Knight, it appears to a demonftration that the minute corrections and alterations, which appear in Johnfon's laft edition, and were not in that of 1765, are all reprinted in the volume before us. The laft edition was, therefore, followed by Sir John: were he to be tried at Hickes's Hall, he would be found guilty of clipping. If he is fore from wounds given to him by Mr. Steevens, Johnson ought not to be mutilated, to gratify the refentment of the editor. There remains another blunder worthy of notice. In J hnfon's Works, vol. 10th, we have a review of a philofophical enquiry into the origin of our ideas of the fublime and beautiful. This was not written by Johnfon. Whoever perufes it will clearly fee that it neither, has Johnson's ftyle, nor manner of thinking. It was written by Mr. Murphy, and given, with many other pieces, to the literary magazine, at the time when Johnfon was the conductor of that publication, and, through ill health, not always able to compass what was expected of him. We have authority to add, that when Mr. Murphy was lately employed in making a collection of his own works*, the review of the fublime and beautiful was rejected by him on mature confideration. H. did Mr. Burke the juftice to read over again that gentleman's elegant tract, and found it to be a work of fo much profound thinking, that it ought not to be oppofed by the fuperficial remarks of one, who read with much hurry, and criticifed with more. This being the fate of the cafe, what the author of the piece thought erroneous, ought not, in juftice to fo fiue a writer as Mr. Burke, to have the fanction of Dr. Johníon's name. We have now, not without great drudgery, made our way through the Life of Dr. Johnton, and alfo through the confufed mass of matter, with which it is encumbered. We have often cried out with Dr. Swift, "What fail we fay to a book, where the blunders and the malignity call for an answer in every page, and the dulnefs will not admit of one?" Such is the work of Sir John Hawkins. Like the late Mr. Millar, we have the grace to thank God that we have done with him, and we hope for ever. A list of all the pieces contained in Sir John Hawkins's edition of Dr. Johnfon's works, with notes and references, &c. will be given in our next Review. * For an account of which, fee Review, vol. lxxv. p. 371. MONTHLY * CATALOGUE, For JULY, 1787. POLITICAL. Art. 16. A general View of the Bill presented to Parliament, during the laft Seffion, for preventing the illicit Exportation of Wool and live Sheep, &c. &c. Addreffed to the Marquis of Lanfdown. By the Chairman of the general Meetings, Mr. John Anstie. 8vo. 25. Dilly. 1787. R. ANSTIE writes like a good well meaning-man, but we rather doubt how far he is qualified to enter publicly on the difcuffion of a question fo arduous as the prefent. We believe that every intelligent perfon will concur in admitting, that where the temptation to fmuggling is great, no laws will prove effectual to prevent it. If this be admitted, would it not feem that the labour of the general meetings must prove vain, and that the devices they would willingly recommend will be equally futile with those which have been devised by others in the fame walk? If fmuggling in this article does prevail (which, from the affertions of this worthy gentleman, we are little inclined to doubt), let the cause of that fmuggling be removed, by admitting a well regulated exportation of that article, and it will then ftop in courfe. Of two circumstances this writer feems to be, without reafon, afraid, viz. that if exportation were on any terms permitted, the quantity of wool produced in Britain would not be fufficient to employ our own manufacturers, and that if the French could obtain our wool, they would not purchase cloth, &c. of our fabrics.-As to the first, there can be no doubt but the quantity produced would in all cafes, temporary vibrations only excepted, keep pace with the demand. And as to the laft, it is equally certain that a manufacture loaded with freight, commifion, infurance, and duty on a raw material, can never come into competition, other circumftances being equal, with a home. manufacture, where all these are nothing. The example of Holland with regard to flax proves this to a demonftration.