favage wars bythe mad ambition of their rulers! 13. May the fword be never unsheathed but for the defence and liberty of our country! and then may every man caft away the fcabbard until the people are safe and free!

14. To the glorious memory of Hampden and Sydney, and other heroes of all ages and nations, who have fought and bled for liberty; 15. To the memory of Dr. Price, and of all thofe illuftrious fages who have enlightened mankind on the true principles of civil Society.

16. Peace and good-will to all mankind. 17. Profperity to the town of Birmingham. 18. A happy meeting to all the Friends of Liberty on the 14th of July, 1792.

It is but juftice to the liberality and public fpirit of an ingenious Artist of this town to mention, that he decorated the room upon this occafion with three elegant emblematic pieces of fculpture, mixed with painting, in a new ftyle of compofition. The central piece was a finely-executed medallion of his Majefty, encircled with a glory, on each fide of which was an alabafter obelisk; one exhibiting Gallic Liberty breaking the bands of Defpotifm; and the other reprefenting British Liberty in its prefent enjoyment.

A truly refpectable gentleman, a member of the Church of England, was chairman-others of that profeffion were of the company; nor was a fingle fentiment uttered, or, I believe, conceived, that would hurt the feelings of any one friend to liberty and good government, under the happy Conftitution we are bleffed with in this kingdom.-I aver this to be a true and juft reprefentation of the proceedings, which have been fo fcandaloufly milreprefented in the Paper abovementioned, and am, Sir, Yours, &c. WILLIAM RUSSEL.

forbid that man thould ex

ult in the late devaftations at Birmingham! Let us all make the cafe his own, and be thankful that the horrors have not been extended in this happy ifle, as they are continually repeating in diftracted Fiance.

But it is impoffible, Mr. Urban, not to indulge one reflexion; that the advocates for Revolution are, in one leading inftance, involved in the confufion we mut all have waded through to accom plith their defigns. "Their mifchief has returned upon their own head, and their violent dealing is come down upon their own pate."

The people of England feel their own

happiness, and are not to be led by the delufions of a few mifguided zealots, who do not diftinguish between fpeculation and practice. Thefe outrages do not originate or terminate, like those of 1780 in the Capital, in plunder and the release of mifcreants; they are the rude effufions of the popular mind, expreffing their high difapprobation of innovations in the religion and polity of their country. It is the national language reechoing that of the old Barons of this land. How different is the language of the English populace from that of the French, let this inftance speak in founds too forcible ever to be forgotten by the friends of OLD ENGLAND!

Dr. Priestley has lived to fee his favourite doctrines exploded; his chemiftry, founded on a mistake in a Scotch profeffor, detected; and his perfon, long held, as himfelf confeffes, in deteftas tion, expofed with his property to the fury of that populace whole favour he has been all along courting, but who prefer their old rulers and leaders to new lords over their confciences, guides of their opinions. If they have been deluded for a moment, the ftrong fenfe and fpirit of Englishmen have fhaken off the delufion, and refifted the innovation.

That the imprudent (and this is a very gentle appellation of it) conduct of the friends of the Revolution, in a town where they must have known they had fo few adherents and abettors, was the oftenfible pretence for thefe exceffes, cannot be denied: but it is not lefs evident that the form has been long brewing for the devoted head of their leader, who has provoked it to burst on himself and followers by every outrage of language and publication. His principles ought to have been as publicly disavowed by the Diffenters as many men of moderation among them have privately wished him to curb his career. They certainly, as they love themselves and good order, and as they would tranfmit their names with honour to pofterity, fhould come forward with an unequivo cal declaration, how contrary their real fentiments are to thofe which his effer. vefcence has afcribed to them.

I thank God that I have lived to fee this teft of the integrity and good principle of my countrymen; and my carneft hope and prayer is, to live to fee faction, fedition, and innovation, in every form and difguife, completely extinguished, while I can fubfcribe myAN ENGLISHMAN. felf

Mr.

