from 1675 to 1680, as a master who taught nothing either in politics, or science, which was dangerous to monarchial government, or which was improper for a diligent scholar to know. Being in 1705 accused by Tutchin of illiterature, De Foe archly acknowledged, "I owe this justice to my ancient father, who is yet living, and in whose behalf I freely testify, that if I am a blockhead, it was nobody's fault but my own; he having spared nothing that

a plain, racy, thorough English style, than De Foe. But still he was not deficient in learning. He boldly asserts himself on this point, in the passage from which Mr. Chalmers has made an extract in the text: "I have no concern to tell Dr. Browne I can read English, nor to tell Mr. Tutchin, I understand Latin; non ita Latinus, sum ut Latine loqui. I easily acknowledge myself blockhead enough to have lost the fluency of expression in the Latin, and so far trade as been a prejudice to me, and yet I think I owe this justice to my ancient father, still living (1705), and in whose behalf I freely testify, that if I am a blockhead, it was nobody's fault but my own; he having spared nothing in my education that might qualify me to match the accurate Dr. Browne, or the learned Observator. As to Mr. Tutchin, I never gave him the least affront; I have, even after base usage, in vain invited him to peace; in answer to which he returns unmannerly insults, calumnies, and reproach. As to my little learning, and his great capacity, I freely challenge him to translate with me any Latin, French, and Italian author, and after that, to retranslate them crossways, for 201. each book; and by this he shall have an opportunity to show the world how much De Foe, the hosier, is inferior in learning to Mr. Tutchin, the gentleman." [Review vol. ii. p. 149.] He also vindicated Mr. Morton's academy from the charge made against it by the Rev. Samuel Wesley, father of the celebrated founder of Methodism, that antimonarchical and unconstitutional doctrines were taught there. De Foe especially denies this. His domestic education seems to have been according to the system then pursued by the strict and pious dissenters. He mentions that he began the task performed by many others of that then persecuted body, of copying the Bible in shorthand, and that he finished the Pentateuch. [Review vol. vi. p. 573.] He was intended for the ministry; but for what reason he relinquished that profession is not known. "It was his disaster," he says, "first, to be set apart for, and then to be set apart from, the honour of that sacred employ."-ED.

might qualify me to match the accurate Dr. Bor the learned Tutchind."

De Foe was born a writer, as other men are born generals and statesmen; and when he was not twentyone, he published, in 1683, a pamphlet against a very prevailing sentiment in favour of the Turks, as opposed to the Austrians; very justly thinking, as he avows in his riper age, that it was better the popish house of Austria should ruin the protestants in Hungary, than the infidel house of Ottoman should ruin both protestants and papists, by overrunning Germany. De Foe was a man who would fight as

d Review, vol. ii. p. 150.

e Appeal, p. 51. This was not the first occasion of his appearing in print. His earliest effort as an author was an answer to Roger L'Estrange's Guide to the Inferior Clergy, and was intituled, Speculum Crape Gownorum; or, A Lookingglass for the Young Academicks, new Foyl'd, with Reflections on some of the late high-flown Sermons; to which is added, An Essay towards a Sermon of the newest fashion. By a Guide to the Inferior Clergy. Ridentem discere verum, quis vitat? It was published in 1682. This work, as might be anticipated, was a satiric attack on the clergy of that day.

De Foe's object in the pamphlet mentioned in the text, was to assert the policy of defending the house of Austria, then closely and vigorously attacked by the Turks. The "prevailing sentiment," referred to by Mr. Chalmers, was a dissatisfaction with the emperor for his cruel persecution of the protestants in Hungary; and which carried the national feeling so far as to make any assistance rendered to the emperor, even against the threatening Turks, extremely unpopular. De Foe, then very young, took the field on the weaker side, and strenuously maintained the danger to Christendom arising from the Mahommedan power being allowed to enter Vienna. Happily, the courage of John Sobieski, king of Poland, prevented that, once imminent, danger. De Foe, in a late period of his life, thus refers to his conduct on this occasion. "The first time I had the misfortune to differ from my friends, was about the year 1683, when the Turks were besieging Vienna, and the whigs in England, generally speaking, were for the Turks taking it; whilst I, having read the history of the cruelty and perfidious

well as write for his principles; and before he was three-and-twenty he appeared in arms for the duke of Monmouth, in June 1685. Of this exploit he boasts in his latter years, when it was no longer dangerous to avow his participation in that imprudent enterprise, with greater men of similar principles.

Having escaped from the dangers of battle, and from the fangs of Jefferys, De Foe found complete security in the more gainful pursuits of peace. Yet he was prompted by his zeal to mingle in the controversies of the reign of James II. whom he efficaciously opposed, by warning the dissenters of the secret danger of the insidious tolerance which was offered by the monarch's bigotry, or by the minister's artifices. When our author collected his

dealings of the Turks in their wars, and how they had rooted out the name of the Christian religion in above threescore and ten kingdoms, could by no means agree with, and though then but a young man and a young author, I opposed it and wrote against it, which was taken very unkind indeed." [Vide Appeal to Honour and Justice.]-ED.

