The four laft chapters of that part of our learned Author's valuable collection which is now before us, are short ones, and contain an account of Lucian of Samofata, Ariftides the Sophift, Dion Chryfoftom, and Galen, together with fome anecdotes concerning diverfe Heathen governours of provinces, who perfecuted the Chriftians, or were favourable to them; and remarks concerning the number of ancient heathen Writers, who have mentioned the Chriftians.

The Council in the Moon.

4to. 1 s. Cambridge printed. Sold

in London by Wilson and Fell.

THE Thus, live of this in HE Author of this humourous and fpirited Pamphlet chufes, like Gallus in Virgil, to fhoot Cretan arrows out of a Parthian bow. The fcene and drama he defcribes are transferred from a learned Univerfity, to the Moon, where he introduces a convocation difputing very gravely whether they fhould eat cheese with their bread? By this he alludes either to a real or a fuppofed debate whether Fellows of Colleges fhould be permitted to marry? The characters of the Anticheefians in the Moon, that is, of the Antimatrimonians in the Univerfity, are humouroudly drawn, and probably have their Archetypes beneath the Moon. Some of their different characteristics and speeches will not be unentertaining to our Readers.

The gentleman, who fpoke next, was Mr. Chriftopher Crab, a man not deftitute of wit and humour. He was efteemed a great critic, because there was nothing he would not find fault with. He was a man of unlimited conjecture; which' often led him to fhew his invention at the expence of his judgment. He did not want knowlege, efpecially that of mankind; but he was not always happy in his application of it. It was too common with him, to form general conclufions and establish maxims upon cafes merely poffible. He had fome fluency of words, but more vivacity than elegance. Hear hin

"Gentlemen! I am of opinion, that under no restrictions. hatfoever, ought this new fcheme to be admitted. I fhall Ay draw my arguments from the nature of cheefe in genend fome particular confequences that are found to arife eating it. In the firft place then, cheefe is abfolutely dicial to many conflitutions: there are many people (likely ough to be met with among the more reclufe lunatics) who bear fuch an antipathy to cheese, that they avoid being in the fame room with it. Then cheefe, though confeffedly effica

cious in digefting other things, does not eafily digeft itself, and will often lie fo long at a man's ftomach, as to give him infinite plague and vexation. Besides cheese is generally too hard, or too foft, too tough, or too pliant, too frong, or quite infipid. Then there's your maggoty cheefe, your rotten cheese, your cheese that every body has tafted, and your Slip-coat cheese. A very dangerous fort of cheese this laft! for being apt to run beyond its prefcribed limits, it is often impoffible for the proprietor, though he loves it ever fo well, to fecure it entirely to his own ufe. In fhort, gentlemen! I cannot help concluding, -from the course of my obfervations, that there is no fuch thing as a good cheese in the world; and therefore, I think it would argue the highest degree of infanity to apply to the legislature, for removing an obftacle, that happily prevents our coming at it.'

An ingenuous young man, who fat near Mr. Crab, fo highly refented the acrimony of his fpeech, that he rose up; and, bowing to the chief magiftrate, faid, That though he apprehended his defign in calling the prefent council, was rather to hear what objections could be produced to the fcheme, than for any other purpose, yet, as he was convinced Mr. Crab had gone very unwarrantable lengths in fome of his obfervations and conclufions, he could not help afking permiffion to offer a remonftrance or two. Which being granted him, he defired the orator to recollect, "That there was fuch a thing as Sage cheese and that being green cheese (a circumstance that would prejudice many men in its favour) and confequently of the fame. -kind that forms the materials of which the Moon was made, he thought it very unworthy a man in the Moon, to suppose that species was not to be found there in great abundance." He next observed," that toasted cheese was held in high estimation by men of the beft tafte. And indeed when cheese has paffed unhurt and unfullied through that fiery trial, it is impoffible to fay too much in its commendation." He added, "that always having profeffed himself a great admirer of cheese in general, he had paid fo much attention to that useful commodity, that he could with confidence affert, that there was much more good cheese, than bad, in the world:" and concluded with faying, "he could not help fufpecting, that Mr. Crab, in fpite of all Reftraints, might have made fome experiments in his time that had proved unfortunate."

