He and his learned associates fi st attempted to recall the attention of the society to objects more worthy of the purposes of its institution,, and of its former enquires; but finding their attempts in vain, he left that temple, where Philosophy once reigned, and where New ton presided as her officiating Minister."

In 1786 Dr. Horsley obtained a Prebend in Gloucester cathedral. This appointment he owed to the Lord Chancellor Thurlow. That great man had perceived and comprehended the designs of the Dissenting Leaders; and considered Horsley as the man who had deserved best of the Church, by vanquishing those who had sought her overthrow. Lord Thurlow was not then personally acquainted with the Doctor; but soon after meeting him at a nobleman's in the country, he was no less pleased with his conversation than he had been with his writings. They travelled to town together; and an intimacy ensued. In 1787, by the influence of Lord Thurlow, he was elevated to the See of St. David's.

The first display of his eloquence and learning in the House of Peers was on Eail Stanhope's motion for a revision and reform of the canons of the church. His speech answered the high expectations of the house. In 1790, when the Protestant Dissenters made their great attempt to obtain a repeal of the Corporation and Test Acts, an anonymous pamphlet appeared, entitled a Review of the Case of Protestant Dissenters,' From its ability and tenor it was imputed to the Bishop of St. David's. The Dissenters railed against it as illiberal and unjust; but those who most accurately studied the history, principles, and proceedings of the Dissenters, at least of the Socinian Dissenters, will not, though they may allow its severity, be the most ready to question its justice.

His conduct in his diocese was highly laudable. He found the Welch curates in a state of great poverty, and consequently without the due respectability among their parishioners. Many of the curacies did not exceed ten pounds a year, a sum that was little likely to procure the services of learning and ability. The Bishop received speedily an accurate state of his diocese; compelled the beneficed clergy to allow their curates a salary more adequate to the important duties they undertook to perform. He himself strictly examined candidates for holy orders; and, in the few years that he was Bishop of St. David's, very greatly improved the condition and character of the Welch

VOL. I.

+ Who the noblemen was has escaped our memory.
C

clergy. At his palace he was distinguished for hospitality to the clergy and gentry, and beneficence to the poor. On January 30th, 1793, he preached before the House of Lords, being a few days after the murder of Lewis XVI. Though many, that were very far from being democrats, might controvert some of his political opinions, all were delighted with his eloquence.

In 179, he was appointed Bishop of Rochester and Dean of Westminster. In both the offices he has earned and acquired much gratitude from those under his care. His political opinions, which not only Jacobins have reviled, but many well affected to our establishments have blamed, will be found, even by constitutional Whigs. little liable to objection, when taken in combination with the whole circumstances of the times; although, in an abstract, and detached from the context, they might not meet the approbation of such.

In 1796 he published a very learned and able dissertation on the Latin and Greek Prosodics, dedicated to Lord Thurlow.

Doctor Horsley has been twice married. By his first lady he had a son, now at Oxford University. The Doctor is a very pleasant companion, with manly manners. His conversation is entertaining, and generally enlightened with a considerable portion of his information and ability.

Concerning this eminent prelate we are promised many communications, which, we hope, may enable us to exhibit a less imperfect sketch of so able and learned a defender of our Christianity* and our national church.

Doctor Watson shall, in a short time, be the subject of a biographical sketch. Communications respecting that prelate shall be most thankfully and respectfully received. Of our many eminent and worthy prelates, Dr. Hurd will succeed the Bishop of Landaff.

CRITICISM.

COMPARISON OF THE ELOQUENCE

OF

BURKE AND CICERO.

BY DR. BISSET.

IT is intended, in the course of this publication, to analyze and contrast the eloquence of the most distinguished Grecian, Roman, and modern British Orators. The high rhetorical powers of the late Edmund Burke deservedly entitles him to our first notice.

GENERAL CHARACTER OF HIS ELOQUENCE.

ON subjects of deliberative wisdom, on subjects addressing themselves not to his prejudices and passions as a party man, but to his knowledge and understanding as a senator, Burke's views were grand and comprehensive. He considered the question with all its relations, profoundly investigated cause, and deduced consequences. The speeches of this illustrious oiator were eminent for exactness, extent, and multiplicity of information; for copiousness and brilliancy of imagery; for readiness, acuteness, versatility, and strength of argument; for wideness of range, and profound reflection; for command of language and facility of communication. Johnson observes, that genius does not consist in the preponderancy of any one of the intellectual faculties, but in the excellence of all. On viewing the whole mental exertions of Burke, one would not have the hardihood to decide whether memory, imagination, or reason, was the most conspicuous; but most men, on attending to the operations of any one of these powers, would esteem it superior to the others. From the most minute and technical details, to the most enlarged philo-. sophy, physical and moral, and its application to practice, he was always completely master of the subject. In speaking on the changes of a turnpike road, or on the revolutions of nations; in cxplaining the process of a manufacture, or the progress of the human mind, he never failed to shew that the whole and every part, the ends and means, the relation of means to means, and of means to ends, were all within his grasp. When exhibition of man was re

