now dead. I there compofed the fecond part of my Effays, which I called Political Difcourfes, and alfo my Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals, which is another part of my Treatife that I caft anew. Meanwhile, my bookfeller, A. Millar, informed me that my former publications (all but the unfortunate Treatife) were beginning to be the fubject of converfation; that the fale of them was gradually increafing, and that new editions were demanded. Anfwers by Reverends, and Right Reverends, came out two or three in a year; and I found, by Dr. Warburton's railing, that the books were beginning to be efteemed in good company. In 1751, I removed from the country to the town, the true fcene for a man of letters. In 1752, were published at Edinburgh, where I then lived, my Political Difcourfes, the only work of mine that was fuccefsful on the first publication. It was well received abroad and at home. In the fame year was published at London, my Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals; which, in my own opinion (who ought not to judge on that fubject), is of all my writings, historical, philofophical, or lite vary, incomparably the beft. It came unnoticed and unobferved into the world. In 1762, the Faculty of Advocates chofe me their Librarian, an office from which I received little or no emolument, but which gave me the command of a large library. I then formed the plan of writing the History of England; but being frightened with the notion of continuing a narrative through a period of 1700 years, I commenced with the acceffion I was, however, I confefs, dif couraged; and had not the war been at that time breaking out between France and England, I had certainly retired to fome provincial town of the former king. dom, have changed my name, and never more have returned to my native country. But as this fcheme was not now practicable, and the fubfequent volume was confiderably advanced, I refolved to pick up courage and to persevere. In this interval, I published at London my Natural History of Religion, along with fome other small pieces: its public entry was rather obfcure, except only that Dr. Hurd wrote a pamphlet against it, with all the illiberal petulance, arrogance, and fcurrility, which diftinguifh the Warburtonian fchool. This pamphlet gave me fome confolation for the otherwife indifferent reception of my performance. In 1756, two years after the fall of the first volume, was published the second volume of my History, containing the period from the death of Charles I. till the Revolution. This performance happened to give less displeasure to the Whigs, and was better received. It not only rose itself, but helped to buoy up its unfortunate brothers. But though I had been taught by experience, that the Whig party were in poffeffion of beftowing all places, both in the state and in literature; I was fo little inclined to yield to their fenfelefs clamour, that in above a hundred alterations, which farther ftudy, reading, or reflection engaged me to make in the reigns of the two firft Stuarts, I have made all of them invariably to the Tory fide. It is ridiculous to confider the English conftitution before that period as a regular plan of liberty. In 1759, I published my Hiftory of the Houfe of Tudor. The clamour against this performance was almoft equal to that against the Hiftory of the two firft Stuarts. The reign of Elifabeth was particularly obnoxious. But I was now callous against the impreffions of public folly, and continued very peaceably and contentedly in my retreat at Edinburgh, to finish, in two volumes, the more early part of the English History, which I gave to the public in 1761, with tolerable, and but tolerable, succefs. The author being now, as he informs us, turned of fifty, and having obtained by the fale of his books, a competent and independent fortune, he retired into his native country of Scotland, determined never more to fet his foot out of it. From this refolution he was however diverted by the Earl of Hertford, whom he attended, as The title of the pamphlet alluded to is-Remarks on Mr. David Hume's Efay on the Natural Hiftory of Religion. Addreffed to the Rev. Dr. Warburton. -Since the appearance of Mr. Hume's Life, a new edition of this performance has been published, with the following advertisement from the bookfeller to the reader. "The following is fuppofed to be the pamphlet referred to by the late Mr. David Hume, in page zi, of his Life, as being written by Dr. Hurd. Upon my applying to the bishop of Litchfield and Coventry for his permiffion to republish it, he very readily gave me his confent. His Lordship only added, he was forry he could not take himself the WHOLE infamy of the charge brought against him; but