Revolution, when this princess retired to Nottingham, being then pregnant of the duke of Gloucester, Radcliffe was requested to attend her; but, being aware of the uncertain state of affairs, he thought it prudent to refuse, which he did under pretext of the extent of his engagements. When William came.to the throne, Radcliffe was consulted along with the celebrated Bidloo, whom the king brought over with him as chief physician. His success was so universally acknowledged that the king offered to make him one of his physicians, which, however, he declined from motives of policy. His success in practice did not, however, suffer from this circumstance, for he continued to be consulted on all important occasions by the king and the first nobility. In 1694, he attended the queen, who had smallpox. Her death was, by some, attributed to carelessness and unskilfulness on the part of Radcliffe. The freedoms which he used with his patients were sometimes resented. Thus we find him dismissed from the service of the Princess Anne of Denmark for refusing to visit her, swearing that "her highness's distemper was nothing but the vapours, and that she was in as good a state of health as any woman breathing, could she but believe it." After this he continued in great favour with the king, which, however, he lost in 1699, by the very uncourtly reply he made to his majesty, who on his return from Holland showed him his swollen legs; "Why, truly," said Radcliffe, "I would not have your majesty's two legs for your three kingdoms." He was no longer employed at court, notwithstanding the exertions made in his favour by the earl of Albemarle. When Queen Anne came to the throne, her dislike to Radcliffe remained unabated, so that he was not reinstated in his post of chief physician; but the confidence in his abilities remained unshaken, and he was often consulted on important occasions. In 1703, he was in considerable danger from a pleurisy, so much so that he made his will. He recovered, however, and continued the practice of his profession with unabated vigour. In 1713, he was elected member of parliament for Buckingham.

In 1714, he was called to attend the last illness of Queen Anne. Respecting his conduct on that occasion it is difficult to form an opinion, the accounts of it differ so much. From a letter of his own it appears that a fit of the gout confined him at the time, and that besides, the call he received neither came directly from the queen, nor from any person properly entitled to take upon him to do so without her command. His confidence in Dr Mead was also so great, that he considered his personal attendance unnecessary. Be the fact as it may, nothing is more certain than that Radcliffe was much blamed by the public, and thought himself in danger of being assassinated. A motion was even made in the house of commons, that he should be called to this place to answer for not attending on her majesty. On the 3d November, 1714, Radcliffe died in Carshalton; he lay in state for some time, and was buried in St Mary's church, Oxford.

The character and talents of Dr Radcliffe have been very differently described. That he was eccentric, sometimes ill-natured, fond of money and of his bottle, cannot be denied. But whatever blame is cast upon him beyond this, must be regarded with some degree of suspicion, when we consider how many enemies his eccentricities, conjoined with his unparalleled success, must have made for him among his profes

sional brethren. We find him described by some as a bold empiric, while Dr Mead says, that "he was deservedly at the head of his profession, on account of his great medical penetration and experience." He has left no writings, so that our proof of his talents must always remain defective. Though of a grasping disposition in acquiring wealth, he was most liberal in bestowing it. He gave many sums of money to the society for propagating the gospel, to the poor non-juring clergy, and to the episcopal clergy in Scotland. But his greatest liberality was bestowed upon the university of Oxford. From the funds left at his death, the Radcliffe library, an infirmary and observatory, besides many other buildings, were erected there. The hospital of St Bartholomew receives £600 a year from his estates; £250 are annually expended on the support of the Radcliffe library; and an estate in Yorkshire is devoted to the support of two travelling fellows of University college. Other funds remain at the disposal of trustees, to be applied to such charitable purposes as they think fit.

William Wycherley.

BORN A. D. 1640.-died a. D. 1715.

WILLIAM WYCHERLEY, the author of several very successful dramas, was the elder son of Daniel Wycherley of Cleve, in Shropshire. A little before the restoration of Charles II., he became a gentleman commoner of Queen's college, Oxford; but he left the university without having matriculated. It appears that before entering on any course of studies in England young Wycherley had resided some years in France, where he lived in the best society, and was much noticed by Madame de Montausier. Hence, perhaps, the tone of persiflage and gallantry that runs throughout his writings.

He

After leaving Oxford, he entered himself of the Middle Temple; but the study of law was far too dry a pursuit for the gay young Englishman, who, in addition to the natural vivacity and buoyancy of his spirits, had had his habits and tastes formed in the court of France. soon abandoned the study of jurisprudence for dalliance with the gayer muses, and, betwixt the years 1672 and 1712, published several comedies and poems in which the dissolute tone of morals which then pervaded the upper ranks of society was but too successfully imitated.

