one hundred Heads, either alphabetical, or agreeable to the natural Order of things, comprehending at one View all Words that can occur relative to any Subject. With a copious and eafy Table of Verbs, fhewing at one View, their Formation through all the different Moods, Tenfes, &c. 12mo. 2s. Hooper.

Although we cannot, for many reafons, think any of the numerous vocabularies of this kind, have any right to be filed complete, we look upon this as one of the beft we have feen: the difpofition of the several words is judicious, and their number greater than in most others. Among thefe, however, there are fome words too technical to have been admitted in a common vocabulary, unless the Author had taken up more room in explaining them. The Learner will have but a very imperfect notion of the term Habeas-corpus, by the French paraphrafe of Permifion de changer de prifon; or of Premurire, by the word Emprisonnement, ou peine pecuniare. On the whole, nevertheless, this little work cannot fail of being extremely useful to thofe who would acquire a copia verborum in either of the languages.

Art. 26. A Revifal of Shakespeare's Text, wherein the Alterations introduced into it by the more modern Editors and Critics, are particularly confidered. 8vo. 6 s. 6d. Johnston.

It is a misfortune, faith this Revifer, which will ever be lamented by all perfons, who have the leaft pretence to taste or fentiment, that the publication of the works of this amazing genius, fecond to none in any age or language, bath fallen to the lot of the moft illiterate and incapable editors. He fhould have faid at first fell; as it appears that he here means those who firft fent the play-houfe copies to the prefs. Not that he thinks thefe first editors are the only perfons of whom Shakefpeare and the public have reafon, and that perhaps the greateft reafon to complain.' They have been fucceeded, fays he, by a race of critics, who have treated him ftill more injuriously. Under the fpecious pretence of re-establishing his genuine text, they have given it us mangled and corrupted, juft as their own particular turn of imagination prompted, or the fize and pitch of their own genius fuggefted to them; and by dif carding the traditionary reading, and interpolating their own fanciful conjectures in its place, they have, to the utmost of their power, endeavoured to continue the corruption down to diftant pollerity.' The principal of thefe critics, against whom our Author's remarks are chiefly intended, is the celebrated Dr, W. This work may indeed be looked upon as a kind of fupplement to the Canons of Criticihin. It is not written, however, with equal fpirit, nor is there an equal thare of critical fagacity difplayed in this, as in that famous performance. A laborious attention to the minutest alterations in Shakespeare's text, is the characteristic of the prefent work; the Revifer, by his own confe!fion, having thought nothing, how little, how un-important foever it might appear, beneath his animadverfion, that might, in his apprehenfior, be of the least advantage towards the correctnefs of a future ediion. In regard to the defiga of the Writer, it appears, therefore, that the public are obliged to him; though perhaps they might have been more fo, if, inflead of publishing his remarks in their prefent form, he

had

had communicated them, when firft written, fix years ago, to the Editor of the new edition of Shakespeare, fo long impatiently expected, and now almost ready to make its appearance.

Art. 27. Thoughts on the Ufe and Advantages of Music, and other Amufements most in Efteem in the polite World, and the Means of improving them to make our proper Happiness and our Pleafures but one Object. In Nine Letters. In answer to a Letter relating to Modern Mufical Entertainments. 8vo. 1s. 6d. Dodfley. The letters before us contain many fenfible and judicious obfervations on the abuse of polite entertainments; the ufe and propriety of which, the Writer confiders both in a moral and religious point of view. He hath advanced, indeed, little that is new; nor is it very easy to do fo on fuch trite and hackney'd fubjects. We would recommend the ferious perufal of them, nevertheless, to fuch as are moft intimately concerned, if we were not pretty well affured that they are the people who are leaft likely to take our advice. It is in vain to attempt to reafon thofe perfons out of their abfardities, who never give themselves time to think. In fact, they could not be infenfible of fuch abfurdities were they to reflect; but thinking is a kind of exercise, for which they have neither time nor inclination. Hence it is that, whenever they try at it, it is like Lady Townly's trying to mend, it hurts them fo they can't

bear it.'

Art. 28. The Death of Bucephalus: A Burlefque Tragedy. In Two Alts. As acted with Applause, at the Theatre in Edinburgh. 8vo. Is. 6d. Johnfton.

