Laudari à laudatis viris, is certainly an honour both to the dead and the living: but we apprehend that the above compliment will be held in little eftimation by the friends of either, when they are told that the fame eulogift calls Sir Richard. Blackmore one of the greatest of our English poets!

R.

CORRESPONDENCE.

To the EDITOR of the LONDON REVIEW.

SIR,

WHEN Bookfellers give a high price for the copy-right of a work, they alfo generally take care that the periodical publications give a favourable account of it. In hopes, however, that the London Review is under no fuch undue influence, I addre's to you the following curfory obfervations on Dr. Robertfon's History of America. No man has a higher idea of the Doctor's abilities than myself, and it is my ettimation of him which excites my indignation when he appears fuperficial.

In the first page of the Doctor's preface, we are prefented with one of the weakest propofitions that ever di graced an historian. While the British Colonies, he fays, " are engaged in civil war with Great Britain, inquiries and speculations concerning their ancient forms of policy and laws, which exift no longer, cannot be interefting ;" and by this rule every page of ancient history muft be ufelefs. But the London Review has already expofed this egregious affertion.

The very day before I read Robertfon's Hiftory of America, I had finished my perufal of the Introduction to Mickle's Tranflation of the Lufiad, or the Difcovery of India. The different ideas which these authors give us of the voyage of Vafco de Gama, the discoverer of India, not only ftruck, but chagrined, me, and made me ready to exclaim with Dr. Robertfon, that without proper evidence an author may be faid, to have written an amusing tale, but cannot be said to have compofed an authentic biftory."

The circumstances of difagreement which chagrined me are these: Robertfon mentions the repulfe, which the propofals of Columbus received at the Court of Lisbon, as the effect of ignorance. And when, by stress of weather, he put into the Tagus, on his return from his first voyage, "Self-condemnation and regret, lays the Doctor, were not the only fentiments to which the fuccefs of Columbus, and reflection upon their own imprudence in rejecting bis propofals, gave rife among the Portuguese. They excited a generous emulation to furpafs his performances ;" and to this emulation the Doctor afcribes the voyage of Gama.

But in the Introduction to the Lufiad we find this matter very differently stated. We are there told that the Cape of Good Hope had

been

been fome years known to the Portuguese, and that John II, who gave it that name, efteemed the route to India as in the certain poffeffion of his own fubjects; for which reafon he declined the proposals of the foreigner. We are alfo told by the fame writer that the difcovery of India had been the great ambition of the Portuguese Princes for many years, that John II. firmly intended it, and that his fucceffor put it in execution. Dr. Robertfon himself, immediately after afcribing it to the fuccefs of Columbus, adds this fentence, " Emmanuel, who inherited the enterprifing genius of his predeceffors, perfifted in their grand Scheme of opening a paffage to the Eaft Indies by the Cape of Good Hope."

Gama's fquadron, fays Dr. Robertfon, "was extremely feeble, confifting only of three veffels, of neither burden nor force adequate to the fervice" and Gama, he fays, found India," in industry and arts a bigbly civilized country."

But in the Introduction to the Lufiad every circumftance conveys different ideas. We there find that the fquadron confitted of four fhips: the flag fhip commanded by Gama, the fecond by his brother Paulus, the third by Nicolas Coello, and the fourth by Gonfalo Nunio. We alfo find in the fame author that this extremely feeble and inadequate fquadron, was an overmatch for all the arts of the highly civilized Eaft. That Gama revenged the treachery of the Moors of Mozambie by reducing their town into a heap of afhes, after having defeated 2000 of them on fhore, who oppofed his taking in fresh water: that the King of Calecut in India fitted out all the strength of his highly civilized coun try, confifting of fixty veflels full of armed men, to destroy Gama's extremely feeble and inadequate fquadron, but that Gama nevertheless beat them all: That he afterwards beat, and took prifoner, a pirate who attacked him with eight veffels, and was the tyrant and terror of the Indian feas. And that on his homeward voyage he gave chace to a fleet of eight Moorish veffels, and levelled the walls of Magadoxa, a Moorish town in Africa, with the ground, and burned every fhip in the harbour.