-Though Holland boalts of a linen manufacture, which would cut down that of Britain were it not for the duties on entry, yet fhe never has been fo ill advised as to ftop the exportation of flax to Britain, as Le finds this conftitutes a very valuable branch of trade. The time we hope approaches when things of this nature will be viewed on more liberal principles than heretofore, and when, instead of devifing new refraints to cramp induftry, and thus neceffarily to enbance the price of manufactures, goods of all kinds will be permitted to circulate more freely than hitherto, and trade be allowed to find out its own natural level. Though we are not convinced, by the arguments of this writer, of the utility of his labours, or the propriety of the measures he recommends, we heartily concur with him in condemning the very illiberal language of thofe who have oppofed him. Is it not poffible for two men, with the best intentions, to fee the fame object under very different points of view?-Why fhould they not, therefore, be F 4 allowed allowed to differ in opinion, without being liable to the imputation of being knaves, or fraudulent impoftors? We are forry to think that men of fuch eminent literary characters as fome of thofe who are noticed in this pamphlet, fhould have fo far demeaned themfelves as to throw out imputations which only could accord with the character of the turbulent leader of a mob! Art. 17. Political Sketches, infcribed to his Excellency John Adams, Minifter Plenipotentiary from the United States to the Court of Great Britain. By a Citizen of the United States, Dilly. 1787. 8vo. 25. The firft of thefe Sketches contains fome ftrictures on the Abbé Mably's Remarks concerning the Government, &c. of the United States. The Author chiefly confines himself to that part of the Abbé's remarks where the American revolution, her laws, and government, are compared to certain hiftorical events and inftitutions of the ancients. He maintains, that there never was, before the American revolution, an inftance of a nation forming its own government, on the original foundations of human rights, revealed by a ftudy of the laws of nature; and creating every civil organ, agreeably to the three acts which conftitute juft government.' To decide rightly on this matter, the Author ought to have determined what the original foundations of human rights are, and how they might be revealed by a study of the laws of nature. He writes in a lively ftyle, and we with that his reafoning had been founded on a firmer bafe, or, at least, that he had demonftrated his first principles. To fay, that the governments of America prefent the MOST FINISHED political forms,' page 1. is bold. The affertion ought to have been fupported by fufficient proofs and arguments. How many political writers have called the English conftitution the most Finished? In the fecond Sketch, the Author refutes the opinion of Montefquieu, that virtue is the peculiar principle on which the structure of democracy refts. Much ftrength of reafoning is here displayed, and the refult is, that liberty, and the completeft complication of laws, and the fullest difperfion of luxury through every vein of the body politic, are in all degrees and respects compatible with each other.' As facts are always preferred to fpeculative reafoning, we cannot entirely affent to the foregoing conclufion. What deftroyed the Grecian republics? Luxury. What was the overthrow of the Roman commonwealth? Luxury. Examples are numerous; and if luxury was not the immediate or proximate caufe of the decline of republics, it must furely be allowed to have been the primary and efficient caufe; for if a republic be overturned by the ambition of tyrants, that ambition will be found to arife originally from luxury, or a defire to gratify the predominant appetites. The Author's aim, in the third Sketch, is to fhew, that the democracies of America cannot degenerate into aristocracies. Here we have almost a repetition of the arguments ufed in the foregoing Sketch. *For an account of this work, fee Review, vol. lxxi. p. 371and vol. ixxii. p. 146. Το To vindicate the American democracies from all objection, the theory of Montefquieu, wherein a small territory is made an effential property of their forms, is combated and refuted. In the fifth Sketch, the Author advances feveral thoughts concerning the balance of power. In America, he fays, the balance of Europe will not apply. What may in future be the cafe we know not; but it is evident that America would not so easily have thrown off the English yoke, had France been neutral. Religion forms the fubject of the fixth and laft of these pieces. The Author here juftly cenfures the American conflitutions for tolerating only Chriftian fects; but he appears, in fome degree, to contradict himfelf, for, in a fubfequent page, he acknowledges that the State of Maryland gives liberty to every man to worship God in the manner which he thinks moft acceptable to him. Religion, he feems to think, makes no part of the government of a state, and that univerfal toleration fhould therefore be allowed. Though we coincide with this ingenious Writer in most of his opinions, we must nevertheless obferve, that his Sketches seem to be the hafty production of a precipitate pen, guided by a hand not yet fufficiently under the controul of calm and deep reflection.. TRADE and COMMERCE, &c. Art. 18. A Letter to the Court of Directors of the Society for improving the Britifh Fisheries. With a Plan for the Erection of Villages. Humbly fubmitted to their Confideration. 