It frequents the fhores and fides of the fea and rivers, in fearch of food. When it fpies a fly fitting on the plants, that grow in fhallow water, it fwims on to the diftance of four, five, or fix feet, and then, with a furprifing dexterity, it ejects out of its tubular-mouth a fingle drop of water, which never fails ftriking the fly into the fea, where it foon becomes its prey.

The relation of this uncommon action of this cunning filh raised the governor's curiofity; though it came well attested, yet he was determined, if poffible, to be convinced of the truth, by ocular demonftration.

For that purpose, he ordered a large wide tun to be filled with fea-water; then had fome of thefe fifh caught, and put into it, which was changed every other day. In a while, they feemed reconciled to their confinement; then he determined to try the experiment.

A flender ftick, with a fly pinned on at its end, was placed in fuch a direction, on the fide of the veffel, as the fifh could ftrike it.

It was with inexpreffible delight, that he daily faw thefe fifh exercising their fkill in fhooting at the fly, with an amazing velocity, and never miffed the mark.'

Art. 15. An Account of the Polish Cochineal. By Dr. Wolfe of Warsaw.

On this fubject here are two papers, the one in Latin and the other in English. They contain the defcription of an infect, which Dr. Wolfe fuppofes may be found in England as well as in Poland. The naturalifts may look for it in the month of June about the roots of the potentilla, fragaria, and polygonum

minus.

Art. 21. An Account of the Degree of Cold cbferved in Bedfordshire. By John Howard, Efq;

By this paper we learn, that at Cardington in Bedfordshire, on the 22d of November 1763, Fahrenheit's thermometer funk fo low as ro and. But as no concomitant circumstances are mentioned, we are apprehenfive this fingular obfervation will throw no great light on the locality of cold, which is the profeffed motive for the communication of this important piece of intelligence to the Royal Society.

Art. 23. A Catalogue of the Fifty Plants from Chelsea Garden, prefented by the Company of Apothecaries, for the Year 1763. Art. 34. An Account of feveral Fiery Meteors feen in North America. By Proffor Winthrop.

Prefixed to the account of thefe meteors, the writer hath thrown out fome ingenious hints relative to the appearance of meteors in general; with a view to the formation of a more fatisfactory theory of their motion than we at prefent poffefs.

Art. 36.

Art. 36. An Account of the Effects of Lightening at South Weald in Effex. By Dr. Heberden.

A relation of the damage done to the church of South-Weald, a village in Effex, on June 18, 1764, much about the time of the like misfortune happening to St. Bride's steeple, and in Effexftreet, London. Dr. Heberden clofes his account with observing, that the whole appearance of the damage done to this church very much favours the conjecture of that fagacious obferver of nature Dr. Franklin, who thinks it probable, that, by means of metallic rods or wires reaching from the roofs to the ground, any buildings may be fecured from the terrible effects of lightening.

Art. 40. Obfervations upon the Effects of Lightening, with an Account of the Apparatus proposed to prevent its Mifchiefs to Buildings, more particularly to Powder Magazines. By Dr. Watson. Dr. Watson hath here defcribed, at large, and in a very fatiffactory manner, the apparatus neceffary to prevent the mischiefs to be apprehended by lightening; but, having mentioned several particulars of this kind in a former Review, we muft refer those of our Readers who are defirous of farther information on this fubject, to the article itself.

Art. 41. An Account of the Effects of Lightening in St. Bride's Church, Fleetfreet, on the 18th of June 1764. By Edward Delaval, Efq;

The ingenious author of this paper hath been very accurate and particular in his defcription of the damaged parts of this building; humanely judging it would be of ufe, by defcribing the feveral circumftances of this accident, to fhew more fully the neceffity of preventing the danger to which fuch buildings are exposed.

Art. 42. A Letter from Dr. Lawrence to Dr. Heberden, concerning the Effects of Lightening in Effen-Street, on the 18th of June, 1764.

This accident hath been before mentioned, and differs little in circumstances from other accidents of the like kind. Art. 44. A Letter to the Marquifs of Rockingham, with fame Obfervations on the Effects of Lightening.

This paper contains fome very fenfible remarks, by the ingenious Mr. Wilfon; well worth attending to, by those who would take such precautions, as the providential discoveries of fcience have put into our hands, to fecure their perfons and property from the melancholy effects of fuch awful difpenfations, as are frequently the difafters attending on thunder and lightening. Art. 47. Experiments and Obfervations on the Compreffibility of Fluids. By John Canton, M. A. F. R. S.. In fpeaking of the accounts heretofore given by Mr. Canton,

to

to the Royal Society, concerning the compreffibility of fluids, we expreffed our diffatisfaction with the defcription he gave of the apparatus, whereby his experiments were determined. In the present paper he fays nothing to remove the difficulties we fuggefted, and which, if we had not, would doubtless have suggested themselves to every reader who might know any thing of the matter.It muft certainly be a very nice inftrument, and fubject to more irregularities than the experimentalist may poffibly be aware of, which can serve to the construction of the following table, of the compreffion of fluids:

Mr. Canton determines these fluids, alfo, not only to be compreffible but elaftic.No doubt of it; compreffibility and elafticity are natural concomitants.-We have many objections therefore to make to Mr. Canton's fuppofition, that the compreffibility of fluids does not arife from the clafticity the fluids may contain.' It was once thought that the Florentine experiment, regarding the incompreffibility of water, was conclufive: Mr. Canton, and others before him, have shewn it was not fo; and we make no doubt, but fome time or other Mr. Canton's experiments will be as fully fhewn to be inconclufive as that of the Academy del Cimento. The taking off the weight of the atmosphere, though by the most artificial means poffible, is, in our opinion, no proof that all the air is extracted from a fluid, whereby it might be rendered compreffible or elaftic to three parts out of a million of its bulk.Having never feen Mr. Canton's apparatus, however, we do not pretend to depreciate the merit of his difcoveries; and, as the news-papers inform us, the Royal Society have honoured him with their prize-medal on the occafion, we hope they are more important and fatisfactory to others than they, at prefent, appear to the Reviewers.

