Mr. Morley to the Lord Chancellor Hyde.

'My Lord,

*** I forgot to tell your Lordship in my laft, that when I took my leave of the Duke of York, I defired him to give me leave to speak fomething to him, which I conceived myfelf obliged unto, in confcience towards God, and in duty to his Highnefs and the whole royal family. He told me he would hear me very willingly, and then withdrawing to a window, he bid me fpeak freely. And then I asked him, whether he had never heard that his father had been very much prejudiced in the opinion of his people by his being fufpected to be a Papift. Yes, faid he; but there was no ground for it. True, faid I; and yet that groundlefs fufpicion was one of thofe engines which his enemies made use of first to wreft his fword out of his hand, and afterwards to take away his crown and his life from him, and confequently to bring the King your brother, and yourself, and the whole royal family, to that almoft defperate condition wherein you now are. Neither is it likely (if you had ever fo many friends abroad, as God knows you have but few) that you fhould ever be restored, if the people of England fhall be made believe that you will bring in Popery along with you, as they will eafily be made to believe, if there be but a probable fuppofition of the King's or your Highness's inclination to that religion, there being no one thing in the world that will more difcourage and alienate your friends, nor give more advantage to your enemies, who by this means will unite the whole people of England against you; thofe of the Romish party there (whatsoever fome men may think or fay to the contrary) being very inconfiderable both for ftrength and number. And therefore, Sir, faid I, I humbly and earnestly befeech you to confider, whether there can poffibly be any thing more prejudicial to the King's, and, next to the King's, to your Highness's own interefts and pretenfions in England, than that it fhould be generally believed or probably fufpected, that the King or your Highness are Papifts, or at leaft well affected to, or favourers of thofe that are of that religion. And if fo, then, Sir, I beseech you to confider likewife, whether it will not be ground enough for fuch a belief or fufpicion, when they fhall hear (as they do) that most of your Highness's family and many of them of the best quality and rank in it, and nearest to your Highnefs's perfon, are, and do openly avow themselves to be Papists, and fome of the reft of those few who are not fo, do turn and are turning daily. From whence thofe that are your enemies in England will conclude, and thofe that are your friends, will be afraid, that your Highness yourself hath either an inclination to, or at leaft no averfion for that religion. Though I, and others that know you, can have no fuch opinion of you, yet thofe that upon the aforefaid grounds fhall think fo of your Highnefs, will have the fame thought of the King your brother alfo. For as they will not be perfuaded that so many of your family should turn to that religion, if your Highness should profefs a diflike of it, so perhaps they will not be perfuaded neither that your Highness would bear with the public profeffion of it in your family, if the King your brother did not favour it alfo; fo that in effect it reflects upon the King as well as your Highness, and is (as I am affured by those who Come out of England) exceedingly prejudicial to y u both. I con

E 3

cluded

cluded with begging his Highness's pardon for the liberty I had taken in fpeaking to him. His answer was, that he did not only pardon but thank me, and should do so as often as I told him of any thing that fo much concerned him. He confeffed he did believe that there being fo many Papifts in his family might be ill taken, and ill fpoken of in England, and give advantage to the King's enemies and his; but faid, that for the prefent he knew not how to help it, for most of his fervants, that were now Papifts, were Proteftants when they came to him, and what made them turn Papifts he knew not, he was fure he gave them no encouragement for it either by word or deed. That he himself did and would continue in profeffion and practice a Proteftant. But he knew not how to turn away thofe that were Papifts, being in the place and condition he now was, and having all his present fubfiftence from thofe of that perfuafion and then thanking me again, he gave me his hand to kifs, and fo I took my leave of him. All the fruits I expect from this difcourfe, is but the comfort I fhall find in having discharged mine own confcience, which I think I could not have done unless I faid fomething to this purpose. I am,

Apr. 24, 1659.

:

Your Lordship's, &c.'

It is impoffible to read this account without remarking the extreme duplicity obfervable in James's conduct; denying, in the strongest terms, his ever having any thoughts of embracing Popery; and yet he was no fooner feated on the throne, than he took every step in his power to establish that religion in his dominions. The confequence fulfilled Mr. Morley's prophecy (if we may fo call it), for it was the means of his being driven from the throne.

To this collection of papers, which comes down to the Reftoration, is added a fupplement, containing applications of perfons of the King's party for rewards for the many fignal fervices they had rendered him, and the remonftrances of those who fuppofed their fufferings not fufficiently recompenfed.

Among thefe, we obferve a very remarkable one from Bishop Gauden, which exprefsly declares the Bifhop to have been the Author of the Icon Bafilike. We are forry the length of it will not fuffer us to lay it before our Readers; we must therefore refer them to p. xxviii. of the Supplement, where the whole is duly ftated, and a minute detail given of every circumftance relative to its writing and publication.

We cannot conclude this article without congratulating the Public on the appearance of fo great a fund of original authority, by means of which the hiftory of the times is much elucidated, and many facts are related, which, without these records, could never have been known.

Ят

ART.

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. Elmsley, &c. 1787.

HE Tranflator of this work informs us, in his Preface, that

6

which are so 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 say so, 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 fubject fo well illuftrates the utility of his principles, that it is much to be regretted he had not purfued 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 treatise.

The rules and principles here laid down, do not effentially differ from the regulations lately publifhed 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 abilities 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 Majefty's laft 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 yle 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 intelligible; among others, that of the point d'appui may be mentioned.

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

E 4

ficient,

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.

Gr

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 males 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 prefent 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 fhall, therefore, view Sir John in a variety of attitudes, as a bicgrapher, an egotist, a relator of facts, a book-maker, a politician, a moralist, a critic, and an editor.

To begin with the first, 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 Johnson make, as here reprefented; what was his character, his genius, his tem- pe and his conduct in the various incidents of his life. We fhall 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 worfe 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 enthusiast; in converfation, captious and dogged. He hated Scotchmen. In the leffer morals, he was always remils. He flept when he fhould have ftudied. A floven, and in his appearance difgufting. Bifhops he refpected: but from motives of envy, having been about three years at Oxford, he despised 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 Sampson Agonifles 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 abused the elliptical arches of Blackfriars Bridge, because he hated Scotchmen. 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 juftly condemned for its illiberality. He wrote the Lives of the Poets, in which there is a great deal of found criticism, 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 desirable 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 egotif, 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