ART. XIV. Elements of Tactics, and Introduction to Military Evolutions for the Infantry, by a celebrated Pruffian General; with Plates. Tranflated from the Original in German, by J. Landmann, Profeffor of Fortification and Artillery to the Royal Military Academy at Woolwich. 8vo. 7s. 6d. Boards. Elmfley, &c. 1787. 'HE Tranflator of this work informs us, in his Preface, that

which are fo directly laid down, that he does not know of any book now extant, that treats the fubject in a more elementary way, or proceeds with fo complete and connected a gradation; the application and reference that may be continually made from any one part of the work, to fome former rule or principle, makes it, if one may fay fo, the Euclid of the Tactitians.

• The Author leaves off at his entrance into the manoeuvres of large corps; and the little he has faid on this subject so well illuftrates the utility of his principles, that it is much to be regretted he had not pursued the fubject further; had he done fo, we might then have hoped to have had a fyftem of tactics complete in all its parts. An attentive reader will however obferve from what has been by this great mafter wrote on the fubject, with what celerity, compactness, and precision the great effential movements of an army, in all the various operations of war, will be performed, when the officer and foldier have been gradually trained up, and brought forward by fuch principles as are laid down in the following treatife.

The rules and principles here laid down, do not effentially differ from the regulations lately published by royal authority, to establish uniformity amongst the troops of the British army; where they may be found fo to do, the regulations will of course be kept to.-'

We are forry to differ from Mr. Landmann, for whose abili ties in his profeffion we have the highest refpect; but our duty to the Public obliges us to declare, that we cannot find the precifion to which he alludes; but that on the contrary, there is fo much obfcurity in many parts of this work, as to require no inconfiderable knowledge of the fubject, in order to comprehend the meaning of the Author. We must likewife obferve, that in feveral inftances, the rules and principles here laid down, are incompatible with his Majesty's last regulations.

Many of the terms are not fufficiently defined and illuftrated, for an elementary treatife, where the reader is fuppofed to have no prior knowledge of the fubject; the Author frequently makes ule of technical terms without explaining their meaning; for inftance, in the article of the firings, he gives directions for firing by platoons, without having told his readers, what part of a battalion a platoon is, or how a regiment is ufually told off. Several of his definitions are far from being clear and intelligole; among others, that of the point d'appui may be men

tioned.

On the other hand, juftice requires us to declare, that though we think this work, as an elementary treatife, extremely deficient,

E 4

ficient, it nevertheless contains many excellent rules and ob fervations, worthy the attention of thofe officers, who wish to have more than the mere practical knowledge of their profeffion, and which may be perufed with benefit by the most experienced. The plans are neatly engraved.

ART. XV. Sir John Hawkins's Edition of the Works of Samuel JohnJon, LL.D. continued.

IN

N our Reviews for the months of April and May, we toiled, with great labour, through the long and ponderous life, with which Sir John Hawkins has overloaded the memory of Dr. Johnfon. In all lead, fays the author of "The Falfe Alarm," there is filver; and in all copper there is gold. But mingled maffes are justly denominated from the greater quantity. In the compofition of Sir John, lead is the prevailing ingredient. From the PIG before us, we have, however, endeavoured to extract the few valuable particles, to the end that we might present to our Readers a clear and regular narration, fuch as, on account of its brevity, might be read with patience, and by its connection, be rendered intelligible. It now remains to examine the heterogeneous matter, which ferves no other purpose, than that of bewildering the reader in a maze of intricacy, and of fwelling the book to an enormous fize. In executing this defign, a methodical arrangement will be neceffary, to avoid that confufion, into which the Knight would lead us. We hall, therefore, view Sir John in a variety of attitudes, as a biographer, an egotist, a relator of facts, a book-maker, a politician, a moralift, a critic, and an editor.

