1794] Narrative of Bishop Hildefley's laft Illness and Death.

it for a few minutes, and fo continued his walk; then took it up again, till he had read it through .

He this day had a neighbouring clergyman to dine with him. Dined with a tolerably good appetite; fat converfing with him til between three and four o'clock; rofe from his chair without much effort; faw his gueft to the hall; and returned to the parlour, but with a tottering hafty kind of gait, which fometimes took him fince his former illnets. On this bis fifter begged him to fit down, but he did not; alked if Mr. Corbet was gone, for that there were two letters which might be fent by hi, and took them out of his cafe. Mr. Corbet was called, and came in with his Lord ip's fifter, and found him in the chair. He took no notice of them, but feemed intent on reading, or looking for fomething; on which the gentleman went away without the letters. In less than two minutes his fifter returned, and found he had fallen off his chair, but had faft hold of a moulding under the window-feat, which he had pulled off in attempting to rife. On his fifter's approach he turned round, and, Jooking up in her face, faid with a finile, Hetty, I cannot rife." How the got him up and feated him in his chair he knows not, for they were alone, and the much frightened. He had fill the two letters in his hand, which his fifter took, and fent them after Mr. Corbet to the tables; ftili ima gining this would go off like fomething of the fame kind that had alarmed them about a fortnight before. On one of the fervants coming in with a petition relative to a fuit in the Bishop's couit, his fifter found that he had loft his fpeech, and the ufe of one hand, indeed of one fide, eotirely. But, thinking this might roufe his attention, the pur the petition into his hand, which he read through; and it plainly appeared that he understood it, as he repeatedly after wards mentioned, though with much difficulty, the petitioner's place of abode. He then had the sheet turned, and feemed still to read where nothing was written; made fome fign, by pointing, as if he wanted an almanack, which his filter

*It is a ftriking circumftance, that the paffage read was in Saturday's paper for July 26, in vol. VI. written by Addison; and moft peculiarly applicable to the Prelute's character and prefent state.

GENT. MAG. September, 1794,

793

opened to him in December; and he ran his finger forward upon it till about the Seventh or eighth day.

A letter coming in from Ramfay was read to him; but he took no notice of it, and feemed quite infenfible of any thing; and in this condition he was carred to his bed, when Mr. Wilks armved about five the fame evening, and Dr. Scott, being fent for from Douglas, got to Bishop's Court the fame night. Before the Doctor came, the Bishop had got fome warm claret and currant jelly, and would have his finer take a cup of the fame. In the mean time, his ftupor and infenfibility increafing, all that could be done in the medicinal way proved ineffectual. He feemed to make fome attempts to fpeak at times, but hardly any thing intelligible. And thus he continued till the Sunday night fol lowing, December 6, and expired quietly about one in the morning of the 7th, much and greatly lamented by his whole diocefe, who have loft in him a most affectionate and faithful paftor, ever a tentive to the fpiritual and temporal welfare of the people committed to his care.

His zeal and piety in getting the Scriptures of the Old and New Teftament, together with the Book of Common Prayer, printed and published in the Manks tongue for the ule of his diecefe, is, above all others, the frongest and most lafting proof that can be given of his ardent love and concern for the goed of his fpiritual charge. And thefe he carried with him to the grave, and even into the grave, as he had by his will directed, that the funeral office and fermon fhould be all in Manks, which was performed accordingly.

Dr. Hildefley left a donative of corn to the amount of fome four, some five pounds apiece to every parish and town in the ifle; three hundred pounds to the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge towards a future edition of the Mauks Bible, &c. together with fome handfome legacies to his relations and particular friends; who, exclusive of this tender evidence of his esteem, will have eafon to remember him with that gratitude and refpect which were moft justly due to fo revered and refpe&table a character.