66 never

In short, he afcribed to the meek charafter of our Redeemer the feeming ambiguity of the reply, Thou fayeft, or, Thou baft faid, when adjured by the High-prift, in the name of the Molt High God, to declare if he was the Cbrif; whereas, in fact, this was but the ordinary mode of direct affirmation, according to the ufual phrafeology of the Jews in thofe times. Alfo, in the Gofpel of St. Mark, the words I am are ufed; and our Bleffed Saviour was fo far from declining to affume his real title of the Methas upon this occafion, that he added immediately after, that, tbeles (that is, nevertheless, for their prefent triumph over his innocence a d facred rights), a time would come when they bould fee bim fitting on the rightband of power, and coming in the clouds of Heaven. Upon which text the learned Dr. Scott, in his chapter, intituled, "Chrift's Regal A&ts," very minutely and curiously elucidates the pallage as follows: In this manner do the Jews expect the coming of their Meffias, as appears by that gloís of one of their antient Mafters on Dan. vii. 13, Si meruerint Judai, veniet in nubibus cœli; which Raymund, Pug. Fid. thus explains: "If ever the Jews deferve that the Meffias fhould come, he fhall come gloriously, according to the Prophet Daniel, in the clouds of Heaven." And it feems very probable that the great offence which the High priest took at our Saviour's faving, that they fould hereafter fee him coming in the clouds of Heaven, Matt. xxvi. 64, 65, was this, that it was a tradition among them that the Meflias fhould fo come, and that therefore he looked upon that faying of our Saviour as a blafphemous pretence to his being the Meffias; as much as if he should have faid, though I have done enough already to convince you that I am the Meffias, yet you fhall hereafter fee that very sign of my being the Meffias, upon which you to much depend, and without which you will not GENT. MAG. July, 1791.

believe, viz. my coming in the clouds of Heaven." Scott's Chriftian Life, vol. III. p. 531-Dr. Doddridge, the most amiable and pleafing commentator on all thefe fubjects that I know of, in a note upon the fame text, expreffes himself thus: "In thefe words, bereafter ye fall fee the fon of man, &c. there feems a plain reference to the view in which the Son of Man is reprefented, Dan. vii. 13, 14, where he is faid to come with the clouds of Heaven to receive a dominion, &c. or to appear, as God did on Mount Sinai, in a chariot of clouds, attended by angelic hosts. Our Lord looked very unlike this perfon now to his infatuated adverfaries: but nothing could be more aweful, majeftic, and becoming, than fuch an admonition in fuch circumftances."

Dr. Gill, upon the phrafe Thou haft faid, has a note, very explicit and fatisfactory to those who think that there is any needful, wherein he, as an infiance that this was "a way of fpeaking in ufage among the Jews, when what was afked was affented to as truth," cites from a Jewish writer, that, "it being faid to a certain perfon, Is Rabbi dead? He replied to them, Ye have faid; and they rent their cloaths." Upon the circumftance of the adjuration, ver. 63, thofe commentators obferve, that the Highprieft had a right in this manner to adminiter fuch an oath, upon any doubtful cafe, to which there is reference, Lev. v. I; and, as in the cafe here referred to, fo in all others, it could not be evaded; but when any "beard the voice of fwearing" he was obliged to declare the truth; which, accordingly, our Bleffed Saviour plainly and fully complied with. Yours, &c. A. C.

the

Mr. URBAN,

N

June 20.

lately made at Stratford upon Avon, communicating the refult of enquiry birth place of

That "Bard, who at one view Could look the whole creation through," perhaps I may afford entertainment to fome at least of the numerous readers of the Gentleman's Magazine.

AN OLD WAINSCOT CHAIR, or more properly, I might have faid, the remaining part, which tradition had handed down as having been the property of the immortal SHAKSPEARE, and which stood in the very house in which he was born, was fold on the 28th of

November,

November, 1790, by Thomas Hart*, the prefent occupier of the houfe, to Major Orlowfki (fecretary to her Serene Highnefs Ifabella Princess Gzartoriska), who, accompanied by an interpreter, a native of Poland, came to Stratford purposely to purchase it.

