MONTHLY ANTHOLOGY. JULY, 1806. ORIGINAL LETTERS FROM EUROPE. Government...Laws...Lawyers. THE kingdom of the two Sicilies, Naples, became an independent state after the dissolution of the Roman empire, of which it was a fragment, and has been from its origin the perpetual seat of discord and civil wars; subjugated by one nation after another, the fertility of its climate, and the labour of its inhabitants, have been insufficient to gratify the rapacity of the conquerors. Yet so lavish is nature of her bounty to this country, that notwithstanding the tremendous effects of earthquakes and volcanoes, and the devastations of continual wars, an interval of a few years of peace always restored its former prosperity. But the immediate rapine and violence of these turbulent times, terrible as they were, have not been so pernicious, as the civil and political consequences that resulted from the irruptions and transient dominion of so many different nations. The former only afflicted a single generation, but the latter have been entailed upon posterity. This beautiful, but unfortunate country, was successively ravaged by the Normans, the Germans, the Spaniards, and involved in perpetual quarrels with the intriguing ambition of the papal power, when the thunder of the Vatican affrightVol. III. No. 7. 2T No. 7. ed the greater part of Europe, in those ages debased by every species of tyranny and superstition. Every invader brought the laws of his own country; the Neapolitans, besides retaining the Roman jurisprudence of the Justinian code, adopted the Norman code, and, that the confusion might be worse confounded, joined to these, with the system of feudal rights and tenures, Spanish customs and authorities, incorporating occasionally with the rest, a papal ordination. This complicated system, or rather this confused medley of laws, many of which, though they were originally good, yet were so successfully veiled in tedious form, as to obscure their meaning and destroy their utility,now forms the unwieldy, intricate system of jurisprudence in this kingdom. It will be easy to imagine the state of confusion and uncertainty, in which such a system must place all sorts of claims or agreements, subject to legal discussion; that the most equitable tenure of property must be insecure, where such a wide field is left open for chicanery and legal vexation and delay. Indeed the single fact, that there are twenty thousand lawyers in Naples, will give the best idea of it; and it may be readily conceived, that from the body of laws just mentioned, (I have been told, they sometimes come to court with a cartload of volumes to cite authorities and precedents) it is easy for them to protract any decision, till the subject of dispute has cost more than its intrinsick value. A fertile soil, a genial sky, and the exertions of industry, would, in a few years after the ravages of war, again give to the grain its customary protection in this country against the fervid heat of the sun, the luxuriant shade of the vine, festooning from the olive, and other fruit trees, planted at regular distances ;...yet these charming fields must be esteemed uncertain wealth, when they are held on such a precarious tenure. It is a singular fact, that the present sovereign is the first king who was ever born in the country. A patriot king may be an imaginary being. Surely he cannot be looked for here, where he has not even the slight attachment of birth. Continually subjugated by foreign nations, they have had a succession of monarchs, strangers to the country they governed, and more solicitous about their personal splendour and power, than the happiness of the people, over whom they tyrannized. This, with the wretched state of their laws, sufficiently explains, why this fine country has always been the prey of others, and why the kingdom of the Two Sicilies, which from the fertility of its soil, the genial influence of its climate, and its geographical situation, ought to have been powerful and respecta ble, has been too weak to resist any rapacious invader, and too contemptible to excite the pity or protection of any respectable pow er. The fertile island of Sicily, once the granary of the Roman empire, hardly gives more consequence to its sovereign, than his kingdom of Jerusalem. Yet from its immense resources, if inhabited by an industrious people, whose earnings should be protected by the laws, this island ought to make its owner a respectable, powerful sovereign. In its present state, it is half a desert, and half a convent. Nor do the continental possessions afford much greater resources; the provinces of the two Calabrias pay no revenues to the crown, and their principal contribution is a yearly convoy of a hundred ruffians to the galleys at Naples. The Museum at Portici is one