I think I have hitherto given no intimation to my Readers, that this republic was established principally for the cultivation of the understanding. But there are fome people in it, who do not cultivate their understandings, and others, who have no understandings to cultivate. Of this laft clafs was Simon Shaljow, who next feized the ears of this refpectable audience with

a fpeech. Simon never doubted the truth of any ftory he had heard in his life. He had no clear ideas of any thing in the world. He would fwallow you half a dozen impoffibilities in a breath, without making a face. He could not be faid to think, in any true fenfe of that word, and feemed to have no property in his own ideas. He voided them juft as he received them, as children do cherry-ftones. He lifped in his speech, and fputtered like a roafting pippin. But with all thefe difadvantages, he was not profcribed the pale of common-sense, according to the definition fome people give of it; for Simon had a good deal to fay for himself. What he faid upon this occafion, I will now lay before you.

"Gentlemen! I have been told that there is nothing in nature more pernicious than cheese. And I can produce fuch inftances of its ill effects, as will leave no reafon to doubt the truth of this affertion. I remember having heard from my nurfe, who thought he had heard it from my grandmother, that cheese would give a man the rheumatism and the ear-ach : and a very fenfible country apothecary, a coufin of mine, fays, that he can attribute a fore throat, or a fever on the spirits, to nothing but cheese. For my own part, I never see a cheese, but it puts me in mind of the dropfy, yellow jaundice, and king's evil; and I am certain, were the new scheme admitted, we should all be afflicted with thofe diforders. Nay, such a terrible notion have I of this baneful commodity, that I should not at all wonder to hear a man had got a leprofy, a wry neck, or a fit of the gout, by eating it: Dixi."

Though the liberty of Fellows of Colleges to marry, or rather the oppofition made to that liberty is here the fubject of humour and raillery, it is by no means unworthy of a ferious confideration. The reftriction of it is certainly one of the pernicious remains of Popery. It may not be fo convenient as it is eafy to fay what moral and political evils it produces; but it is obvious to every liberal and unbiased understanding, that it must be equally prejudicial to the community, as it is the caufe of diffatisfaction to many of the individuals who are obliged to labour under it.

A celebrated French Writer has obferved what we hope will in time come to pafs. "Peut-être aujourd'hui que l'efprit philofophique a fait tant de progrès, un concile ferait des loix plus favorables à l'humanité que le concile de Trente."

A Defence of Mr. Kenrick's Review of Dr. Johnson's Shakespeare; containing a Number of curious and ludicrous Anecdotes of Literary Biography. By a Friend. 8vo. 1 s. Bladon. THOSE

HOSE who are the most ready to give offence, by too unguarded a freedom of behaviour, are ever the moft impatient of rebuke; and therefore we are not at all furprized to find Mr. K. or his fanguine friend Mr. R. R. (whoever may be the real Author of this pamphlet) warmly refenting our mild reprehenfion of Mr. K's rough attack on the editor of Shakefpeare. But it were not wonderful if he fhould appear to be nettled; for he has been ftung by a whole neft of literary hornets. He has been attacked, in his turn, by an army *of fcribblers'; and he may, poffibly, have enough to do, to rout them all, notwithstanding his boafted prowess, and his avowed: contempt for a miriad of cockle-fhell + critics':-i. e. Reviewers †, Magaziners, Chroniclers,-versemen & profemen,all armed and ranged under the standard of General Johnson. The general, indeed, hath not yet vouchfafed to ftir out of his camp; but feems content, for the prefent, at leaft, with detaching his light & troops' to harafs the enemy.

