none have made a nearer approach to fame, through this avenue, than those who have ftood foremost in our profeffion. I think I need not explain my meaning by mentioning the hiftories of Henry the Seventh, and the Civil War. That this track has not been more frequented by fome of the same set of men, may be imputed to their want of leifure; in fome measure to a delicacy perhaps, in declining to relate transactions, in which their own part, though often confiderable, was only fhort. But in general it is much to be lamented, that in this country, immortality of reputation, which is one great fpur to actions, and wifely made perhaps The last infirmity of noble minds, is after all left at the mercy of obfcure and private historians. We have few Xenophons and Cæfars; as few Bacons and Clarendons; few in any public capacity who have penned memorials of the times in which they lived; and defcribed the scenes in which they acted themselves.' In a note on this paffage, our Author expreffes no small degree of diffatisfaction with Mr. Horace Walpole, who has paffed a fevere cenfure on Sir Thomas More, Lord Bacon, and the Earl of Clarendon, as hiftorians; and who has faid, that it is hoped no more Chancellors will write our ftory, till they can diveft themselves of that habit of their profeffion, apologizing for a bad caufe." Mr. Walpole's remark, like many others which occur in his works, is, perhaps, rather fuperficial, and a little petulant; but, at the fame time, we can by no means agree with the Writer of these Dialogues, in his high opinion of the hiftorical merit of Bacon and Clarendon. Both thefe great men are very reprehenfible for their prejudices, their partiality, and their undue attachment to the memory of princes who were guilty of tyranny and oppreffion. Their manner of compofition, too, can never be justly confidered as a perfect model. The style of Lord Bacon partakes of the pedantry of the age in which he lived; and Lord Clarendon's is intricate, obfcure, prolix, and fometimes ungrammatical. It is, indeed, often admirable in point of ftrength and copioufnefs; and his characters are drawn with a masterly hand. They are always beautiful as pictures, though they are not always ftrictly conformable to truth. What our Author has faid to the difparagement of obfcure and private hifiorians is equally erroneous. In the prefent age at leaft, in which the fources of history have been fo fully difplayed, and an extenfive knowledge of the world, and the moft liberal views of things, are attainable by perfons of almoft every rank, why should not private men be as capable of historical compofition as the greateft of our lawyers!. We should be glad to know what gentlemen of the law could be mentioned, who would would be likely to write the hiftory of their country with an ability, penetration, and elegance fuperior to what we meet with in Leland, Hume, and Robertfon. As to our prefent Dialogift, whatever dignity in his profeffion he may now poffefs, or hereafter attain, we will venture to foretell, that, unlefs he should greatly improve in liberality of fentiment, and claffical purity of language, he will not eafily rife to an equality with feveral of those whom he confiders as obfcure and private hiftorians. The remainder of the dialogue is employed in pointing out the neceffity and utility of an acquaintance with the law of nature, the civil, the canon, the feudal law, and the pofitive laws of other countries. The fecond dialogue is carried on by the fame perfons, Policrites and Eunomus, and takes in the whole of the fecond volume. It is almost entirely confined to points in which lawyers alone are peculiarly concerned. After treating on the language of the law, and endeavouring to prove that pleading is a science, the Author enters into a copious difcuffion of the fubject of conveyancing; from which he paffes to the practice of the courts, and all the proceedings refpecting a fuit, whether before, at, or after the trial. In the courfe of the dialogue, many curious particulars are confidered; and the Writer feems to have accomplished his purpose of inftructing young gentle. men, defigned for the bar, in a variety of things relative to their profeffion. He has, likewife, the farther defign of vindicating the wisdom of the law itfelf; with regard to which he has fucceeded in feveral inftances, though he hath not kept himfelf wholly free from the bigotry of the lawyer. He undertakes a vindication of the law, in refpect of