Hart was happy in receiving for the relick twenty guineas, with an entertainment given at an inn to his family (though I am affured, had he afked, he might have received a much larger fum for it); and the man, who made the cafe to pack it in, alto received a guinea for his trouble.

When I first vifited Stratford, Mr. Urban, now fome time fince, I was the wn (as I understood all ftrangers were whole curiofity led them to call at the house) this chair, had the honour of fitting in it; and the people of the houfe cut from one of the feet, and prefented to me. a fmall chip, which I must own I was mɔt Virtuofo enough carefully to preferve, as there appeared to me a degree of improbability in fuppofing this chair fhould have continued there for near 1000 centuries, though fixed in the wall, and bearing evident marks of antiquity, or that it was ever the one, as 'ome have fuppofed, in which our Great Poet fift repofed, when

Each change of many-coloured life he drew, Exhaufted worlds, and then imagin'd new.

But, to return to my information. In February laft, the Interpreter again vifited Stratford, faid a doubt had arifen refpecting the authenticity of the relick, that it was purchafed for the faid Princels, and that her Highnels requested a certificate, fetting forth that it was the fame chair fhead teen and fat in in the fummer of 1790, which certificate was granted, figned by Thomas Hart, John Wariow, Auftin Warilow, and John Jordan +.

* Thomas Hart is fifth in defcent from Joan Hart, Shakspeare's fifter. MALONE.

John Jordan, whofe fignature is annexed to this certificate, is a man well informed, though in an humble ftation of life (a journeyman wheelwright); is the author of a poem, called, "Wellcombe Hills," &c.; was employed by, and collected for, Mr Malone, many valuable materials for his Shakspeare; for which contributions, much to the honour of that gentleman, he has been liberally rewarded; and Mr. M. ftill continues his affiftance to Jordan's family at this time, by Dr. Davenport, Vicar of Stratford, paying for the education of his children, and promifing his future fupport. I acknowledge myself indebted to Mr. Jordan for part of my infor

ation.

Refpecting the celebrated MULBERRY-TREE planted by Shakspeare, the relation of the following anecdote led me to make fome enquiries: "A gentleman, paffing through Stratford, called at the houfe of a Mr. Sharp, a cutler, who, it is well known, procured fome of the mulberry-wood after the tree was cut down by Mr. Gaftrell, and who, without doubt, has received, and continues to receive, confiderable emolument from vending a variety of articles, fuch as toys, &c. faid to be made of that wood. Taking up a tobacco-ftopper, from amongst other articles which he had intended to purchafe, and on which was indented, as is on all the toys, &c. Shakspeare's wood, he thus interrogated the perfon attending: "Will you swear, Sir, that this tobacco-ftopper was ever a part of the original mulberry-tree planted by Shakspeare?" No, Sir," replied the young man, “I will not fwear it; but my faiber will." This young man was Sharp's fon!" But, Mr. Urban, notwithftanding this anecdote was related to me as a ftubborn fact, I have weighty reafons to believe I fhould mifinform you, were I to fay Sharp has not, at this time, in his fhop a quantity of the wood in toys, &c. as well as unconverted; for of this tree (which, it is fuppofed, was planted by Shakspeare about the year 1609, and was cut down by Mr. Gaftrell in 1757, being then grown to an enormous fize, and part of the body decayed), there were many large boughs preferved which were perfectly found, fome of which were fent to the shop of George Willes, a joiner, who is now living at Stratford, to be converted by him, at Mr. Gaftrell's requeft, into an eafy chair; but these branches having remained with Willes unconverted until after Mr. Gaftrell's death, they were then purchased by Sharp. The body of the tree was cut up, ftacked amongst others as fire-wood, and as fuch fold to different perfons; but Sharp, I am info med, had the greatest part of it, which is fuppofed to have been about 20 cwt.

The late Thomas Mortibcys, efq. had feveral pieces, out of which was carved that elegant box, prefented by the Corporation of Stratford to David Garrick, elq. in 1769. After the deceate of Mr. Mortiboys, amongst his effects, which were fold, Sharp again became the purchaler ot all that remained of this celebrated wood, giving for it one fhilling per pound.