Ω

Mr. URBAN, Clapham, Aug. 15. Naniwer to the letter addreffed to you in your Magazine for June, p. 500,

500, refpeding Mr. Blair, the author of "The Grave," I wish to refer your correfpondent to a letter of Mr. Blair's, in the volume of letters to and from Dr. Doddrige, which contains a curious account of the publication of that poem. I have been informed, that there are other letters of Mr. Blair's to Dr. Dodidge in the poffeffion of Mr. Stedman (the editor of that entertaining and inAtructive collection), which, no doubt, that gentleman will readily communicate to gratify the public curiofity. I am, Sir, your conflant-reader, and occafional correfpondent,

AN ADMIRER OF MR. BLAIR.

Mr. URBAN,

Wefiminfer, Sept. 3. THE query relative to Dr. Watts, propofed by your correfpondent C. in your last magazine, p. 695, goes upon two fuppofitions; that the Doctor in tended to tranflate every Plalm, and that the fixty-fourth is the only one omitted. Neither of thefe is the cafe. The Palms not tranflated by Dr. Watts are twelve in number. These are the 28th, 43d, 52d, 54th, 59th, 64th, 70th, 79th, 88th, 108th, 137th, and 140th. The reafons of the greater part of them being paffed over evidently are, that they contain fuch complaints of the perfonal calamities of the Pfalmift, fuch defcriptions of his particular enemies, and fuch denunciations of wrath against them, as could not well be applied to Chrißian worship. The fixty-fourth Pfalm partakes in fome degree of this charader. The forty-third Plalm was probably omitted becaufe of its manifeft conformity to the preceding Pfalm. This conformity is fo great, that Bishop Lowth, in his Prælectiones, conjectured the forty-third Plaim to have been ori. ginally a part only of the forty-fecond; and the truth of the conje&ture has been afcertained by various manufcripts, as appears from Dr. Kennicott's collations. It is not ealy to fay why the 108th Piala was not tranflated, as it contains materials for a very fine compofition. From what has been offered, it will, perhaps, be deemed of little conlequence to rearch into the early editions of Dr. Watts's Palms.

if your correlpondent C. be, as I fuppofe, an ingenious and worthy friend of mine, I have an apology to make to him; which is, that the above circumftances did not occur to me when he mentioned the difficulty in private conyeriation. A K.

3

Mr. URBAN,

Sept. 1. N a work I published fome time aga upon Vision, I attempted, among other things, to prove, that the reafons commonly given, why objects at reft appear to be in motion, notwithstanding our bodies are alfo at eft, during the giddinefs we experience from turning ourfelves feveral times quickly round, are all of them without good found. ation; and afterwards offered a different explanation of the fame fact, which feemed to me both true and fufficient. I find, however, that what I then faid upon this fubject has not been admitted as jft by every one; for, Dr. Darwin, of Derby, the celebrated author of the "Botanic Garden', has, in the Addi

tions to his late publication, intituled "Zoonomia", ftrenuously defended the opinion of his fon, Dr. Darwin, of Shrewsbury, it being one of those I had attacked; and has with equal vigour endeavoured to fhew, that my explanation of the abovementioned phænome-non is liable to infuperable objections. The most proper place for any reply I may have to make to that author would certainly be in a new edition of my work upon Vifion; but, as I do not expect that another will foon be printed, and as my filence in the mean time might be contrued into a confeffion of defeat, I beg you will afford room in your valuable mifcellany for fome of the arguments I have to urge in fupport of what I formerly advanced.

The opinion of Dr. Darwin the young▾ er was given by himte:f briefly, but, to my apprehenfion, obfcurely, in the following words:

"When any one turns rapidly on one

foot till he becomes dizzy, and falls upon the ground, the fpecira* of the ambient objects continue to prefent themselves in rotation, or appear to librate, and he feems to behold them for fome time fill in motion." Philof.

Tran, vol. LXXVI. p. 315.