Appeal.

The title of De Foe's pamphlet, or pamphlets, on this subject, does not seem to be known, but he more than once in afterlife proudly refers to his efforts on that important matter. "The next time I differed with my friends, was when king James was wheedling the dissenters to take off the penal laws and test, which I could by no means come into. And as in the first I used to say, I had rather the popish house of Austria should ruin the protestants in Hungary, than that the infidel house of Ottoman should ruin both protestant and papist, by overrunning Germany, so in the other I told the dissenters I had rather the Church of England should pull our clothes off by fines and forfeitures, than that the papists should fall both upon the church and the dissenters, and pull our skins off by fire and fagot." [Appeal to Honour and Justice.] And again: "I never would have had the dissenters to join with king James, to take off the penal laws and test. No; no: I thank God I was of age then to bear my testimony against it, and to affront some who were of a different opinion." [Review, vol. viii. p. 694.]-ED.

writings, he did not think proper to republish either his tract against the Turks, or his pamphlet against the king.

De Foe was admitted a liveryman of London on the 26th of January, 1687-8; when, being allowed his freedom by birth, he was received a member of that eminent corporation. As he had endeavoured to promote the revolution by his pen and his sword, he had the satisfaction of partaking, ere long, in the pleasures and advantages of that great event. During the hilarity of that moment, the lord mayor of London asked king William to partake of the city feast on the 29th of October, 1689. Every honour was paid the sovereign of the people's choice. A regiment of volunteers, composed of the chief citizens, and commanded by the celebrated earl of Peterborough, attended the king and queen from Whitehall to the Mansion-house. Among these troopers, gallantly mounted, and richly accoutred, was Daniel De Foe, if we may believe Oldmixon.

While our author thus displayed his zeal, and courted notice, he is said to have acted as a hosier

h History, vol. ii. p. 37. The following is the passage in Oldmixon: "Their majesties, attended by their royal highnesses and a numerous train of nobility and gentry, went first to a balcony prepared for them at the Angel in Cheapside, to see the show; which for the great number of liverymen, the full appearance of the militia, and the artillery company, the rich adornments of the pageants, and the splendour and good order of the whole proceedings, outdid all that had been seen before, on that occasion; and what deserved to be particularly remembered, says a reverend historian, was a royal regiment of volunteer horse, made up of the chief citizens, who being gallantly mounted and richly accoutred, were led by the earl of Monmouth, now earl of Peterborough, and attended there majesties from Whitehall. Among these troopers, who were for the most part dissenters, was Daniel De Foe, at that time a hosier in Freeman's Yard, Cornhill." [History of England, vol. iii. p. 36.]

in Freeman's Yard, Cornhill; but the hosier1 and and the poet are very irreconcilable characters. With the usual imprudence of superior genius, he was carried by his vivacity into companies who were gratified by his wit. He spent those hours with a small society for the cultivation of polite learning, which he ought to have employed in the calculations of the counting-house; and being obliged to abscond from his creditors, in 1692, he naturally attributed those misfortunes to the war, which were probably owing to his own misconduct k.

i Being reproached by Tutchin, in his Observator, with having been bred an apprentice to a hosier, De Foe asserts, in May, 1705, that he never was a hosier, or an apprentice, but admits that he had been a trader. [Review, vol. ii. p. 149.] Oldmixon, who never speaks favourably of De Foe, allows that he had never been a merchant, otherwise than peddling a little to Portugal. [Hist. vol. ii. p. 519.] But, peddling to Portugal makes a trader.

66

h These views of Mr. Chalmers seem confirmed by De Foe's own severe comments on the distraction caused to tradesmen by an over-indulgence in literary pursuits. In his Complete Tradesman, one of the most valuable practical books that was ever published, and which should be the manual of every young man beginning business, he says, a wit turned tradesman! no apronstrings will hold him; it is in vain to lock him behind the counter, he is gone in a moment. Instead of journal and ledger, he runs away to his Virgil and Horace; his journal entries are all Pindarics, and his ledger is all heroics. He is truly dramatic from one end to the other through the whole scene of his trade; and as the first part is all comedy, so the two last acts are always made up with tragedy; a statute of bankrupt is his exeunt omnes, and he generally repeats the epilogue in the Fleet prison or the Mint." [See ante, vol. xvii.] He is also very severe against tradesmen who are led away into expensive pleasures and idle company. But Mr. Wilson vindicates De Foe, in some degree, by showing from his own statements that he had been the victim of the fraud of others, as well as of his own imprudent habits. In one of the Reviews, [vol. iii. p. 70.] he says, that "nothing was more frequent than for a man in full credit to buy all the goods he could lay his hands on, and carry them directly from the house he bought