that he fhould hereafter, if he thought it worth his while, Explain himself more particularly on that subject. T. CADELL." "Strand, March, 1777. fecretary, fecretary, on his embaffy to Paris in the year 1763. He gives us the following account of his reception in that capital. Those who have not feen the ftrange effects of modes, will never imagine the reception I met with at Paris, from men and women of all ranks and ftations. The more I refiled from their exceffive civilities, the more I was loaded with them. There is, however, a real fatisfaction in living at Paris, from the great number of fenfible, knowing, and polite company with which that city abounds above all places in the universe. I thought once of fettling there for life. I was appointed fecretary to the embaffy; and, in fummer 1765, Lord Hertford left me, being appointed Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. I was chargé d'affaires till the arrival of the Duke of Richmond, towards the end of the year. In the beginning of 1766, I left Paris, and next fummer went to Edinburgh with the fame view as formerly, of burying myself in a philofophical retreat. I returned to that place, not richer, but with much more money, and a much lar. ger income, by means of Lord Hertford's friendship, than I left it; and I was defirous of trying what fuperfluity could produce, as I had formerly made an experiment of a competency. But, in 1767, I received from Mr. Conway an invitation to be Under fecretary; and this invitation, both the character of the perfon, and my connexions with Lord Hertford, prevented me from declining. I returned to Edinburgh in 1769, very opulent (for I poffeffed a revenue of 1000l. a year), healthy, and though fome what ftricken in years, with the profpect of enjoying long my ease, and of feeing the increafe of my reputation. In spring, 1775, I was ftruck with a diforder in my bowels, which at firft gave me no alarm, but has fince, as I apprehend it, become mortal and incurable. I now reckon upon a speedy diffolution. I have fuffered very little pain from my diforder; and, what is more ftrange, have, notwith. ftanding the great decline of my perfon, never fuffered a moment's abatement of my fpirits; infomuch, that were I to name the period of my life, which I fhould moft choose to pass over again, I might be tempted to point to this later period. I poffefs the fame ardour as ever in ftudy, and the fame gaiety in company. I confider, befides, that a man of fixtyfive, by dying, cuts off only a few years of infirmities; and though I fee many symptoms of my literary reputation's breaking out at laft with additional luftre, I know that I could have but few years to enjoy it. It is difficult to be more detached from life than I am at present. To conclude hiftorically with my own character. I am, or ra ther was (for that is the ftyle I must now use in speaking of myfelf, which emboldens me the more to speak my fentiments); I was, I fay, a man of mild difpofitions, of command of temper, of an open, focial, and cheerful humour, capable of attachment, but little fufceptible of enmity, and of great moderation in all my paffions. Even my love of literary fame, my ruling paffion, never foured my tem per, per, notwithstanding my frequent difappointments. My company was not unacceptable to the young and careless, as well as to the ftu dious and literary; and as I took a particular pleasure in the company of modest women, I had no reason to be displeased with the reception I met with from them. In a word, though moft men any wife eminent, have found reafon to complain of calumny, I never was touched, or even attacked by her baleful tooth: and though I wantonly expofed myfelf to the rage of both civil and religious factions, they feemed to be difarmed in my behalf of their wonted fury. My friends never had occafion to vindicate any one circumstance of my character and conduct: not but that the zealots, we may well fuppofe, would have been glad to invent and propagate any story to my difadvantage, but they could never find any which they thought would wear the face of probability. I cannot fay there is no vanity in making this funeral oration of myself, but I hope it is not a mifplaced one; and this is a matter of fact which is eafily cleared and ascertained. The following Sketches are faid to bave been delineated by the Pen of I the late Lord Chesterfield. In order to make the Groupe complete, we have added that of Lord Chester. field himself, by another Hand. SIR ROBERT WALPOLE. Much queftion, whether an im partial character of Sir Robert Walpole will or can be tranfmitted to pofterity: for he governed this kingdom fo long, that the various paffions of mankind mingled and in a manner incorporated