A feeble imitation of the celebrated Rehearfal. Nat. Lee's famous play, the Rival Queens, is the fubject of this burlefque. A fubject sa much exploded, a play fo univerfally laughed at, that we should wonder if any man of wit or humour, could think of holding it up to ridicule, at this time of day. It is true, this piece of bombaft has been often brought upon the ftage, even fince Garrick's reformation of the theatre, -for the fake of indulging the galleries with Mr. Barry's rants; and therefore, perhaps, it was that our Author conceived it to be a living and a proper object for the lafh of burlefque fatire: but he would probably have spared himself the trouble, had he known that the tafk had been much better performed before, by Colley Cibber: Vid, COM, PANION TO THE PLAY-HOUSE, Art. Rival Queens.

Art. 29. Matho: Or, the Cofmotheoria Puerilis: In Ten Dialogues. Wherein, from the Phænomena of the material World briefly explained, the Principles of Natural Religion are deduced and demonftrated. The whole accommodated to the Capacities, and intended for the Information of young Students. By the late learned and ingenious Author of the Efay on the Human Soul. The Third Edition; corrected and enlarged, 2 Vols. 12mo. 6 s. Millar.

The advertisement prefixed to this new edition of a very valuable and ufeful work, will fhew our Readers the alterations and improvements that are made in it.—It is as follows:

Thefe philofophical dialogues have been univerfally well received, and found to anfwer the purpofe which their learned and pious author (Mr. William Baxter) had in view; the advancement and defence of true religion; in oppofition to the fceptical refinements of fome late writers: and this, by fixing its principles and obligations on an invariable and fure foundation, the divine attributes, as clearly difplayed in

the works of nature.

A mistake, however, in the aftronomical theory, which the Author did not live to rectify, (as he intended) had disgufted fome Readers; and might have created a prejudice againit thofe parts of the work which, for the execution as well as the defign, were altogether unexceptionable.

To remove this ftumbling block, the conference, which was chiefly affected by that mistake, is entirely fuppreffed, and another added to fill up the vacancy. In this, the occafion of the error is pointed out, and obviated; the doctrine of centripetal forces is carried farther ;— and their quantities and effects exemplified in fome of the more remarkable inftances:-the whole in as near a conformity to the Author's plan as could be contrived; and requiring little more than a competent knowlege of common arithmetic.

The prefent ftate of aftronomy fuggefted another addition still. The notion of the mundane fyftem, which youth get from their tutors, is ofteneft imperfect and fuperficial; while the phyfical aftronomy, cultivated by the great maflers, is too fublime for common ufe; and, with every new improvement, grows more and more intricate and forbidding. But an aftronomy more generally useful, and of eafy application, is, what we may call, the popular, or arithmetical; accommodated to the fervice of the husbandman, the feaman, and the clergyman; and particularly of the hiftorian and chronologer. This was probably the primitive aftronomy of Babylon, Egypt, and China, though now neglected, and almoft forgot; nor indeed have the grounds of it ever been properly explained.

And yet fome late publications have fhewn the neceffity of refloring it, in its antient genuine form of temporary cycles and periods: and thele not founded in fanciful criticism, but deduced from actual obfervations, in a legitimate demonftrative way.

Be this faid without offence to the Mofaic aftronomers, whofe candor and ingenuity are not impeached or fufpected. What might miflead them, was the confiftency of a cycle with itfelf, which they feem to take for a proof of its being the true cycle. In this they were greatly deceived; for fuch confittency proves only the truth of arithmetical rules, but can fignify nothing towards determining the quantities of the revolutions on which the cycle is to be conftructed: these mult be had from obfervation only. Another, but less excufeable, error of those gentlemen, is their obftinacy in maintaining the commenfurability and perfect equability of the heavenly motions; this, we fay, can hardly admit of an excufe; because it contradicts univerfal experience, and the teftimony of their own fenfes, if they would take the trouble to use them.'

We

We have only to add, that the alterations, in this edition, are made by a gentleman, who is acknowledged to be one of the ableft mathematicians in Britain.

SERMONS.

1. Difference of Conditions confidered, with respect to Learning and Morals.Before the University of Cambridge. By John Mainwaring, B. D. Whilton.