Art. 51. An Account of the Effects of Lightening on three Ships in the Eaft Indies. By Mr. Veicht.

This article may be dispatched in the fame manner as that numbered 42, above mentioned.

Art. 53. and 55. contain accounts of two remarkable meteors; both feen at Oxford; the one March 5, 1764, and the other April 23, 1764. By the Rev. Mr. John Swinton, B.D. F.R.S Member of the Academy degli Apatifti at Florence, &c.

[To be continued.]

A Reviso

A Review of Doctor Johnson's New Edition of Shakespeare: In which the Ignorance, or Inattention, of that Editor is expofed, and the Poet defended from the Perfecution of his Commentators. By W. Kenrick. 8vo. 3s. Payne.

WH

THEN men, eminent for their abilities, or learning, engage on contefted points of literature or fcience, perfons of inferior endowments will naturally look up to them, as to examples, for their imitation; they will study their arts of attack and defence; they will copy their manners; and if the dispute be liberally conducted, they will obferve how generously the MASTERS encounter,-fcorning every little mean advantage, and mutually disclaiming all perfonal enmity, or private malice-the love of TRUTH their principle, and Fame their only motive. With what fuperior skill do they wield the weapons of controverfy! with what elegance of deportment, what refinement of addrefs! equally difplaying the fcholar, the genius, and the gentleman!

On the contrary, when we fee, as too often we do fee, perfons of diftinguished abilities indecently attacking each other, forgetful not only of what they owe to the caufe of truth, but even the refpect due to their own rank in the republic of letters, -how much reason have we to regret the illiberal difpute, and to be forry for fuch improper examples !-examples which the paffions of mankind will but too naturally excite them to follow!How much, rather, were it to be wifhed, that men of letters would learn to diffent from each other with urbanity, and to debate with fuch candid oppofition of fentiment, that every witness to the friendly conteft, fhould be ready to cry out with the poet,

Ingenuas didiciffe fideliter artes

Emollit mores, nec finit effe feros !

The foregoing general reflection was excited by fome paffages in the rough attack which the Author of the critical performance now before us, hath made on a gentleman of established literary reputation. This Reviewer feems to be one of those violent affailants whose aim is not merely to vanquish but even to exterminate his antagonist. With him, it is not enough that the editor of Shakespeare be proved to have mistaken his own powers and qualifications, when he undertook that arduous task, in which greater men than Dr. Johnson have failed of fuccefs,but he must also be expofed as a very pretender to all literature and science !-This is really outrageous! What must the im

* See p. 54; where Mr. K. fays, it does not appear to him, that Dr. J. is matter of any one science, or any one language.'

REV. C. 1765.

partial reader think of fuch extravagance? what, but that Mr. Kenrick is, in controverfy, what the North-American Indians are in war; and comes armed with the tomahawk and fcalpingknife, to slay, and to strip the flain, with the barbarity of a Mohawk or a Cherokee.

To do our Author juftice, however, he feems to have been confcious of his having offended against the laws of literary war; and he thus apologizes for it, in his preface; if, indeed, that can be called an apology, which is rather a juftification:

The Author, fays he, fpeaking of himfelf, can readily forefee, that he shall be thought to have treated both Dr. Johnfon and Dr. Warburton [for he fpares the bifhop as little as he hath fpared the doctor of laws] with an ill-becoming levity, if not with unmerited feverity.-The Reviewer confefles indeed he fhould have been glad to have had, on this occafion, less to do with the commentary of the reverend gentleman last mentioned. And this, he has reafon to think, would have been the cafe, had not Dr. Johnfon been prevailed on by his printer prudentially to cancel feveral annotations, in which he had strongly expreffed his diffent from that learned fcholiaft. But having, on fecond thoughts, judged it expedient to fhelter himself, as it were, under the wing of the bishop of Gloucester; it is hoped the juftice due to Shakespeare will excufe the Reviewer, though he fhould be fometimes obliged, in correcting his prefent editor, to ruffle and expofe an irreverend feather or two of the bishop's.

That he may not be fufpected, however, of attempting to injure either, from a principle of fpleen or refentment, he can fafely aver, with regard to both, what another of Dr. Warbur ton's antagonists hath declared in respect to him alone; i. e. "That he is perfonally a ftranger to either of these gentlemen; never converfed with them; never faw them [but once]; never had the leaft communication with them of any kind; never hath received or folicited any favour from either; nor, on the other hand, had been ever perfonally disobliged by them; so that it is impoffible this proceeding can have been influenced either by disappointment or refentment. The truth is, that the Reviewer hath always understood it to be an established law in the republic of letters, wifely calculated to restrain the excefles of infult, petulance and ill-nature, too apt to fhoot up in the fplenetic receffes of folitary literature, that every writer fhould be treated on the fame foot of civility, on which, when unprovoked by prior ill ufage, he hath been accustomed to treat others." Now, whether he hath treated either of thefe gentlemen worfe than they have treated Shakespeare, he dares appeal to the impartiality of the public; which, at whatever low eftimation it may rate an obfcure author, who hath never fet his name to a book; it will hardly think there can be a greater difference between him and