Either therefore Mr. Mickle has given us an amufing tale; or the Doctor's knowledge of the voyage of Gama has been highly superficial, when he called this fquadron extremely feeble, and inadequate to the fervice. Mr. Mickle cites his authorities, and they certainly exist.

Tho' I read much, I am no author; but my indignation is ftrongly excited when I fee men of the most refpectable abilities making the moft egregious miftakes. Dr. Robertfon commends the accuracy of Voltaire as an hiftorian, while all Europe laugh at his random affertions. He alfo commends Mr. Gibbon in the highest terms, tho' that gentleman's many and grofs mifreprefentations have already been expofed by Dr. Watfon, and are now in the hands of a celebrated Detector. But idle compliment feems to be the predominant paffion of our modern fine writers. The Tranilator of the Lufiad has given fome egregious examples of it: he calls the Abbé Reynal an author accurate in hifto.. rical facts." And yet he has taken no fmall pains to prove that the Abbé is exceedingly inaccurate; and I believe he has proved it too, in feveral material circumftances. A plain honest reader, who does not

66

know

4

know the mystery of book-making, does not like these ambo-dexter doings, and according to my efteem for an author's abilities is my difappointment when I perceive him thus tripping.

Oxford, July 7, 1777

I am, &c.
OBSERVATOR.

SIRS,

To the LONDON REVIEWERS.

BEING a conftant purchaser of the London Review (which your exceffive ill ufage has compelled me to forbear), with the most compalfonate concern I find the despicable Authors reduced to fo low an ebb as to accept contemptible hire, to infult me in the moit fpiceful terms, as the Author of The Chriftian History; and this from a wretch unprovoked, and my old acquaintance, agreeable to the Pfalmift, v. 13. Expreffions big with the most rancourous malice of heart would never have been employed, without fuch interesting temptation, publicly to infult a ftranger who has been guilty of employing fome time in reading the Gospels and various celebrated Comments thereon in various languages, in order to publish, under the fanction of refpectable approbation, the most regular arrangement and the most exact verfion polible (from the best authorities, barring Reviewers) of the facts contained in the feveral inspired Hiftories of Christ's Life: a performance he would have been extremely glad to have found executed by fome abler hand, who might, in fome refpects at least, have gained applaufe, fuch as reconciling the different hiftorians in places of acknowledged difficulty, as Peter's Denials, Pilate's Examination, and the Refuriec tion; alio a concise recital of the arguments in favour of the History. The Critics who fo virulently abufe me, would have given me and the public fome fatisfaction, it, inflead of general expreffions, they lad felected fome of the paffages they with to much envenomed declamation condemn as tame, inanimated, fpiritlefs, vapid, miferable, degrading to the common vertion, which face veftra is not bold, but bald, and what is worle, frequently talie; allo as depriving the Gospel of its natural fublimity, pathos, and poetry: fome particular errors in the order of arrangement, fome miferably degrading expreffions in the ver fion, fome futile arguments in the differtations, fhould justify this truly viperous condemnation. It is as abfurdly impertinent to affert that a clofe and accurate tranflation, conveyed in a correct ible, can deprive an original compofition of its natural fublimity, pathos, and poetry, as that expreffions (whatever the thoughts may be) can be at once both noble and fimple, ye moft noble fimpletons in criticifm and confiftency!! Peace to the manes of Mr. Locke, such a set of execrable Critics are welcome implicitly to believe all he fays on the understanding. It is plain enough that you agree with him in this, that your wills are determined by unealinels: the uncafirefs of your craving appetites made your wills tamely, miferably fubfervient (for a prefent recruit) to the purposes of the most undeferved rancour, of overflowing gall; for

the

the discharge of which had you not furnisht a channel, it would proba bly have burst the invidious livid heart that bred it. If this reply to your truly miferable cenfure is also tame and inanimated, the contents of the Book you have fo difparaged dictates fuch conduct, quoting page 198. the Pfalmift, "He that is unjust, let him be unjust still." But ye have your reward. Your paltry bribe will ferve Critics of fuch a jaundiced eye in little itead, when your prefent Bookfeller fhall follow the example of fo many others in turning you out of doors. General contempt will follow the wanton abuse of a Book too useful and important, too well approved and authorized, too humanely intended, and too carefully, correctly finished, to deferve fuch treatment, but from fuch votaries of dullnefs, fuch flaves to indigence, fuch patterns of prostitution and base venality, as the hacknied London Reviewers. W. Wins.