2. Before the Sons of the Clergy, at St. Paul's, May 9, 1765. By James Hallifax, D. D. Vicar of Ewell in Surry.-With an Abstract of the Charter, and a Lift of the Collections, from 1721. Rivington.

3. Preached to the Society for Reformation of Manners, May 17, 1765; at St. Swithin's, London-ftone. By Mofes Brown, Vicar of Olney. Buckland, &c.

4. The Natural Grounds and Meafures of Charity; at St Nicholas, Liverpool, before the Trustees of the Infirmary; at their Anniversary Meeting, May 8, 1765. By E. Owen, M. A. Mafter of the Freeschool at Warrington. Johnston.

5. On the Female Character and Education: Preached May 16, 1765. At the Anniversary Meeting of the Guardians of the Afylum for Deferted Female Orphans. By John Brown, D. D. Vicar of Newcastle, and Chaplain in Ordinary to his Majesty. Davis and Reymers.

CORRESPONDENCE.

The account given in our Review, of Dr. Reid's Enquiry into the Human Mind *, hath induced feveral of our Correfpondents to write to us; and among the reft the Author of the following letter, from Shottisham, in Norfolk.

A

To the MONTHLY REVIEWERS,

GENTLEMEN,

S your Review is univerfally read, and generally approved, it is a work which may be either exceedingly ufeful, or very detrimental to the interefts of literature. Candour is undoubtedly a fundamental requifite in a work of this kind, but the generality of the world are

See Review, Vol. XXX. Page 358.

much

much mistaken in the ideas they affix to that word. For they are apt to imagine, that every commendation, or at leaft abstinence from blame of a work, is an inftance of the Critic's candour, and that every cenfure of a performance is a proof of his ill-nature. Not confidering that it is but the juftice we owe to truth to take all opportunities of exploding error, and that it is more injurious to the caufe of learning to diffufe erroneous, than even to prevent the diffemination of true opinions. For if the mind be carefully preferved from the one, it will frequently by its own native force frike out the other; but the reception of the former, will almost always prevent the admiffion of the latter. For thefe reasons it is,, I now fend you the following obfervations on Dr. Reid's Enquiry into the Human Mind, an enquiry in which error is of the most fatal confequence and extenfive prejudice to knowlege, as a mistake here, neceffarily produces falfe reasoning in almost every other branch. Of this work you gave the fummary contents in your Review without praise or cenfure, and therefore to many, I do not doubt, with the appearance of the utmott candour. But as in confequence of this, I am perfuaded, many have embraced Dr. Reid's opinions, which appear to me and fome others very erroneous, we cannot think you truly candid, or the fincere friends of truth, unless you infert the following criticism:

The Doctor has undoubtedly fully proved himself to be a learned and agreeable writer, but for want of a few plain definitions, he has, I am afraid, deduced a number of falfe conclufions, and even run into a ftrange inconfiftency in the very title of his book, An Enquiry into the Human Mind on the Principles of Common Senfe.' For Commen Serfe in its general acceptation means, the opinions entertained by the generality of mankind or the unlearned, and a man would be just as successful who would attempt to fhew, that the perceptions, operations, and faculties of the mind are agreeable to the common notions of mankind, as if he should attempt to prove the fame of the pofitions and revolutions of the planets. The Doctor indeed afterwards gives us his own definition of Common Senfe, by which he fays he means thofe certain principles which he thinks there are, which the conflitution of our nature leads us to believe, and which we are under the neceflity to take for granted in the common concerns of life, without being able to give a realon for them, and what is manifeftly contrary to them is what we call abfurd.' Now not to take notice, that the learned Profeffor himself feems to think that the very existence of thefe Principles of Common Sense is dif putable, by the help of which alone he undertakes to vanquish doubt and deftroy all Scepticism; yet it furely follows from this definition, that it is manifeftly abfurd to fuppofe, that the earth revolves round the fun; as men are neceffarily led in the common concerns of life to take for granted, that the earth refts, and the fun moves. But if this be Common Senfe, how deftitute of Common Senfe was a Copernicus and a Nervion?

In the Introduction to the work, we find the following obfervation : • It is Genius, and not the want of it, that adulterates Phutofaphy. Now, if the Doctor mean only by this expreffion, that a genius for poetry, when employed about philofophy, adulterates it, then it is certainly an indifputable