According to a vulgar phrafe, they fee farther into a millstone than he who picks it.

The writings of thefe philofophers feem to conftitute that which in the Scriptures is ftyled, vain philofophy. It is that knowledge which puffeth up, and has no connection with the charity which edi. fieth. The motives of thefe men appear to have little refemblance to thofe of real benignity of difpofition, for they evidently originate in the pride of reafon.'

But why, in the name of common fenfe, muft every enthusiast be talking of the pride of reafon? Of what has man to boast, more than of his reafon and is it then to be ridiculed, and fet at naught? Is reafon to be wholly unexercised by us in matters of religion, becaufe Chriftianity is addressed to fomething very different from the reafoning faculty?' Such fanatical doctrine will never be admitted by us, notwithstanding the following curious. argument in fupport of it, and the ftill more curious manner in which the pofition is illuftrated:

A rational Chriftian feems at firft fight to be a most laudable character; but as many of the doctrines of Christianity are above reason, he who compels them all to undergo the examination of reafon, and determines by art and fophiftry to explain them according to reason, will be found, even when he boasts of his own reafon and reafon in general, to act moft irrationally. He brings to the jurif diction of reason that which is fuperior to it; just as if a judge were brought to be tried before a juftice of peace, or a king before a conftable.'

What admirable reafoning is here, to prove the weakness and imbecility of reafon Sceptic! haft thou any longer a loop to hang a doubt on? Seriously speaking,-Is he who writes in fuch a ftrain as this, to be confidered as a friend, or as an enemy to real Chriftianity? We know not how to determine the matter. Is it neceffary to remind him that a real philofopher is equally the advocate of religion and of truth?

The Author frequently takes occafion to declare himself not the apologist of the Methodifts-but, furely, this declaration is equivocal; for if he is not a fupporter of Tabernacle preaching, on account of the illiteracy which fo generally marks its character, he is clearly the defender of the tenets and principles of that multitudinous fect. A paffage or two from his book will evince the truth of this remark:

*"I have often wondered, that people can with patience endure to hear their teachers and guides talk against reafon; and not only fo, but they pay them the greater fubmiflion and veneration for it. One would think this but an odd way to gain authority over the minds of men; but fome skilful and defigning men have found by experience, that it is a very good way to recommend them to the ignorant; as nurfes ufe to endear themselves to children, by per petual noife and nonfenfe." TILLOTSON.

• The

· The zeal with which the methodistical teachers diffufe their doc trines is exemplary. It exhibits every appearance of fincerity. Early and late, in feafon and out of feafon, they are ready to exert their beft abilities in prayer and in all acts of charity. They wait not for folicitation, but feek occafions of doing the work of that ministry which they have voluntarily undertaken. They confider the acquifition of a profelyte, or the converfion of a finner, as gain; and are no lefs delighted with it than the merchant with his fair profit, and the ufurer with his exorbitant intereft. Under the natural influence of an ardor and industry fo fingularly active, it cannot be wondered that their fect should flourish. The Methodists with great propriety, and indeed in imitation of that great Teacher whom both they and we profefs to follow, addrefs themselves with at least as much zeal to the poor as to the rich and great. The officiating clergy do indeed vifit the poor when fent for, and promote alms-giving on the ufual occafions; but the higher orders fpend their time for the most part among the rich, and in the ufual amusements of a pleafurable or fashionable life. But where do you find the Methodist, from choice, early in the morning and at the midnight hour? In the cottage or in the garret of the poor, on his knees and at the bed-fide of the fick and afflicted, &c.'.

The foregoing paffages have brought our Readers acquainted with the religious opinions of the Author: the following will fhew them, though in a lefs particular manner, the peculiarity of his ftyle: All graphical reprefentations of God the Father are to be disapproved; for instead of exalting our idea of the Deity, they elevate or lower it.' Can there be a greater proof of the affectation we have hinted at, than that of employing the word elevate, in the fenfe required here?-And this for no other reafon than because the Latin elevare fignifies to diminish, to detract from, and that the English expreffion had fuch meaning affixed to it in former times?