8vo. 1S. Cadell. 1787. This writer feems well acquainted with the fubject, and we hope his judicious remarks will be duly attended to by the Directors. He condemns the plan for erecting buildings at the expence of the Society, and propofes to let out land on building leafes of twentyone years; he chufes this method in preference to that of feuing (a particular mode of granting leafes in perpetuity), because he thinks this would lefs thwart the prejudices of the inhabitants. We fear, however, that by endeavouring, in this refpect, to avoid one inconvenience, he would fall into another. The granting of feus might not perhaps accord entirely with the aristocratic ideas of an Highland laird: but would not the idea of building on the precarious tenure of a fhort lease be difliked by the people who muft form the fettlements? We think the Directors of this benevolent Society will find more difficulty in properly applying their funds to the purpofes intended than they feem to have been originally aware of; but it is to be hoped, that by a cautious attention to circumftances, and firmness in the execution of the plans they may at last adopt, they will prove more fuccessful than those who have engaged in fimilar undertakings, in former times. AGRICULTURE. Art. 19. Suggestions for rendering the Inclosure of Common Fields and A well-meant performance, intended to open the eyes of people who, incapable of reafoning themfelves, are apt to be affected by vulgar prejudices. Those who are accuftomed to accurate inveftigation, will here meet with very little to make amends for the trouble of reading; but to others it may be of fome ufe, and prejudicial to none, as it is, at the worst, an harmless performance. We are very glad to find that the vulgarifms we had occafion to reprehend in Mr. Stone's Efay on Agriculture (See Rev. for March, p. 257) do not occur in the prefent work. Art. 20. Enclosures a Cause of improved Agriculture, of Plenty and Cheapnefs of Provifions, of Population, and of both private and national Wealth; being an Examination of two Pamphlets, entitled, the one, A political Enquiry into the Confequences of enclosing Waste Lands, and the Caufe of the prefent high Price of Butchers Meat*, &c.-the other, Curfory Remarks upon Enclosures, by a Country Farmer t. By the Rev. J. Howlett, Vicar of Great Dunmow, Effex. 8vo. 25. Richardfon. 1787. Mr. Howlett once more steps forth as a champion in the caufe of enclofures, and he weilds his arms with his wonted force and adroitnefs. The firft pamphlet above-named appeared to us to be written with fo much fpirit and ingenuity as to deferve an anfwer; and we are bound to make our beft bow to the reverend vicar for the compliment he has paid us in giving it that anfwer, which we freely acknowledge to be full and fatisfactory. We are no friends to defpondency, and are always happy when we meet with an author who gives good reafons for making us cheerful and contented with our prefent fituation; and to few have we been more obliged in this respect than to Mr. Howlett. The writer of the pamphlet, to which this is chiefly an answer, had endeavoured to prove, "Ift, That the enclofures which have taken place in the courfe of the last thirty years have already advanced the price of butchers meat three halfpence in the pound more than the advance of price on other things; and "2d, That should all the wafte lands in the kingdom be enclosed and cultivated, the price of butchers meat would be raised to ninepence, or a fhilling in the pound."-Mr. Howlett, on the contrary contends, and we think fully proves, ift, That the affertion that the price of butchers meat is advanced three halfpence in the pound, in the course of the last thirty years, more than the advance of price on other things, IS NOT TRUE. 2d, Granting it to be true, that our enclosures cannot have occafioned it. 3d, Allowing even both, that there is not the finallest probability that the enclosure and cultivation of all our waftes and commons would raite the price of butchers meat to ninepence, or a fhilling in the pound. And 4th, Admitting all the three facts, that fill our Author's arguments against enclosures would be inconclufive." Each of these propofitions he demonftrates in detail with a force of argument which it will not be easy to fubvert. Vid. Rev. vol. lxxiii. p. 460. + Vol. lxxv. p. 148. The |