its delay and expence ; and would even perfuade us, that the poor are not, in any degree, deprived of the means of fuing for or defending their own rights. This is certainly going too far, though we are not infenfible that more may be alledged on the fubject than superficial declaimers are apt to imagine. Toward the conclufion of the dialogue, our Author makes fome judicious obfervations on the difficulties arifing from the antiquity of the law; and fhews how far the ftudy of antiquity is neceffary. From thence he defcends to certain lighter matters which concern the hiftory of the profeffion; fuch as its feats of refidence, its various degrees, the ancient and modern qualifications for thofe degrees, and the mafques and revels formerly given by the Inns of Court. The obftacles to the study of the law, which proceed from ourselves, are next confidered; and the fecond volume is finished with a well-drawn portrait of an eminent counfellor, who had retired from bufinefs. [To be concluded in our next.] ART. II. The divine Predictions of Daniel and St. John demonftrated in a fymbolical theological Differtation on Cox's Mufeum, with Notes critical and explanatory, and a dedicatory Epiftle to the Bishop of Gloucefter. 4to. 1s. 6d. Wheble. 1774 S His ego fuetus, Dum melior vires fanguis dubat, amula necdum O did Entellus fay, and so faith MARTINUS SCRIBLERUS, who had like small expectance to be called from that long and uninterrupted repofe in which he was ftealing gently forward into the land of oblivion. Yet to fee this pert Dares invade my province, and ftand aftride with his commentariolum over the profound abyfs of typi-symbolo-theology, provoketh most justly mine honeft indignation. Tantane patienter! animalcula criticularia! commentatorunculorum fcabies! who, or from whence art thou, that attempteft to pervade those myfteries which Scriblerus alone was born to unfold? Dareft thou to lift thy profane voice against the mighty Epifcope of Gloucefter, that Babel of learning, who hath not found his fellow fince the confufion of tongues! O cerebrum ineptillum! Where waft thou when the Divine Legation was formed? faweft thou him who darkened counsel by words without knowledge? where waft thou when he laid the foundation of his work, or when he ftretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof faftened, or who laid the corner-ftone thereof? faweft thou when he made a cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swadling band for it? O! inane of intellect, as unfanctified of fpirit! deemedft thou thyself a fit congreffus for the Epifcope of Gloucester? thou, who knoweft all doxies fave paradoxes, and he who, faving paradoxes, knoweth no doxies: no, verily, not even his own doxy, his proper doxy, his-orthodoxy ! Knoweft thou not the wonderful depth of his learning? remembereft thou not the miraculous knife wherewith he armed Abraham, to facrifice his fon Ifaac? how that he made him not lift up an iron tool upon him, neither a tool of Chaldean brafs, nor yet of Shittim wood, but a tool made of allegory; which word I have fince difcovered to be derived from the Arabic al and lagar, that is, God's hard wood; for this is a hard kind of wood common in the Eaft, that anfwereth to our horn beam. And here, verily, I cannot but ftand fill to marvel at the aptnefs and acumen of this the fapient prelate's difcovery! he knew, forfooth, that Sarah, Abraham's wife, was a female of declining virtue, a laughing, gigling woman, who had given .λ out out that her lord was old. Certes, that lord, he concluded, had little caufe to believe that Ifaac was the offspring of his loins, and therefore he right aptly armeth him for his execution, with a knife of barn beam. How this homunculus of criticism tormenteth my fpleen! the doctrine of the primary and secondary intentions of the prophecies he ignorantly afcribeth to my learned Lord of Gloucefter; whereas that doctrine had been adopted by many di vines before, and amongst the rest by Doctor Edward Littleton, Fellow of Eton College. Still worse hath this writer demeaned himself in giving to the abovementioned Prelate the CREDIT of the thought, that barbarity of style is characteristic of an infpired language. That thought, to use an expreffion of my learned brother, canon Wilfon, was peculiarly my own. To Martinus Scriblerus it belongeth, and fhall not be taken from him. Ecce teftimonia ! About the time when the notable Doctor Middleton, meeting with no loaves and fishes, did