To begin with the firft, as a biographer; Sir John promised to be the guardian of Johnfon's fame, and with that intent undertook to write the life of his deceafed friend. It may, therefore, be proper to enquire what figure does Johnfon make, as here reprefented; what was his character, his genius, his temand his conduct in the various incidents of his life. We shall draw into one point of view the feveral obfervations, which we find scattered, with wild profufion, through a dull and tedious compilation. According to Sir John Hawkins, Johnson did not write from the impulfe of genius-money was his only motive. He wished to excel his contemporaries in literature, and that, we are told (as if the caution were neceffary), does not deserve a worse name than that of emulation. He was MYOPS, and never faw his wife's face, though Mrs. Piozzi fays it was aftonishing how he remarked minuteneffes of drefs, fuch as the accidental pofition of a Lady's ribband, hat, or tucker. He was marked by a roughnefs that approached to ferocity. In his imitation of Juvenal, he was the echo of vulgar complaints. He loved wine,

and

and a tavern life, and the habits then contracted embittered his reflections to the end of his days. He was not uniform in his opinions, contending more for victory than truth. He wrote the Rambler, because his mind was grown tumid. He was in religion, an enthufiaft; in converfation, captious and dogged. He hated Scotchmen. In the leffer morals, he was always remifs. He flept when he fhould have ftudied. A floven, and in his appearance difgufting. Bishops he refpected: but from motives of envy, having been about three years at Oxford, he defpifed the inferior clergy, conceiving that they ufurped, what with better right belonged to himself. When Hawkefworth was made a Doctor of Laws, Johnfon quarrelled with his friend. His grief for his wife was a leffon learned by rote, and practifed till it became ridiculous. He believed in preternatural agents, and, in his youth, had been a dabler in dæmonology. He had not mufic in his foul. An habitual floven, as much as if educated at the Cape of Good Hope. In eating, which he did greedily, he was more a fenfualift than a philofopher. His criticifm on the Sampfon Agonistes was prompted by envy. His Imitations of Juvenal might have been made wafte paper; and his Tragedy of Irene might well have been damned the first night. He drank tea with an eagerness that marked effeminacy. Raffelas, his most applauded work, is by its moral, of little ufe. He abufed the elliptical arches of Blackfriars Bridge, because he hated Scotch

He talked of good-breeding, but knew nothing of the ritual of behaviour. He recommended perfons to credit, who, he knew, neither could nor would pay their debts. He was not a ftaid man. He envied Garrick's fuccefs, and faw with indignation great rewards bestowed on a player. He was unfit for the office of a fcholiaft. Those who lent him books, never faw them again. The hiftory of the Hebrides is of no use, and moft justly condemned for its illiberality. He wrote the Lives of the Poets, in which there is a great deal of found criticifm, though Johnson was not qualified for a critic, not having a true poetic. faculty, because he had no eye to roll in a fine phrenzy. His fondness for rhyme was abfurd. He had no relifh for the mufic of drums, and pulfatile inftruments. He was not a defirable inmate. He punctured his lower limbs; but he was NOT GUILTY

OF SUICIDE.

Such is the picture of the man, as given by the daubing hand of Sir John Hawkins: and it is thus that eminent writer is reprefented by the guardian of his fame. Could he arife and read this account, where would Sir John hide himself from the indignation of an injured friend?

As an egatift, Sir John makes no inconfiderable figure. For this, he prepares us in the outfet, obferving, that many writers affect to speak in the third perfon, but for his part, he chufes to

