Whitaker's Vindication of Queen Mary.

whole. Mr Goodall demonftrated
this univerfal belief to be falfe in
itfelf. Conviction flashed upon all
the thinking and ingenuous part of
the nation. But there were fome
Moles in criticism, it feems, who
had been long in the habit of throw-
ing up dirt against Mary, to whom
the light was peculiarly painful,
who therefore took refuge from it
again in darkness, and there began
to throw up their dirt again. The
divine and the fceptick united to-
gether, to treat the intelligence
which they acquired from Mr Good-
all's reasoning, juft as fcepticks are
very apt to treat the knowledge
which they derive from scripture;
to admit what they cannot deny,
to appropriate all without any ac-
knowledgment, and then to turn
their borrowed fcience against the
very lender of it. Mr Hume and
the Doctor fecretly renounced all
their former errors, under the im
preffion of Mr Goodall's arguments;
and they then pretended, that these
errors had never exifted in their or
any other heads at all. Mr Hume
filently pretends it, and Dr Robert-
fon openly. With an affectation of
liveliness to colour over a want of
candour, the latter lets his fpirits
ferment, till at laft they break out
in the very extreme of difingenu-
oufnefs. "So far as I know,'
he cries at the end,
"denied" the prefent French copy
to be only a tranflation from the
Scots. But did any man ever affert
it before Mr Goodall? The doctrine
of gravitation, fo far as I know,"
was never denied by any man. But
was it ever affirmed before Sir Ifaac
Newton? And would it not reflect
difhonour upon the fpirit of a philo-
fopher at prefent, a difciple (we
will fuppofe) of Mr Hutchinson's,
if feeling too powerfully the weight
of Sir, Ifaac's arguments for the
credit of his understanding, to deny
affent to his conclufions he fhould

no man ever

37

yet take shelter from conviction in littlenefs, fhould catch at fome pretended hints of gravitation in an ancient author, and then exclaim with an acted admiration at the proofs in the real difcoverer, that "he might have faved himself the "labour of fo many criticisms," and that, "fo far as he knew, no per"fon had ever denied" the doctrine.

But is the French copy that we have at prefent, fay, or mean to fay thefe confeffors and martyrs for political prejudice, the very fame with the copy produced by Murray at Westminster? And is the Scots copy that we have at present, I add, the very fame that was exhibited by him at York? The one may be queftioned as well as the other. Some anti-confeffor or anti-martyr to the fame fort of prejudice, may determine the question as affirmatively on the one fide, as they have done it on the other. And how fhall we, who are not for being confeffors or martyrs to either, be able to determine betwixt them? One answer will be effectual to both. We have fome remains, as Dr Robertfon himself allows, of the French copy that was exhibited by Murray. We have alfo fome remains, as every one must allow, of the Scots copy exhibited by him. "In the "Scottish tranflation of the Detec “ "tion," fays the Doctor, two or "three fentences of the original "French were prefixed to each "letter, which breaking off with "an &c. the Scottish translation of "the whole followed." And I have already given fome paffages out of the original Scots, which the commiffioners at York have afforded me. But are thefe paffages, and thefe fentences, greatly different from thofe in the prefent copies ? No! Are they different in any one important word? No! They are nearly to a word the fame in Scots. They are actually the fame to a

word

word in French. This Dr Robert talk egregious nonfenfe at times. fon himself admits. And where, It changes Mary's letter of adultery therefore, in the name of common into her BIBLE, that edition of it, fenfe, can a poffibility of doubt be anticipated (I fuppofe,) in which lodged? No where within the re- the commandment ran, "thou shalt gions of common fenfe. But in that "commit adultery." It confounds refinement of understanding, which her letter again with her first day's is only the refult of difingenuoufnefs, journey; and fo makes her to proand which is a kind of intellectual mife, with a happy Hiberniafm, to juggle that an uncandid mind exer- finifh this her first day's journey the cites upon itself, there will still be NEXT DAY. It even mistakes irkit scope for evasion. Thefe paffages, for nakit, ftrips the delicate Queen fo exactly the fame in the Doctor's in the month of January and at the pretended original and the prefent hour of midnight, and keeps her in copy of the French, may have been, this fituation toute nue," without he will be bold to fuppofe, and ac⚫ even the cover of a fmock upon her, tually were, he will be more bold to writing a long letter to her lover. affert, taken from that original into How can we rely, then, upon the the prefent copy; and fo came to teftimony of fuch a blundering witbe exactly the fame in both. "The nefs as this? And, what is more, as "French editor," the Doctor tells the Scots can depofe to what it us, "laid hold of these fentences, knows at second hand only, fo the " and tacked his own translation to Latin and the French can atteft only "them." And the extracts from at third and at fourth hand." the Scots may be also afferted by an antagonist of equal bravery, if such a one can be met with, to have been equally borrowed by the prefent copy from the letters of the commiffioners at York, and for that reason to be fo entirely conformable in both.

In their zeal to lodge the French original in fome unknown sphere, Mellieurs Robertfon and Hume deprive themselves of any original at all. The prefent Scots is merely a verfion; the prefent French is alfo a verfion; and the prefent Latin is equally one with both. The Scots is alfo afferted, by Meffieurs Robertfon and Hume, to be very faulty. The Latin is allowed by them to be ftill more fo; and the great faultinefs of the French, is their principal argument for its fpurioufnefs, All may be exceedingly vitiated; each certainly differs from the other. This argues all to have been ftrangely corrupted, as we have no original for the trial of any. The French particularly, we know to

But I will pufh the good Doctor no farther. Theology and history owe too much to him, to let him be preffed too fharply, even when he is moft wanton in his attacks, and moft weak in his weapons. And I go on to observe, that thẹ facts, which I have previoufly ftated, preclude all this frantic hypothefis of an original, which was just feen, and then afcended to the clouds,

Oftendunt terris hunc tantum fata,
neque ultra
Effe finunt;

and which was feen only by Dr Ro
bertfon in its flight upwards,

As Rome's great founder to the Hea vens withdrew,

To Proculus alone confefs'd in view.”

