguist Mr. Swinton and pleafing would it be to us, though we fear the wifh is vain, to view the next emotions of grief or joy conceived in Phoenician, Palmyrene, or Samnian, brought forth by lead and regulus, and cut by copper.

"Hebrew characters were used earlier than 1480*. A copy of the Pentateuch, which was printed in 1482, most probably at the Monaftery of Sonciro, is preferved at Verona, and another in the library of the Marquis of Baden Durlac.

"Mr. Mores feems to have intended to have given a specimen from the many curious matrices in his Foundery, if he had lived to have published his Differtation. And here it may not be unneceffary to obferve, that when he fpeaks fo frequently of our FOUNDERY, he was actually poffeffed of all the curious parts of that immenfe collection, which, after an accumulation of nearly three centuries, had centered in the late Mr. John James; a mafs apparently of rubbish, but in which, Mr. Mores fays, virtú was gratified by fome original punches of Wynkyn de Worde.

"Of Mr. Jackfon, fays the writer of the Appendix, Mr. Mores would have faid more, if he had known him in 1779. The labour of fix fucceffive years has been diligently exerted fince Mr. Mores defcribed his Foundery in 1773. He too, after cutting a variety of types for the Rolls of Parliament (a work which will ever reflect honour on the good taste and munificence of the pre

* See The Origin of Printing, #776, p. 198.

fent

fent reign) has employed his talents on Domefday, and in a manner more fuccefsful than his fellow-labourer [Mr. Cottrell.] I have the pleasure of informing the public, that the larger volume of that valuable record is nearly finished at the prefs.'

The following account of musical types fhall conclude our extracts,

"

"Fournier is faid to be the inventor of printing mufic twenty years ago. M. Preufchen first thought of printing maps in 1773. He affociated with M. Haas, a celebrated founder, who executed the types in 1775, and fent fpecimens of his performance to the Imperial Academy at St. Petersburg. See more in the Journal Encyclopedique, 1779, Avril, p. 89.' The perfon who fent me this notice is perfuaded, that he knows an univerfal improvement to all three fpecies of printing. I must add, however, that Fournier's claim, I imagine, is to the invention of ftamping mufic on plates of pewter, which Mr. Mores, p. 81, mentions as having been practifed in London by Foght, and which, as he properly obferves, is lefs beautiful than types, though poffibly more expeditious, and fufficiently durable for a fong. The earliest use of mufical types may be fixed, with Ames and Sir John Hawkins, to the Polychronicon of Higden" in 1495, where the characters are fufficiently rude. Mufic was printed with plates, ftill earlier, at Milan. The types arrived at great perfection in Germany by the year 1500; in Italy about 1515; and in England, progreffively, by Grafton (who obtained a patent for printing the ftatute-books, the earliest patent that is taken notice of by Sir W. Dugdale) about 1540; by John Day in 1560; and in 1575 by Thomas Vautrollier, the printer of the "Cantiones" of Tallis and Bird, who, though not printers, obtained from Q. Elizabeth a patent for the fole printing of mufic. In 1598 a patent, with powers ftill more ample, was granted to Thomas Morley; after the expiration of which, this branch of printing was exercised by every printer who chofe it; and was greatly improved by Thomas Playford in 1569. See Hiftory of Mufic," vol. III. p. 56, $7, 174. IV. 341, 473. and V. 107-110; in which latter page, this learned and entertaining writer fays, "the last great impro ver of the art of famping mufic in England was one Phillips, a Welchman, who might be faid to have ftolen it from one Fortier, a Frenchman, and a watch-maker,"

"

Sermons on the moft Prevalent Vices. To which are added an Ordination Sermon, a Synod Sermon, and Two Sermons on a Future State. By the Rev. David Lamont, Minifter of Kirkpatrick-Durham, near Dumfries. 8vo. 5s. 3d. Crow

der.

[Continued from page 190.]

Ii 2
iz

As

+

As Mr. Lamont's reflections on the character and duty of a minifter of the gospel are equally fenfible and ingenious, we fhall gratify our readers with a few more of his fentiments on that fubject.

“A minister should be an excellent Divine. Nothing can be more ridiculous, than to fee a Divine a stranger to Divinity. Like Apollos, he should be mighty in the fcriptures, and form his dif courfes upon that model of fublime and facred oratory. He fhould be a complete mafter of our orthodox fyftem, and of the moft flourishing deviations from it. He fhould be particularly ac quainted with the objections of the Deift, and the arguments by which they are most effectually answered-that, by thefe helps, he may be able to fpeak with propriety, difpute with acuteness, and inttruct with authority.

