« AnteriorContinuar »
rous, and his subjects various. With his theological works I am only enough acquainted to admire his meekness of opposition and his mildness of censure. It was not only in his book, but in his mind, that orthodoxy was united with charity. Of his philosophical pieces, his logic has been received into the universities, and therefore wants no private recommendation; if he owes part of it to Le Clerc, it must be considered that no man, who undertakes merely to methodize or illustrate a system, pretends to be its author. In his metaphysical disquisitions, it was observed by the late learned Mr. Dyer, that he confounded the idea of space with that of em/ity aftace, and did not consider that though space might be without matter, yet matter being extended could not be without space. Few books have been perused by me with greater pleasure than his “ Improvement of the Mind,” of which the radical principles may indeed be found in Locke’s “Conduct of the Understanding;” but they are so expanded and ramified by Watts, as to confer upon him the merit of a work in the highest degree useful and pleasing. Whoever has the care of instructing others may be charged with deficience in his duty if this book is not recommended. I have mentioned his treatises of Theology as distinct from his other productions; but the truth is, that whatever he took in hand was, by his incessant solicitude for souls, converted to Theology. As piety predominated in his mind, it is diffused over his works; under his direction it may be truly said, Theologie Philosofhia ancillatur, philosophy is subservient to evangelical instruction; it is difficult to read a page without learning, or at least wishing, to be better.
The attention is caught by indirect instruction, and he
that sat down only to reason is on a sudden compelled to pray. It was therefore with great propriety that, in 1728, he received from Edinburgh and Aberdeen an unsolicited diploma, by which he became a doctor of divinity. Academical honours would have more value, if they were always bestowed with equal judgment. He continued many years to study and to preach, and to do good by his instruction and example; till at last the infirmities of age disabled him from the more laborious part of his ministerial functions, and, being no longer capable of public duty, he offered to remit the salary appendant to it; but his congregation would not accept the resignation. By degrees his weakness increased, and at last confined him to his chamber and his bed; where he was worn gradually away without pain, till he expired, Nov. 25, 1743, in the seventy-fifth year of his age. Few men have left behind such purity of character, or such monuments of laborious piety. He has provided instruction for all ages, from those who are lisping their first lessons, to the enlightened readers of Malbranche and Locke; he has left neither corporeal nor spiritual nature unexamined; he has taught the Art of Reasoning, and the Science of the Stars. His character, therefore, must be formed from the multiplicity and diversity of his attainments, rather than from any single performance; for it would not be safe to claim for him the highest rank in any single denomiRation of literary dignity; yet perhaps there was nothing in which he would not have excelled, if he had not divided his powers to different pursuits. As a poet, had he been only a poet, he would probably have stood high among the authors with whom he is now associated. For his judgment was exact, and
he noted beauties and faults with very nice discernment; his imagination, as the “Dacian Battle” proves, was vigorous and active, and the stores of knowledge were large by which his fancy was to be supplied. His ear was well tuned, and his diction was elegant and copious, but his devotional poetry is, like that of others, unsatisfactory. The paucity of its topics enforces perpetual repetition, and the sanctity of the matter rejects the ornaments of figurative diction. It is sufficient for Watts to have done better than others what no man has done well. o His poems on other subjects seldom rise higher than might be expected from the amusements of a man of letters, and have different degrees of value as they are more or less laboured, or as the occasion was more or less favourable to invention.
He writes too often without regular measures, and
too often in blank verse; the rhymes are not always sufficiently correspondent. He is particularly unhappy in coining names expressive of characters. His lines are commonly smooth and easy, and his thoughts always religiously pure; but who is there that, to so much piety and innocence, does not wish for a greater measure of sprightliness and vigour ! He is at least one of the few poets with whom youth and ignorance may be safely pleased; and happy will be that reader whose mind is disposed, by his verses or his prose, to imitate him in all but his non-conformity, to copy his benevolence to man, and his reverence to God.
Or the birth or early part of the life of AMBROSE PHILIPS I have not been able to find any account. His academical education he received at St. John’s college in Cambridge,” where he first solicited the notice of the world by some English verses, in the collection published by the university on the death of queen Mary. From this time how he was employed, or in what station he passed his life, is not yet discovered. He must have published his pastorals before the year 1708, because they are evidently prior to those of Pope. He afterwards (1709) addressed to the universal patron, the duke of Dorset, a “Poetical Letter from Copenhagen,” which was published in the “Tatler,” and is by Pope in one of his first letters mentioned with high praise, as the production of a man “who could write very nobly.” Philips was a zealous whig, and therefore easily found access to Addison and Steele; but his ardour seems not to have procured him any thing more than kind words; since he was reduced to translate the “ Persian Tales” for Tonson, for which he was afterwards reproached, with this addition of contempt, that
* He took his degrees, A. B. 1696, A. M. 1700. C.
he worked for half-a-crown. The book is divided into many sections, for each of which if he received halfa-crown, his reward, as writers then were paid, was very liberal; but half-a-crown had a mean sound. He was employed in promoting the principles of his party, by epitomising Hacket’s “Life of Archbishop Williams.” The original book is written with such depravity of genius, such mixture of the fop and pedant, as has not often appeared. The epitome is free enough from affectation, but has little spirit or vigour.” In 1712 he brought upon the stage “The Distrest Mother,” almost a translation of Racine’s “Andromaque.” Such a work requires no uncommon powers; but the friends of Philips exerted every art to promote his interest. Before the appearance of the play, a whole “Spectator,” none indeed of the best, was devoted to its praise; while it yet continued to be acted, another “Spectator” was written, to tell what impression it made upon sir Roger; and on the first night a select audience, says Pope,t was called together to applaud it. . It was concluded with the most successful epilogue that was ever yet spoken on the English theatre. The three first nights it was recited twice; and not only continued to be demanded through the run, as it is. termed, of the play, but whenever it is recalled to the stage, where by peculiar fortune, though a copy from. the French, it yet keeps its place, the epilogue is still expected, and is still spoken. The propriety of epilogues in general, and coilsequently of this, was questioned by a correspondent of “The Spectator,” whose letter was undoubtedly ad
* This ought to have been noticed before. It was published in 1700, when he appears to have obtained a fellowship of St. John’s, C. t Spence.