In a word, the Writer, to speak fomewhat in his own ftyle, labours fo continually to display his philomathy, that the expreffion is equally unpleafing and faulty even when virtue and morality are his themes †. If affectation like this be once encouraged, it is impoffible that a language fhould ever be fixed; nay it will eventually be quite deftroyed. But let us hear our Author on this very fubject-" Out of thy own mouth fhalt thou be judged" Though Brown is an excellent writer, yet it must be allowed that he is pedantic; and that he preferred polysyllabic expreffions derived from the language of ancient Rome, to his vernacular vocabulary, even in inftances where it was equally elegant and fignificant. Had he fought the fountains of anti

* This fentiment we much approve, though we blame the expression. For instance- formal and perfunctory'-' Corrugate the nofe' Palingenefia Indifferentifm'- Ofcitancy.' Lingering languor.' Tenderness of fenfibility' Prigs in pulpits,' &c. &c.

Z3

quity

quity only when thofe of his own times were dry, he would have deferved efteem for enriching the English language, and he might have been juftly held up as an example for imitation; but he appears to ufe fingular and magnificent words from oftentatious motives; and what, after all, does the use of them prove? that he was acquainted with the Latin and Greek languages, and that he was a learned etymologift. Senfible readers are not perfuaded of an author's general learning or folid wisdom by the proofs of his language.' Is it not aftonishing, that the writer who can fpeak thus of the pomp of language,' fhould yet continually violate the ordinary form of expreffion by the use of harth and pedantic terms? But he is frequently inconfiftent, as well with respect to manner as to matter. "Know thy felt" is an admirable precept.

Having thus entered our proteft against any fantastic deviation from an established mode of fpeech, we muft, in conclufion, acknowlege, that many of the Effays* which compose the prefent collection bear evident and inconteftible marks of an underftanding well cultivated and improved by an intimate acquaintance with books. It is with much concern, indeed, that we obferve a writer of fuch abilities giving way to prejudice and paffion, on the fubject of religious opinion. A zealot, though he may mean well, is feldom (as a zealot) an amiable character. Let us therefore bear in mind the words of an eminent philofopher; and which may juftly be received as a maximFugeons les actions des hommes, et laiffons Dieu juger de leur foi."

* Many of them, indeed, are on fubjects where entertainment is mingled with inftruction; and the variety is very confiderable. Some of the effays have agreeably amufed us, and compenfated, in a great degree, for the faults (in other papers) which we have pointed out.

ART. XII. Warton's Edition of Milton's Poems, concluded. See Review for Auguft, p. 104.

S Milton's Latin Poems have been, by foreigners as well as his own countrymen, allowed to poffefs diftinguished merit, we cannot but exprefs our furprife that his former annotators should have treated them with fo much neglect, and that Mr. Warton fhould have the honour of being the first who has prefented to the Public a regular edition of them, enriched with many critical and explanatory notes. For this part of his labour, therefore, the republic of letters will confider itself as under peculiar obligations to him. With the notes, in general, we confefs ourselves greatly pleafed; nor is it our intention, by the few ftri&ures we fhall make on this part of the volume, to difpute his title to a large tribute of commendation. Mr. War

ton

ton will certainly confider us as no enemies to his fame, notwithftanding the freedom of our former animadverfions:-the very length to which thefe have been carried being a moft unequivocal proof of our high eftimation of the work in general; for we never defcend to a very minute difcuffion, unless plura

nitent.

Milton is the firft Englishman, Leland (according to Mr. W.) only excepted, who, after the reftoration of letters, wrote Latin verfes with claffic elegance.

In the Elegies, Ovid was profeffedly Milton's model for language and verification. They are not, however, a perpetual and uniform tiffue of Ovidian phrafeology. With Ovid in view, he has an original manner and character of his own, which exhibit a remarkable perfpicuity of contexture, a native facility and fluency. Nor does his obfervation of Roman models opprefs or deltroy our great poet's inherent powers of invention and fentiment. I value thefe pieces as much for their fancy and genius, as for their style and expreffion.

That Ovid among the Latin poets was Milton's favourite, appears not only from his elegiac but his hexametric poetry. The verfification of our author's hexameters has yet a different ftru&ture from that of the Metamorphofes : Milton's is more clear, intelligible, and flowing; lefs defultory, lefs familiar, and lefs embarralled with a frequent recurrence of periods. Ovid is at once rapid and abrupt. He wants dignity: he has too much converfation in his manner of telling a story. Prolixity of paragraph, and length of sentence, are peculiar to Milton. This is feen, not only in fome of his exordial invocations in the PARADISE LOST, and in many of the religious addreffes of a like caft in the profe works, but in his long verfe. It is to be wished that in his Latin compófitions of all forts, he had been more attentive to the fimplicity of Lucretius, Virgil, and Tibullus.'

But, notwithstanding this laft remark, Mr. Warton by no means inclines to the opinion of Dr. Johnson, who prefers the Latin poetry of May and Cowley to that of our Poet. As to May, the continuator of Lucan, he very juftly obferves that he is fcarcely an author in point; and clearly proves, as to Cowley, that the preference given to him by the critic of Bolt court, has nothing to justify it." Milton (fays Dr. J.) is generally content to express the thoughts of the ancients in their language. Cowley, without much lofs of purity or elegance, accommodates the diction of Rome to his own conceptions.-The advantage feems to lie on the fide of Cowley." But what,' fays our Editor, are these conceptions? Metaphyfical conceits, all the unnatural extravagancies of his English poetry; fuch as will not bear to be cloathed in the Latin language, much lefs are capable of admitting any degree of pure Latinity.' He adduces feveral infances of this kind from Cowley's Poemata Latina. In thefe compofitions, on which fuch extravagant praise is lavished by the critic juft mentioned, we have the Plufquam vifus aquilinus of

Z 4

lovers,

lovers, Natio verborum, Exuit vitam aeriam, Menti auditur fymphonia dulcis, Nature archiva, Omnes fymmetria fenfus congerit, Condit aromatica prohibetque putrefcere laude. Again, where aliquid is perfonified, Monagramma exordia mundi. Take alfo the following curious line:

Hauferunt avide Chocolatam Flora Venufque.

We find nothing of this fort in Milton's Latin poems. These may be justly confidered as legitimate claffical compofitions, and are never difgraced with fuch language and fuch imagery. Cowley's Latinity, dictated by an irregular and unreftrained imagination, prefents a mode of diction half Latin and half English. It is not fo much that Cowley wanted a knowledge of the Latin style, but that he fuffered that knowledge to be perverted and corrupted by falfe and extravagant thoughts. Milton was a more perfect fcholar than Cowley, and his mind was more deeply tinctured with the excellencies of ancient literature. He was a more just thinker, and therefore a more juft writer. In a word, he had more tafte, and more true poetry, and confequently more propriety. If a fondness for the Italian writers has fometimes infected his English poetry with false ornaments, his Latin verfes, both in diction and fentiment, at least are free from thofe depravations.'

Nor do his Latin poems merit attention merely on the fcore of their purity and elegance; they are great curiofities, confidering the age of the author; fome of them having been written in his first year at Cambridge, when he was only seventeen. Such correctnefs and ftrength, fuch copioufnefs and command of ancient fable and hiftory in the performances of fo young a writer are truly furprifing. Thefe fhew him (as Morhof in his Polyhiftor obferves) to have been a man in his childhood, being vaftly fuperior to the ordinary capacities of that age. Added to this, they contain feveral curious circumftances of Milton's early life, his fituations, friendships, and connections; they make us acquainted with the original turn of his genius, and the course of his ftudies. Several of thefe juvenile poems fhew the author to have been of an amiable difpofition. One informs us, that at nineteen, he complained of the weakness of his eyes; and another, that in Quintum Novembris, written at feventeen, is a prolusion which promifed a future Paradife Loft: fee the first note to this poem, in Mr. Warton's book, p. 507.-All paffages relative to Milton's early ftudies will neceffarily intereft the learned reader, and in his examination of fome of them, he will find himself affifted by the hiftorical and critical comments of Mr. Warton, whofe intimate acquaintance with the Gothic library has often enabled him to explain what might have puzzled a good claffical fcholar. In his notes on that part of the Epitaphium Damonis,

"The Latin pieces (fays Dr. Johnson) are lusciously elegant." See his Life of Milton.

where