The publication of his first play, 'Love in a Wood,' introduced him at once to the special favour of the court, and particularly to the duchess of Cleveland. Spence, in his gossipping garrulous book,' gives an account of our poet's first introduction to the duchess, which, as sufficiently characteristic of the times, we shall here insert. "Wycherley," says he, "was a very handsome man. His acquaintance with the famous duchess of Cleveland commenced oddly enough. One day as he passed that duchess's coach in the ring, she leaned out of the window, and cried out loud enough to be heard distinctly by him, Sir, you're a rascal! you're a villain!' Wycherley from that instant entertained hopes. He did not fail waiting on her the next morning; and, with a

* Anecdotes, Observations, &c. by the Rev. J. Spence. London, 1820.

very melancholy tone, begged to know how it was possible for him to have so much disobliged her grace. They were very good friends from that time yet, after all," adds Spence, "what did he get by her ?" He was fortunate enough to enjoy pretty substantial patronage in still higher quarters. The duke of Buckingham gave him two or three military commissions under him; and Charles himself occasionally presented him with sums of money. Spence says, the king 66 gave him now and then a hundred pounds,-not often." But there is abundant evidence that Wycherley shared as much of the royal favour as he could reasonably expect, so long as the capricious monarch chose to pay him any attentions at all. His marriage with Lady Drogheda, however, threw him into disgrace at court for a time, and seems to have cast a continual shade over the remainder of his fortunes. Spence, on the authority of old Dennis, says: "Just before the time of his courtship, he was designed for governor to the late duke of Richmond, and was to have been allowed £1500 a-year from the government. His absence from court, in the progress of this amour, and his being yet more absent after his marriage, (for Lady Drogheda was very jealous of him,) disgusted his friends there so much, that he lost all his interest with them. His lady died; he got but little by her; and his misfortunes were such that he was thrown into the Fleet, and lay there seven years." Wycherley died in 1715. "He died a Romanist, and has owned that religion in my hearing," says Spence. On this subject, a reviewer judiciously remarks:-" It is rather remarkable that we have three instances together of poets who were Roman Catholics at this period,-Garth, Wycherley, and Pope himself. The reason assigned for Garth's predilection for this faith, viz. the greater efficacy which it gives to the sacraments,' does not appear to be very obvious or satisfactory. Popery is, in its essence, and by its very constitution, a religion of outward form and ceremony, full of sound and show, recommending itself by the charm of music, the solemnity of pictures, the pomp of dress, the magnificence of buildings, by the dread of power, and the allurements of pleasure. It strikes upon the senses studiously, and in every way; it appeals to the imagination; it enthrals the passions; it infects by sympathy; has age, has authority, has numbers on its side, and exacts implicit faith in its inscrutable mysteries and its gaudy symbols :—it is, in a word, the religion of fancy, as protestantism is the religion of philosophy, and of faith chastised by a more sober reason. It is not astonishing, therefore, that at a period when the nation and the government had been so lately distracted by the contest between the old and the new religion, poets were found to waver between the two, or were often led away by that which flattered their love of the marvellous and the splendid. Any of these reasons, we think, is more likely than the greater efficacy given to the sacraments' in that communion, to explain why so many poets, without much religion, as Garth, Wycherley, Pope, Dryden, Crashaw, should be fascinated by the glittering bait of popery, and lull their more serious feelings asleep in the torpor of its harlot embraces. A minute, but voluminous critic of our time, has laboured hard to show, that to this list should be added the name of Massinger. But the proofs adduced in support of this conjecture are extremely inconclusive. Among others, the writer insists on the profusion of crucifixes, glories, angelic

visions, garlands of roses, and clouds of incense scattered through the 'Virgin Martyr' as evidence of the theological sentiments meant to be inculcated by this play; when the least reflection might have taught him that they proved nothing but his author's poetical conception of the character and costume of his subject. A writer might, with the same sinister shrewdness, be suspected of heathenism for talking of Flora and Ceres, in a poem on the seasons; and what are produced as the exclusive badges of catholic bigotry, are nothing but the adventitious ornaments and external emblems, the gross and sensible language, in a word, the poetry of Christianity in general. What, indeed, shows the frivolousness of the whole inference is, that Decker, who is asserted by our critic to have contributed some of the most passionate and fantastic of these devotional scenes, is not even accused of a leaning to popery."