right reasonably dispute the reality of the miracle, there lived a learned perfon at Deventer in the province of Overyffel, whofe name was Simon Tissot de Patot. He was professor of mathematics in that town, a man of much recondite erudition, who did fet forth many learned tracts against the apoftate Middleton; one whereof, entitled De Miraculo Linguarum, he did me the grace to address to me, Martinus Scriblerus: Mi Scriblere, faid he, in hac re inveftiganda mihi multum in aqua hæret, de hujufce miraculi extenfione, vel ad animalia quibus articulatio vocum ignota. Quippe cum in Sylvas non longé ab oppido remotas, et ardorem folis evitare, et quietem colere, me nuper conjeciffem, confeftim nefcio quam picam pro fuo more garrientem primo fané, ad poftmodo voce plane humana loquentem audivi. Hæc nempe Loquela, Belgice, Mynheer falt gelagh betalen; Anglice, my mafler shall pay the reckoning. Si non ab infpiratione, tales unde voces ? annon divinitus, mi Martine? an dubitare fas fit ? Tiss. De Mirac. Ling. Sect. iv. ch. 3. Thus did Tiffotius fpeak, and thus did I refpond; which doth, methinks, moft plainly evince that I, Martinus Scriblerus, was the first who discovered that a barbarous style was the characteristic of an infpired language. Quid autem de tua pica miranda, quæ fane loquitur ut picus mirandula, dicam? Anne divinitus illæ voces? Nequaquam! Belgicæ et grammaticé elegantiores; ideo in quibus familiariter edocta fuerit pica ore humano. Linguæ infpiratæ haud talia funt figna; at barbarifmus potius, et oratio impolita, fcilicet, ut ait Quintilianus, illud vitium barbarismi, cujus exempla vulgo funt plurima, fibi etiam quifque, fingere proteft, ut verbo, cui libebit libebit, adjiciat literam fyllabamve, vel detrahat, aut aliam pro alia, aut eandem, alio quam rectum eft, loco ponat. Linguæ infpiratæ indicia maxime tales funt barbarifmi; quippe qui illis raro eveniunt, qui aut orationem habuerint paternam aut extraneam didicerint. Teftis, quam ancilla mea fovebat, cornicula, quæ afflatu numinis egregia extitit, et voces edidit plané infpiratas. Anglice locuta eft, Jack make more better talk now. In barbarifmis hujufcemodi edocta fuerat non voce humana. Oratio fuit infpirata, his teftibus barbarifmis. Ad TISSOT. Epift. p. 14. Having thus, unto the fatisfaction, I do prelume, of all Europe, redeemed my fair fame from the abuse of this unfcienced mohock, and fully established my claim to the originality of this notable thought, viz. that a barbarous ftyle is a proof of an inspired language, I fhall proceed as orderly as I may, unto the entire confufion and demolition of his principal pofition; which is, that the mufæum of one Cocceius, whom he barbarously calleth Cox, predicateth the completion of the divine predictions of St. John. I do aver that every point here alledged is perperam omnino. To Martinus Scriblerus it was left to investigate the profound mystery of the beaft in the revelation D. Joannis Apocalypfis. The beaft is Joannes Wilkefius, commonly called John Wilkes, Efquire; and the fquare of the numerical characters of his name answering precisely to No. 666, and the circumftances of his perfon and converfation, do wonderfully coincide therewith. Apoc. ch. xiii. 6. And I stood upon the fand of the fea, that is upon the fand of the ftill-houfe; and faw a beaft rife up out of the fea, that is, emblematically, out of the ftill houfe; having feven heads, these heads were the five patriotic aldermen, and the two fheriffs of London and Middlesex; and ten horns, these were as follow, viz. Parfon Horne of New-Brentford, Meffrs. Crayhorne and Boxhorne, breeches-makers of Old-Brentford, Mr. Linkhorne, peruke-maker in Goodman's-fields, Meffrs. Cohorn and Lanthorn, mafter chimney-fweepers in St. Maryle-bon, Mr. Longhorn, carcafe-butcher in Whitechapel, Mr. Langhorn of the repofitory in Barbican, Mr. Fullhorn, victualler in Wapping, and Mr. Mudhorn, fcavenger in St. Giles's, all refpectable freeholders of the county of Middlesex. And upon his horns ten crowns; the above named gentlemen fubfcribed five fhillings each to the Bill of Rights. And upon his head the name of Blafphemy; the refolutions of the House of Commons on this head were right full and conclufive. 2. And the beast which I faw was like unto a leopard, that is, spotted from top to toe, and his feet were as the feet of a bear; how ftrikingly emblematical of this our beaft! It is the property of the bear to fall upon children in particular, as faith the |