appear

appear in HIS OWN PERSON, and thefe little EGOTISMS he thinks a grace to his compofition. He communicates a great deal concerning himself, but forgets to inform us, that he was originally an Attorney's Clerk, and afterwards a Practifer, with little bufinefs. How a Barrifter may rife in his profeffion, he ftates without referve; but the arts by which an Attorney may advance himself, he chufes to conceal. He talks of writing from the impulfe of genius, but not a word of the time, when he wrote letters and effays for an evening paper, at the price of half a guinea for every piece that happened to be inferted. He was a member of the chop-houfe club in Ivy-lane; was in company with Warburton, and dined with Akenfide at Putney Bowling-green. was Chairman of the Quarter Seffions at Hicks's Hall, and though the Juftices of the county were in the commiffion, every thing was done before HIM, and HIM ONLY: he wrote the hiftory of mufic, and underftands the proportions of architecture. He explained to Johnfon the profound mystery of proving a will at Doctors Commons. He was acquainted with Garrick, and went to him with a law-cafe, to which Garrick preferred a new pantomime. He has a houfe at Twickenham, and Garrick often ftopped at his door. He had a gardener at Twickenham, who paid no attention to Millar's Dictionary. He kept his own coach, and Johnson was in it feveral times. Mrs. Cornelys was indicted before him, and if the matter had not been made up, fhe might have been tried before him. He actually faw the epitaph on Dr. Goldfmith in Johnfon's own hand-writing, and therefore knows (what all the world knew) that Johnson was the author of it. He travelled in a ftage-coach with the late Mr. Richardfon, as far as Parfon's Green. He advised Johnson to abandon a man in a fpunging-house to his fate, but Johnson was too good-natured, and paid the debt. Bifhop Hoadley talked with him about one Fournier, who had, by a dextrous forgery, converted the Bishop's frank into a note for 8ocol.; and in this converfation Hoadley told Sir John, what he had long before told the world, in a pamphlet upon the fubject. He hates Negroes, and thinks they ought not to enjoy the benevolence of their mafters, nor be permitted to keep their watches, though made refiduary legatees: but this difpute with the Black is carefully fuppreffed.

Such is the account Sir John gives of himself. We will venture to fay that P. P. the Parish Clerk in Pope's Mifcellany, was not a man of fo much felf-importance.

As a relator of facts, it will be evident from the following inftance, how far Sir John is worthy of credit: The late Mr. Mil

Vid. Rev. vol. xviii. p. 226. The title of the Bishop's narra

tive was, "A letter to Clement Chevalier, Efq."

lar,

Jar, he says, upon receipt of the laft sheets of the copy of the Dictionary, fent Johnfon his money, with a note, informing the author, that he thanked God he had done with him. This polite card drew an answer from Johnfon in the following terms: "Samuel Johnfon fends his compliments to Mr. Andrew Millar, and is glad to find, as he does by his note, that he has the grace to thank God for any thing." He who reads this, will naturally conclude that the two notes lay before the Biographer. What will the reader fay, when he is told, that no fuch notes were ever written? Mr. Millar was not capable of such deliberate and brutal rudeness. It is true, he fent the money, and said at the fame time to the bearer, "Thank God, I have done with Mr. Johnfon." That Johnfon fhould be told this, he did. not defire: the perfon, however, who went on the errand, being afked what Millar faid, repeated the words, and Johnfon anfwered as above stated. No writing paffed between them, nor ought it now to be ftated, that Mr. Millar fent an ungrateful and infolent note to an author, who had finished fo capital a work. After this, we think, the ftory of Lord Chesterfield's grofs and vulgar behaviour to a lady, for which that accomplifhed nobleman narrowly escaped being kicked down ftairs, will be marked, by every judicious reader, as another inftance of the hiftorian's integrity.

In the character of a book-maker, the Knight appears to be a more laborious drudge than any of the tribe. He undertook to write the Life of Dr. Johnson, and for this purpose his whole common-place book is difembogued, to fhew at once the Author's comprehenfion, and raise the price of the copy. Hence we have the hiftory of Lobo's Voyage to Abyffinia, the origin of taverns, the rife and progrefs of Cave's Magazine, to edify the readers thereof, who may be curious about a work, the fame whereof has fpread far and wide. The portion of history, on which the tragedy of Irene was founded, may be a proper infertion, but we should have liked it better in the words of Knolles the hiftorian, than in the rumbling ftyle of the modern Biographer. It is to the artifice of book-making that we are indebted for a long digreffion on the adminiftration of Sir Robert Walpole. No less than four fpeeches at full length are inferted from the Parliamentary Debates. This is followed by another farrago: the Catalogue of the Harleian printed volumes, with ap account of the Harleian Manufcripts, which have been printed in eight quarto volumes, was a lucky expedient to him, who was determined to have no mercy upon paper. What had Johnson to do with Goodman's Fields, or the theatre there? This, however, is added to the reft of the lumber. The hiftory of Covent Garden playhoufe is as little to the purpose, but it ferves to put the Knight in mind of the Licenfing Act, and when once he is