quisite, either of the individual or species, either as modified by particular professions, arts, circumstances, or situation, or in a general society, he drew a just, discriminate, strong, and striking picture. Often, indeed, the fulness of his mind and the elasticity of his fancy would lead him farther than was necessary, for information or argument, on the mere subject of discussion. But if some of his thoughts, images, or sentiments, might be irrelative to the individual object proposed, they did dot fail to produce some purpose of general pleasure or utility. If he did digress, you might be instructed, and must be delighted; and you were sure soon to return to the matter in discussion. The rapidity of Burke's associating principle often brought together subjects slightly related. The fulness and flow of his capacious mind rendered his speeches very long, and to some very tiresome. To follow his details, relish his imagery, and grasp his reasoning, often required an extent of knowledge, a vigour of fancy, and a compass of intellect not granted to ordinary men. Besides, there are seasons, when even the wisest men may be weary of wisdom. He frequently, after the night was far advanced, began a speech which he carried on for three hours.

COMPARISON WITH CICERO.

The eloquence of Burke has been frequently compared to that of Cicero. There is, no doubt, a general resemblance between two of the most learned men and greatest orators of the most learned and eloquent ages and countries. Both are men of extraordinary genius: both had acquired an uncommon share of the knowledge of their respective times, and especially of the knowledge most necessary for political disquisition and eloquent orations: both are completely informed on the subjects which they undertake to discuss: both reason with great force and dexterity, arguing closely or loosely, directly or circuitously, as best answered their purpose.

We may consider these two great orators, in point of materials, disposition, language, and the purposes to which their respective eloquence was directed. The different circumstances of the times necessarily produced a very considerable difference in the materials. of their eloquence. The extent and complication of modern politics required a proportionate comprehension and variety of materials from the British senator, which the more simple relations of ancient politics did not require from the Roman. Besides more multifarious detail, the philosophy of politics is now much farther advanced than in the time of Cicero. There is much more of generalization in

politics, as in all other subjects. To compose eloquent orations, in the age of Cicero, required neither the same extent and multiplicity of knowledge, nor enlargement of views, as in the age of Burke. On the other hand, it now requires less ability to procure multiplicity of knowledge; because, in fact, there is much more to be attained; and less native vigour of mind to generalize, because habits of generalization are common. Cicero's most distinguished orations were judicial, a species of oratory requiring not so wide a compass of materials as deliberative: even the questions of deliberation among the Romans, who were merely a nation of warriors and conquerors, with little commerce, intrigue, and little variety of relation to foreign states; hardly indeed any other than those which proceeded from command. Their situation afforded less variety of deliberative matter than the Grecian republics, and much less than England.

The principal deliberative oration of Cicero, as far as I can recollet, is that (pro lege Manilia) on the expediency of appointing Pompey to succeed Lucullus, with extraordinary powers. This speech turned, first, on the comparative merit of the two Generals, as it was easy for the Romans to conquer Mithridates, if they had able commanders, desirous of terminating the war. Secondly, on the personal character of Pompey, as likely to be affected by unlimited authority. The facts ascertaining the merits of the two leaders were not difficult to collect, as they were recent in every one's memory. The character of Pompey was well known; and for Cicero's purposes, the chief object was exaggeration. Cicero certainly gives his materials that order and direction which was most likely to procure the recall of Lucullus and the appointment of Pompey. But on perusing the oration pro lege Manila, and Burke's speech on American taxation, and estimating them by the true criterion of speeches on momentous business, the quantity of important, particular, and general truth, of information and instruction, which they contain, it appears to me that the stores of Burke's mind, as exhibited in his speech, are greater than those of Cicero. If we take all Cicero's speeches and all Burke's, and compare them in the degree of knowledge and wisdom which they convey, I think few would hesitate to say, that a reader might become more knowing and wiser by Burke's than by Cicero's. Much of this, however, arises from causes not peculiar to Burke, but appertaining to this age and country. The reasoning of Cicero is frequently very acute, and generally very ingenious; but his arguments not rarely are taken from common-place topics, sources so much recommended by ancient