The firft idea of Sharp's manufactory

was

father's picture, does not prove that the might not have been ftill more struck with the likeness of the miniature. One is at a lofs to know upon what ground it is affumed (by a perfon who never faw the picture or the print), that, if Faithorne's be like, the miniature is not like; and ftill lefs can it be conceived why he thinks that "the likeness in Sir Joshua's picture cannot be a ftriking likeness of Milton, whatever it may be of Selden." How came Selden into his head? Here fome suspicion arises that he has feen the picture and the print, a cicumftance which he choofes to conceal, as the comment by Sir Joshua on the print wou'd have prevented the parade of his criticism.

The opinion of Sir Joshua Reynolds, in matters relating to his own profeffion, certainly ought to have fome weight. He is not likely to be wanting in that skill to which every other artift pretends, namely, to form fome judgement of the likenefs of a picture without knowing the original. It appears that Sir Joshua told Warton, that he was perfectly fure that "the picture in his poffeffion was a ftriking likeness, and that an idea of Milton's countenance cannot be got from any of the other pictures." Without being an artift, it is cafily perceived that the picture of Faithorne does not poffefs that individuality of countenance which is in the miniature.

There is fomething very perverfe in believing that an ordinary, common-place portrait, painted by an engraver for the purpofe of making a print from it, should be preferred, or be fuppofed to be more like, than the beft picture of the firft miniature painter, perhaps, that ever lived. Cooper pofleffed all the correctnefs, precifion, and all the attention to pecuitarity of expreffion, which we admire in Vandyke, whereas Faithorne imitated, as well as he could, the lax and vicious manner then introduced by Sir Peter Lely, who, though upon the whole an ingenious artist, Itands in the first rank of what the painters cali mannerifis. We may add, in regard to Faithorne, that, however he might be diftinguithed among his contemporaries, and fince by the curious in old prints, his merit as an engraver (and much lefs as a painter), were he now living, would not raife him above the rank of the common herd of artifis. It does not appear that Deborah Milton, when Faithorne's picture was fhewn to her, faid any thing to confirm us in the opinion of its being to ex

She

tremely like: the exclaimed, “O, Lord! that is the picture of my father.” prob bly had fe-n the picture before, and it is even probable that he was prefent when it was painted; and, when the law it again, the immediately recognized it, as fhe would have done her father's watch, buckles, or any other appendage to his perfon.

There is no doubt but that Milton fat to Faithorne for that crayon picture; the diftinguishing features are the fame as in the miniature; the fame large eyelid, the fame fhaped nofe and mouth, and the fame long line which reaches from the noftril to below the corners of the mouth, and the fame head of hair; but if the etfect and expreffion of the whole together fhould be, as in fact it is, different in the two pictures, it cannot, 1 fhould think, be difficult for us to determine on which fide our faith ought to incline, even though neither poffeffed any strong marks of identity.

All the objections that have been made by your correfpondent, I hope, have been anfwered, and fome, perhaps, which the reader will think were fcarcely worthy of an answer. There is no occafion to take notice of objections which are made in order to be confured, namely, the pains the Critick takes to obviate a fuppofition which nobody ever fuppofed, that the writer of the memorandum on the back might, by miflake, write ber death instead of his death. This is to raile conjectures in order to triumph in their confutation!

Mr. Tyrwhitt, to whom the miniature was fhewn at the Archbishop of York's Table, and whofe skill in matters of this kind is univerfally acknowledged, scouted the question which was there put to him, Whether he thought the manufcript was a late fabrication? "The orthography, as well as the colour of the ink, fhews it to have been written about a hundred years fince." He then remarked the muftake of the writer in fuppoling that Deborah Milton was dead at the me te wrote; and, though your correspondent thinks that this mittake is a fufficient reafon for calling the whole a pa pable fiction, we may reatonably oppole Mr. Fyrwhitt's opinion to that of your anonymous correfpondent, of whom we may lav, it he had poffeffed a greater fhare of criti al fagacity, he would have remarked, that even the mistake of uppoting Deborah Milton to be dead when he wrote thews it to be not what he calls it, a fiction. A man who deals in fic

tion