them. felves with every thing that was faid or written concerning him. Never was man more flattered or more abused; and his long power was probably the caufe of both. I was much acquainted with him both in his public and private life. I mean to do impartial justice to his character, and therefore my picture of him will perhaps be more like him, than it will be like any of the other pictures drawn of him. In private life he was good-natured, chearful, focial; inelegant in his manners, loofe in his mo rals, he had a coarfe ftrong wit, which he was too free of for a man in his fiation, as it is always inconfiftent with dignity. He was very able as a minifter, but without a certain elevation of mind, neceffary for great good, or great The author of a letter addreffed to Dr. Smith, and faid to have been written by a dignitary of the University of Oxford, puts the following queries to him, upon this point-"Was there, then, any fulpicion in Scotland, that he might "not, at times, be quite fo compofed and eafy as he fhould have been? Was "there any particular book ever written against him, that fhook his fyftem to "pieces about his ears, and reduced it to a heap of ruins, the fuccefs and eclat of which might be fuppofed to have hurt his mind, and to have affected his health? "Was there any author, whofe name his friends never dared mention before him, and warned all ftrangers, that were introduced to him, against doing it, because "he never failed, when by any accident it was done, to fly out into a transport of "passion and swearing ?' mifchief. mifchief. Profufe and appetent, his ambition was fubfervient to his defign of making a great fortuneHe had more of the Mazarin than of the Richelieu-He would do mean things for profit, and never thought of doing great ones for glory. He was both the best parJiament man, and the ableft manager of parliament, that I believe ever lived. An artful rather than eloquent speaker, he faw, as by intuition, the difpofition of the house, and preffed or receded accordingly. So clear in ftating the moft intricate matters, especially in the finances, that, whilst he was fpeaking, the moft ignorant thought that they understood what they really did not. Money, not prerogative, was the chief engine of his adminiftration; and he employed it with a fuccefs, which in a manner difgraced humanity. He was not, it is true, the inventor of that fhameful method of governing, which had been gaining ground infenfibly ever fince Charles the Second, but with uncommon fkill and unbounded profufion he brought it to that perfection which at this time difhonours and diftreffes this country, and which, (if not checked, and God knows how it can be now checked) mult ruin it. Befides this powerful engine of government, he had a most extraordinary talent of perfuading and working men up to his purpose A hearty kind of frankness, which fometimes feemed imprudence, made people think that he let them into his fecrets, whilft the im politeness of his manners feemed to atteft his fincerity. When he found any body proof against pecuniary temptations, which, alas! was but feldom, he had recourfe to a ftill worse art: for he laughed at and ridiculed all notions of pub. lic virtue and the love of one's country, calling them "The chie merical school-boy flights of claffical learning;" declaring himself at the fame time "No Saint, no Spartan, no Reformer." He would frequently afk young fellows at their first appearance in the world, while their honeft hearts were yet untainted-" Well, are you to be an old Roman? a patriot? You'll foon come off of that and grow wifer.” And thus he was more dangerous to the morals, than to the liberties of his country, to which I am perfuaded that he meant no ill in his heart +. He was the eafy and profufe dupe of women, and in fome inftances indecently fo-He was exceffively open to flattery, even of the groffeft *Notwithstanding his avowed principles of venality, it is a well known truth, that he fometimes checked the mean fervility of members of Parliament, especially thofe from North Britain. Though it cannot be denied that Sir Robert ruled this country by general corruption, and fucceeded in his plans of government by temporary expedients, there was a decency in his parliamentary conduct, of which we now kiment the total abfence. Every motion during his adminiftration was treated with respect, and every queftion difcuffed with feeming fairnefs and impartiality. The parliamentary chiefs were ranged on both fides, according to their fuppofed merit; and engaged each other, not only with vigour, but with that liberality which becomes citizens, There was then no rude and boisterous uproar, no boyish and tumultuous clamour of The question! the question! |