6

The contents of this pamphlet are divided into 9 fections; in which the spirited Author affigns reasons for the Reviewer's (Mr. Kenrick's) having a lefs exalted opinion of Dr. Johnson's abilities than has hitherto been entertained by the public in general; queftions are offered to Dr. J's friends, respecting fomet curious anecdotes of the life and literary conduct of that gentleman;-whether Dr. J. deferves better treatment than he has received, and how far Mr. K. is excufable in having fo treated him? Specimens are given of the literary abilities, candour, and urbanity | of the hypercrities on Mr. K. Together with an entire section on the Modesty of men of letters; and another on literary knowlege; with fome remarks on IGNORANCE and INATTENTION. To all which is added, a Poftfcript, addressedto the Monthly Reviewers.

In his fecond fection, the Author enters into a detail of the grounds of Mr. K's first dillent from the general public opinion of Mr. Johnfon's literary abilities; viz. the numerous defects

See Kenrick's Review; or the paffage here referred to as tranfcribed in our last, p. 467.

+ If, by a cockle-fhell critic, Mr. K. only means, a critic in cocklefhells, there is nothing extraordinary in his defying whole armies of them but what have these submarine animals to do with the contests about Shakespeare?

Among thefe, however, the Monthly Reviewers are not to be in-. cluded; they being perfectly neuter; and chufing to act only as a corps of obfervation.

Kenrick's Review,

He has employed a particular fection, in animadverting on the ingenuoufnefs, impartiality, and urbanity of Sylvanus Urban, Gent. regarding the writings of Mr. K.

and

and imperfections which, he fays Mr. K. obferved, (during his refidence abroad) in that gentleman's grand English dictionary: fo numerous, indeed, and fo important, in the Reviewer's estimation, that he thought the honour of literature, and of his country called upon him to take every proper occafion of speaking of them as they deferved...

Having, fays our Author, been fo egregioufly difappointed, as to the philological abilities of Dr. J. the Reviewer's expectations were greatly lowered from the height to which they had been raised, with regard to his propofed edition of our incomparable poet. His enthufiaftic veneration for Shakespeare, however, it is added, could not be restrained within the bounds of filence, on finding this Editor had taken every opportunity to depreciate the merit of that incomparable bard; on whom Dr. J. hath, in repeated inftances, (as is fhewn in Mr. Kenrick's Review) endeavoured to fix the charge of incapacity, folly, vulgarity, immorality, and impiety.'

To aggravate all this, adds Mr. R. R. Dr. J. falls with equal violence on the only commentator on Shakespeare, that, by his own confeffion, hath acquitted himself with reputation; charging him with weakness, ignorance, meanness, faithlessness, petulance and aftentation.'

Here our Author would have us draw the parallel. • Those, fays he, who complain of Mr. K's feverity, and charge him with fcurrility, ill-manners, and abufe, would do well to look through his work, and fee if they can find any passage wherein he hath called Dr. Johnson mean, faithlefs, immoral, or im-. pious.'

In his third fection, the attack on Dr. J. is carried farther than it was in Mr. K's Review; for here is an implied charge, from which he would feem to have it inferred, that the Editor. of Shakespeare had formerly taken fome invidious steps, toward depreciating the merit of other great poets, the ornaments of English literature: particularly with regard to Lauder's, infamous attempt to defame the excellent Author of PARADISE LOST. Dr. J. is here reprefented as the encourager of that execrable attempt; and a query is put, in which it is demanded, who actually wrote Lauder's pamphlet against MILTON? The Dr. is likewife taxed with endeavouring to leffen the poetical reputation of Mr. Pope, by carping criticisms on fome of the moft admired paffages of his writings. From thefe charges it is hoped, Dr. J. will be fully vindicated, by himself, or by fuch f his friends to whom it may be best known whether there is y foundation for them, or not.

In his fourth fection, wherein this question is difcuffed, wheer Dr. J. deferves the treatment he hath received, and how Far Mr. K. is excufable in having fo treated him? We have

the