"A minifter fhould be an excellent moral philofopher, Moral philofophy is the first and best of human study, the fum and fubftance of human learning. Its connection with Divinity is fo clofe, that a man may as well pretend to preach without a tongue, as to preach fenfe without this accomplishment. For as, in practice, a man's religion feldom furvives his morality, fo, in fpeculation, a man's Divinity feldom furvives his philofophy.

A minifter fhould be well acquainted with history. Hiftory is the great magazine or storehouse, whence we extract, in miní ature, a faithful defcription of men, their fentiments, maxims, manners, cuftoms, characters, and fprings of action. In history we fee the progrefs and declenfion of virtue and vice, in every country, and in every period, with the interchanges of humility and pride, contentment and covetoufnefs, liberty and flavery, gentleness and cruelty, harmony and difcord, peace and war, chequering the varied feene. Thefe furnish us with the beft means of ftoring our minds with knowledge, and confequently of communicating knowledge to others.

"A minifter fhould know a little of rhetoric, just as much as to prevent aukwardnefs, not fo much as to produce affectation; for affectation in any man is ridiculous, but in a minifter is highly offenfive.

"As a member of ecclefiaftical government, a minifter fhould be acquainted with the fundamental laws of the church, and fuch fundamental laws of the state as are connected with it.

"I would not, however, exclude other fciences, which may tend to finish the fcholar, but these, I think, are abundantly fufficient to complete the minister.

"There is, nevertheless, one kind of knowledge which I had almoft forgot, but which must not be omitted, and that is the knowledge of the world, without which the knowledge of books will only make us pedants. The knowledge of the world gives a noble polish to our minds, rubs off our native rufticity, foftens our manners, improves our addrefs, infpires a modeft affurance, and opens a wide field of obfervation.

"A

A minifter, enriched with all thefe various branches of knowledge, bids fair for refpect; but if, on a thorough exami nation of himself, he finds he is materially deficient in any, he fhould take his hand from the fpiritual plough; and, to follow out Dr. South's fimilie, put it to another plough much better fuited to his capacity.

"A third prefervative against contempt in a minifter, is to be a good preacher. Preaching is the proper bufinefs of the preacher, and to be expert at that should be his study; for to be a bungler in his own profeffion, muft render him contemptible, though he were an adept in every other science; and though poffeffed of every other accomplishment, he would be confidered as a quack. But a competent degree of perfection in this divine art paves the way to folid honour.

The

By a good preacher, I do not mean a man of noife and gefture, who preaches up himself, and not his subject; and goes to the pulpit, as many go to the church, to be feen of men. action of the theatre, and the bombait of romances, are unworthy of the pulpit, and difgrace its folemnity. But, by a good preacher, I understand a man, who, from his original good fenie, improved by a good education, enters deep into the spirit of the facred text; ipeaks what he feels, and feels what is juft; who, in his lectures, is clear and copious; in his fermons, accurate and perfuafive; in both, more attentive to fenfe than found, to dignity of fentiment, than loftinefs of style; who manages his difcourfes with fuch propriety, that, in each there is as much fimplicity as will render it inftructive to the vulgar, and as much fublimity as will render it acceptable to the refined.

A good preacher fuits his fubjects to his audience; expatiates on the evidences of christianity where infidelity prevails; urges to the practice chriftian virtues, where vice predominates; and endeavours, with modefty, to illuftrate the obfcure paffages of fcripture, without darkening the clear ones by studied artifice.

A good preacher does not dive into myfteries, or pretend to explain them; but paffes them over in filence, as fubjects equally unintelligible to his audience and to himfelf. And, indeed, what is it lefs, than the most arrogant prefumption in any man, to pretend to know that which God has concealed from human knowledge, or to investigate that which God has locked up from the keenest researches of man's penetration?

"A good preacher adapts his difcourfes to the capacities of his hearers, and does not affect the falfe fublime. Learned difquifitions, above common comprehenfion, debafe the pulpit; and a man may, with as good a grace, read a lecture on aftronomy to an ox, as preach abftrufe difcourfes to men who have but plain understandings. There is a peculiar majefty in unaffected plainnefs; a substantial beauty, which needs neither paint nor patch. All drefs fuppofes imperfection: truth needs not the aids of ornament. A glittering outfide often indicates a trifling infide, Truth loves to be naked, and is not afhamed.

"A