The tardiness of carriers occafion this to be the first post after receipt of your kind favour.

*

Tenby, June 30, 1777.

** Poor Mr. William Williams! How terribly angry ! We return his compaffionate concern with all our heart; for really we know nothing of his old acquaintance, who is faid to have bribed us to condemn his book perhaps there has been fome mistake, and he has fent the bribe to fome other Reviewers, who have condemned it in ftill harfler terms!" Let the galled horfe go wince, our withers are unwrung. Rev.

THE Author of "MISPLACED CONFIDENCE" prefents his compliments to the Editor of the London Review, and begs leave to point out those errors in the criticifin of that work, from which it is hoped fuch criticism will be found to have undefignedly proceeded.It is not afferted in the work alluded to, that Sir John Delaval promifed the author he would provide for him till after the election fpoken of; Bor was the promise then made in that manner, to which Mr. Reviewer refers, and which was the delufive occafion of the Author's premature marriage. The Lieutenancy the Author is faid to have applied for, fhould have been written an Enfigncy; the real occafion of which application was the Author's total inability, from caufes known to the altentive readers of the work in queftion, to procure a livelihood for himfelf and family from the purfuit of that precarious proteffion with the nature of which Mr. Reviewer (if ingenuous) appears to be totally unacquainted. What could induce him to align it to idleness (a character diametrically oppofite to the Author's natural difpofition) must be best known to himself, though his recourle to perfonal flander, and affiduity to exculpate Sir John, rather few him to be more than critically INTEL RESTED. It is requested that the insertion of this in the next London Review may exclude the neceffity of fending a copy of it, with addiLional commentation, to other periodi al publications..

June 14, 1777.

We

We should not have troubled our readers with fuch wretched reprehenfions as thefe, if it were not the fairest way to let the complainants ftand or fall by their own juftification. As to the imputation of perfonal partiality or pecuniary influence over the London Review, the Editor defpifes it too much to make it any reply. The contrary is fo notorious, that we appear, from the Letters of our Correfpondents, to fuffer from our impartiality; fo true is that ancient adage, Feritas odium parit.

K.

To the LONDON REVIEWERS.

GENTLEMEN,

THE three following Paffages appearing to me of a very remarkable phrafeology, and my not having met with, in any other publication, any thing fimilar to it, I cannot but think they proceed from the fame pen-and confequently are, in my opinion, a pretty ftrong internal proof, that the author of Junius's Letters is that candid writer, perfuafive orator, loyal fubject, and true patriot, E. B. Efq; I fhould be glad of your fubmitting this opinion to the Critics (if you should not chufe to decide upon it yourselves) among the Letters of your Correfpondents.

Your conftant Reader,

A. B.

"From whatever origin your influence in this country arifes, it is a "phænomenon in the hiftory of human virtue and understanding. "Good men can hardly believe the fact; wife men are unable to account "for it; religious men find exerciic for their faith, and make it the last "effort of their piety, not to repine against Providence."

Junius's Letters to the Duke of Grafton, Sept. 28, 1771, Vol. II.
Letter LI.

"Every project of a material change in a government fo compli "cated as ours, combined at the fame time with external circum"ftances ftill more complicated, is a matter full of difficulties; in "which a confiderate man will not be too ready to decide; a prudent man too ready to undertake; or an honest man too ready to promise."

46

Thoughts on the Caufe of our prefent Difcontents. Page 99. 34
Edition.

"I really think that for wife men this is not judicious; for fober 66 men not decent; for minds tinctured with humanity not mild and mer"ciful."

Mr. Burke's Speech, March 22, 1777. Page 49. 3d Edit.