Roger Cotes.

BORN A. D. 1682.-DIED A. D. 1716.

THIS mathematician, whose life was too short for the fulfilment of its early promise, was the son of the Rev. Robert Cotes, rector of Burbage in Leicestershire. He was born on the 10th of July, 1682, and received his first education at Leicester school. When about twelve years of age he began to evince a decided predilection and capacity for mathematics and the related branches of natural philosophy, and, with the view of pursuing this line of study, was boarded for a while with his uncle, the Rev. John Smith, one of the best mathematicians of his day. He continued with him for some time, after which he was sent to St Paul's school, where he made considerable proficiency in classical studies, but still devoted a portion of his attention to the mathematical and metaphysical sciences. In 1699 he was entered of Trinity college, Cambridge, of which he was chosen a fellow in due course of time.

His scientific acquirements obtained for him the appointment of Plumian professor of astronomy and experimental philosophy, upon the first election to that new foundation. He filled this office with much credit to himself until his death, on the 5th of June, 1716.

Cotes was a mathematician of first rate talents and high promise. He edited the second edition of Sir Isaac Newton's Principles of Natural Philosophy, to which he attached an admirable preface. This, with a description of the great meteor that was seen in some parts of England on the 6th of March, 1715, and which was inserted in the Philosophical transactions, are the only writings he published; but he left behind him several valuable tracts on subjects connected with his chair, which were given to the world by his successor and kinsman, Dr Robert Smith.

The following anecdote evinces the high and general esteem in which this young mathematician was regarded by his contemporaries. Mr Whiston was one of the electors to the Plumian professorship on its first institution. Besides Mr Cotes, there was another candidate who had been a scholar of Dr Harris's. As Mr Whiston was the only professor of mathematics who was directly concerned in the choice, the rest of

the electors naturally paid a great regard to his judgment. At the time of election, Mr Whiston said that he thought himself to be not much inferior to the other candidate's master, Dr Harris; but he confessed that he was but a child to Mr Cotes. The votes were unanimous for Mr Cotes; and it should be remembered that he was then only in the twenty-fourth year of his age. In 1707 Mr Whiston and Mir Cotes united together in giving a course of philosophical experiments at Cambridge. Among other parts of the undertaking, certain hydrostatic and pneumatic lectures were composed; they were in number twenty-four, of which twelve were written by Mr Cotes, and twelve by Mr Whiston. But Mr Whiston esteemed his own lectures to be so far inferior to those of Mr Cotes, that he could never prevail upon himself to revise and improve them for publication.

6

THOMAS PARNELL, of whose poetical compositions, The Hermit' at least has been deservedly popular, was the descendant of an ancient family which had been settled for some centuries at Congleton, a market-town in Cheshire, until about the year 1660, the period of the Restoration, when his father, Thomas Parnell, who had been of the commonwealth party, went to Ireland. Here he purchased another estate, which, with that in Cheshire, descended to our author, who was born in Dublin in the year 1679. In this city, too, at a late date, John, his brother, was born, who became judge of the court of king's bench in Ireland, and died in 1722, leaving John Parnell the first baronet of the family, who died in 1782.

Thomas, the subject of our memoir, was educated at the grammarschool of Dr Jones of Dublin, under whose management he is said to have early distinguished himself by his surprising powers of memory. The following anecdote is related of him in after life :-) :-Before The Rape of the Lock' was finished, Pope was reading some parts of it to Swift, who listened attentively, while Parnell went in and out of the room, apparently taking no notice of it: he, however, kept in mind a tolerably exact description of the toilet, which he translated into Latin verse, and on the day following, when Pope was again reading to some friends what he had written of the poem, our author insisted that part of the description was taken from an old monkish manuscript, and proceeded to support his assertion by reciting his translation.

In 1692, at the age of thirteen, he was admitted into the college of Dublin, and in 1700 he took the degree of Master of Arts, and was ordained a deacon by the bishop of Derry, with a dispensation, he being under the canonical age. In 1703 he was ordained a priest, and, in 1705, the archdeaconry of Clogher was conferred upon him by the bishop, Dr Ashe. About this time he married Miss Anne Minchin, a lady of high intellectual endowments. Until towards the close of Queen Anne's reign, Parnell had been considered as belonging to the liberal party; but, on their ejection from office at this period, he came round, and was, we are informed, "received by the new ministry as a