monument in favour of the government no recent researches have been made, though doubtless much remains to be discovered. We would pardon, however, this government for letting the skele tons of the inhabitants of Pompeia repose in the houses, where they have been buried for eighteen centuries. This is only disappointing the curiosity of the artist and antiquarian. But when a stranger witnesses the degraded state of their country, and the indifference with which they suffer its great natural resources to lie dormant, he cannot help execrating their apathy. The king of Naples, like his cousin, the king of Spain, is extravagantly fond of hunting; it seems to be a passion of the Spanish line. Yet while the king is hunting boars in the wilds of Caserta, his ministers are hunting his subjects in every part of the kingdom. Had the Neapolitan court been less occupied with the pleasures of the chace, or other pleasures less ferocious, and, econ omizing their resources, endeavoured to excite the industry of the people; diminished the herd of insignificant noblesse; given a body of regular laws for civil decisions; occupied the Lazzaroni in cultivating Sicily, or employed them in manufactures; had they availed themselves of their advantageous position for commerce,... the king of the Two Sicilies would have been a powerful sovereign, though now obliged to cringe, alternately, to the great powers of Europe. LIFE OF RICHARD BENTLEY, D. D. Late Regius Professor of Divinity, and Master of Trinity College, Cambridge, Eng. Τιμιωτατα μεν και πρώτα τα περ την ψυχην αγαθα. Continued from page 299. THE justice as well as the acuteness of these remarks was universally acknowledged, and Le Clerc was sensible that his character as a critick was lost, if they remained unanswered. While he deliberated on what measures he should adopt, a manuscript was left at his house by a stranger, who in the title-page called himself Philargyrius Cantabrigiensis. This book contained remarks on the fragments and corrections of several errours, which had escaped Philelutherus Lipsiensis, in his emendations. PLATO, de Legib. IV. afterwards, when he published another edition of his notes in Menander and Philemon, he did not appear, as far as we can remember, to have been influenced in any single instance by the observations of Philargyrius Cantabrigiensis. Many of them display acuteness; but a settled determination, at all events, to defend Le Clerc, and depreciate Bentley, is too apparent. It was observed by the learned Dr. Salter, the late master of the Charterhouse, that the critical remarks interspersed through this work were of little value; and, in the discussion of philological subjects, his sentiments deserve attention. He was a very accurate Greek scholar. His reading was universal, and extended through the whole circle of ancient literature. He was acquainted with the poets, historians, orators, philoso In 1711, Le Clerc published this anonymous defence. He prefixed a long preface, in which he attempted to wipe off the stain which his critical abilities had received. His arguments, however, in general, are feeble. He does not name Bentley as his adversary, but by several hints points out his suspi-phers, and criticks of Greece and cions. This answer to Bentley was written by Pauw, a man of no very extraordinary abilities. He was, however, a laborious critick, and tolerably versed in Greek literature. The remarks do not deserve any exalted commendation. Bentley, in all probability wholly disregarded them, as a few years Rome. His memory was naturally tenacious; and it had acquired great artificial powers, if such an expression be allowable, by using no notes, when he delivered his sermons. So retentive, indeed, were his faculties, that, till a few months before his death, he could quote long passages from almost every author whose work he had perused, even with a critical exactness. Nor were his studies confined to the writers of antiquity. He was equally conversant with English literature, and with the languages and productions of the learned and ingenious, in various parts of Europe. But this is not a proper place to enlarge on the classical erudition, or eminent talents, of Dr. Salter. We could not, how ever, refrain from drawing this little sketch of his character, as, in his earlier life, he had been acquainted with Bentley, and cherished his memory with fond respect. He preserved many anecdotes of that great critick, which have been published from his papers,* and are now incorporated into this account. Those who were acquainted with Salter, and know how to estimate the value of his erudition, will peruse these honorary lines with some pleasure, which may perhaps receive augmentation, by finding his name recorded in the life of his favourite Bentley. Τις γαρ θανεσι χρη τον ου τεθνηκοΐα EURIP. PHONISS. See the life of Bentley, in the Biographia Britannia, and the notes on the edition of the Dif fertation of Phalaris, published by the learned En glish printer, Bowyer. The facts recorded in this account are generally derived from these fources. pected edition of Horace, which he dedicated to Harley, Earl of Oxford, who was then minister. The opinions of the learned with respect to this edition are various. By some it was extolled, as the greatest work that had appeared since the revival of letters, and by others it was ridiculed, and treated with contempt. If we may be allowed to give our sentiments on this subject, for Who shall decide, when Doctors disagree,' we must confess, we think that Bentley has received too much praise for his corrections of Horace from one party, and has been too much condemned by the other. Some of his emendations display wonderful acumen and critical perspicuity, and some of the passages, which he has restored from the manuscript copies,should certainly be admitted in all future editions. But many of his remarks are more eminent for ingenuity than judgment. It should likewise be remembered, that in his own edition, which was published at Cambridge in quarto, he did not incorporate the most daring of his corrections into the text, but inserted them in his notes, which he placed at the end of the volume, and that he always inserts at the bottom of the page the readings of former editors. The dedication to the Earl of Oxford was dated from Trinity College, on the 6th of the Ides of December, which was the birthday of Horace. It is a lively, ingenious composition. The former part of it contains an address to Horace, with a comparison between his Mecenas, in the court of Augustus, and Harley, whom he styles the modern Mecanas. The latter part consists of a short histo The mode of arrangement and many of the criti-ry of the earl's immediate ancestors. cal remarks are criginal. Dr. Bentley originally intended to have dedicated his edition of Horace to the Earl of Halifax,who had been at Trinity College. But as the work was delayed until the year 1711, when the ministry was changed, he determined to place it under the patronage of the Earl of Oxford. At the accession of King George I. he was told that this dedication would most probably hurt his interest. In reply he said, that he should share the fate of Hare, Gooch,and Sherlock. These three, however, all became bishops, while Bentley died Master of Trinity College. In the preface he informs us, that as the weighty cares, which had devolved upon him, for some years, by his situation as master of a college, had prevented a regular application to any serious. study, he determined to devote a part of his leisure hours to the publication of some entertaining author, lest he should banish entirely his regard for the muses, and his favourite pursuits. He fixed upon Horace, because he was an universal favourite. In his notes he tells us, that explanations of passages, which related to the customs or to the history of the ancients, form no part of his design. His intention was to correct errours, and restore genuine readings, either by the authority of copies, or by conjecture. In his notes he availed himself of the printed editions, and of several manuscripts, the readings of which had escaped the researches of former editors. The orthography, in his edition of Horace, appears affectedt, be Valgus for Vulgus, Divom for Divum, and the plural accufatives in is instead of es, when the gen. plur. ended in ium. Conpefco, Inpius, are more defenfible, and de cause it is unusual; but as it is the mode of spelling, which appears by medals and inscriptions to have been used in the time of Augustus, and which is found in the most ancient copies of Horace, he seems rather to merit praise than censure for attempting such a revival. To enter into a critical examination of his notes would far exceed our limits, and as the book is well known, the criticism would appear rather ostentatious than necessary.. The following emendation we cannot help transcribing, for although Bentley thought it too bold a correction for him to admit into the text, we think it affords a happy specimen of critical sagacity : Ceflit inermis tibi blandienti Cerberus ; quamvis furiale centum So Bentley would read this passage in Horace's Ode to Mercury, III. XI. In common editions the 3d line stands thus : Muniant angues caput ejus, atque Dacier observes, that the word ejus debases the whole poem. There is a passage in Ovid of the same cast, but that should not be admitted as a defence for an expression, so mean and prosaick. The alteration may be defended by several similar passages. Among his corrections the change of "Ille et nefasto tu posuit die" into " Illum |