Inftructions to a celebrated Laureat; by Peter Pindar, Esq. 39

an antiquary. It is a quotation refpecting the famous cafket: "quilk "box, and haill [whole] pecis with "in the famyn, were takin and fund "with umquhill [uncle] GEORGE "DALGLEISCHE, &c." The words

within hooks are Mr Whitaker's explanations; and his uncle is most deplorable; for the readers even of Allan Ramfay know that umquhill, or umquhile, means dead, deceased, defunct, &c. Yours, &c. R.

He should not charm enough his guests

divine:

His maids had all new aprons, gowns,
and fmocks;
And lo! two hundred pounds were spent

in frocks!

Inftructions to a celebrated Laureat; by Peter Pindar, Esq. THIS moft extraordinary Genius, defpifing all the admonitions he has received from brothers of the quill lefs daring than himself, continues wantonly to attack the greatest names on earth. Some poet has reprefented Death as playing at foot-ball with crowns and fceptres. Peter, by his irreverend kicks at Majefty and all its accompany ments, realizes this allegory.

His productions, while they afford high enjoyment to the party-politician, are interefting even to the reader of taste and the calm philofopher. The one will admire his genius, and lament its mifapplication; the other will admire that government which permits its first magiftrate to be made the butt of public ridicule.

None of his critics, we believe, have remarked that his language and verfification are as uncommon as the fubjects he chufes to celebrate. His manner is unexampled in English poetry; and, if it is not confidered as an imitation of Fontaine, must be allowed to be perfectly original.

He has lately taken upon him to inftruct Mr Wharton the Laureat in the true method of Ode-making, both by precept and example, chufing for his fubject, The KING's vifit to Mr Whitbread's Brewhoufe. The pen of Aristophanes never produced any thing more comic, nor more impudent. But, let it speak for itself.

"Mus E, fing the ftir that Mr Whitbread made,

Poor gentleman! most terribly afraid

To make th' apprentices and draymen
fine!

Bufy as horfes in a field of clover,
Dogs, cats, and chairs and ftools were
Amidft the Whitbread-rout of prepara-
tumbled over

tion,

To treat the lofty RULER of the nation,
Now mov'd KING, QUEEN, and PRIN

CESSES fo grand,

To vifit the first Brewer in the land-
Who fometimes drank his beer and

munch'd his meat

Ina fnug corner christen'dChifwell Street,
Lord AYLESBURY, and DENBIGH'S
Lord alfo ;

His Grace the Duke of MONTAGUE,
With Lady HARCOURT, join'd the
likewife;
raree-fhow,

And fix'd all Smithfield's marv❜ling

eyes

For, lo! a greater fhow ne'er grac'd Since MARY roafted, juft like crabs, thofe quarters,

the martyrs.

Arriv'd, the KING broad grinn'd and gave a nod

To Mr Whitbread; who, had GoD

Come with his angels, to behold his beer, With more refpect he never could have Indeed the man was in a fweat,

met

So much the BREWER did the KING
revere.

Her MAJESTY contriv'd to make a dip
Light as a feather then the KING did skip,
And ask'd a thousand questions, with a
laugh,

Before poor WHITBREAD well could
anfwer half.

Reader!

To his curious My did ftoop His MAJESTY his watch most fagely "

Inftructions to a celebrated Laureat; by Peter Pindar, Esq. 41

" to

"Grains? grains?" faid MAJESTY,
fill their crops?
"Grains? grains?that come from hops
yes, hops, hops, höps."
Here was the KING, like hounds fome-
times, at fault

SIRE," cry'd the humble Brewer,
"give me leave

"Your facred MAJESTY to undeceive, "Grains, SIRE, are never made from bops, but malt.

"True," faid the cautious MONARCH,
with a smile :
"From malt, malt, malt,I meånt
malt all the while."
"Yes," with the sweetest bow, rejoin'd
the Brewer,

"An't please your MAJESTY, you did

I'm fure."

"Yes," answered MAJESTY, with quick reply,

"I did, I did, I did, I, I, I, I.”

་

And now before their SOVEREIGN's curious eye,

Parents and children, fine, fat, hope ful sprigs, All fouffling, fquinting, grunting, in their ftye,

Appear'd the Brewer's tribe of hand-
fome pigs t

On which the obfervant man who fills a
Throne,

Declar'd the pigs were vastly like his own.

Now did his MAJESTY fo gracious fay,
To Mr Whitbread, in his flying way,
"Whitbread, d'ye nick th' Excifeman
now and then?

Now having well employ'd his royal` On nails, hoops, ftaves, pumps, barrels, lungs

and their bungs,

The KING and Co. fat down to a col lation,

Hæ, Whitbread, when d'ye think to Of flesh, and fish, and fowl of ev'ry na

leave off trade?

"Hæ! what? Mifs Whitbread still a

tion.

Dire was the clang of plates, of knife, and fork,

That merc'lefs fell like tømyhawks to work,

And fearless fcalp'd the fowl, the fish, and cattle,

Whilft Whitbread, in the rear, beheld the^. battle.

The conqu❜ring MONARCH ftopping to take breath

Amidft the regiments of death,

Now turn'd to Whitbread with com placence round,

And merrythus address'dthe Man of Beer: "White

This alludes to the late Dr JOHNSON's laugh on a Great Perfonage, for Jaudable curiofity in the Queen's Library, fome years fince.

F