It is to be remarked that this opinion, fo far from being accompanied by any proof or illuftration, is itfelf given in

* As the term "ocular spectrum" was, I believe, firit used by Dr. Darwin, I shall here give his definition of it: "When any one has long and attentively looked at a bright object, as the fetting-fon, on clofing his eyes, or removing them, an im g', which refembles in form the object he has been attending This continues fome time to be fenfi le. apperance in the eye we shall call the ocular fpectrum of that object." Philof. Tranf yol. LXXVI. p. 313. proof

1794.]

Dr. Wells's Reply to Dr. Darwin on Vision.

proof of another opinion, as if its own truth was fo evident as to command univerfal affent. What I faid refpesting it was this:

"I do not indeed pretend to understand his opinion fully; but this much feems clear, that, if fuch an apparent motion of farrounding objects depends, in any way, upon their Spectra, or the illufive representations of thofe objects, occafioned by their former impreffions upon the retinas, no fimilar motion would be observed were we to turn ourselves round with our eyes fhut, and not to open them till we became giddy; for, in this cafe, as the furrounding objects could not fend their pictures to the retinas, there would, confequently, be no spectra to present them felves afterwards in rotation. But whoever will make the experiment will find, that objects about him appear to be equally in motion, when he has become giddy by turning himself round, whether this has been done with his eyes open or fhut." Ellay upon Single Vision, &c. p. 93.

When I made this objection to Dr. Darwin's opinion, I conceived it unanfwerable. His father however thinks otherwife, and attempts to elude its force by faying:

"It is certain, when any perfon revolves in a light rom with his eyes closed, that he nevertheless perceives differences of light both in quantity and colour through his eyelids as he turns round; and readily gains Spectra of thefe differences. And thefe fpe&a rent very different, except in vivacity, from thofe which he acquires when he revolves with unclofed eyes."

But, not to conteft the juftness of thefe obfervations, when Spettra of the fame kind differ in v vacity, do not the fainter difappear more quickly than the fronger and ought not, therefore, upon his own principles, the apparent rotation to continue longer when we have revolved with our eyes open, than if we had revolved with them clofed, even though both experiments had been made in a light room? I answer, that to my perception the rotation continues equally long in both cafes. But what would the event be if we were to turn ourselves in a dark room? To this Dr. Darwin lays nothing. I can affert, however, from experience, that if any perfon will turn himself in a dark room ll he becomes giddy, having prev.oufly remained in it a fufficient time to allow the spectra of objects he had formerly feen to difappear, he will obferve, upon the admiffion of light, that the furrounding bod.cs teem to move in the fame manner as if the room had been enlight

795

ened during the whole courfe of the experiment.

Though I think I may fafely regard what I have juft now faid to be a com plete confirmation of my former remarks upon Dr. Darwin's opinion; yet, to fhew that it is not from one fource only that I derive my conviction of its being erroneous, I proceed to exhibit feveral other arguments against it.

1. When a perfon ceafes to turn, after he has become giddy, objects at first appear to move through confiderable fegments of circles. The fegments thenceforth gradually become lefs; and, at length, the objects seem to rest. Now no reafon is afforded by Dr. Darwin's theory, why the apparent motion should not be as great juit before it ceafes as when it was firft obferved. The pedra indeed may become fainter and fainter; but, as the laft turn we give our bodies, with the view to make ourfelves giddy, is fimilar to the first, the fpera gained during the whole time of turning ought to prefent themselves in the fame manner, and with equal velocity, as long as they are perceived.

2. Dr. Darwin, the elder, has, in his Anfwer to my obfervations upon his fon's opinion, expreffed it in language different from that employed by the latter, and even by himfelf when he fpeaks of it in the body of his work. According to this interpretation of it, which I muft fuppofe correct, and given with his fon's confent, "the apparent progreffion of the ocular spectra of light or colours is the caufe of the apparent retrogreffion of objects, after a peifen has revolved tit he is become vertiginous," and an illuf. tration of this view of the point in quefton is afterwards g ven, taken from the moon, which "fometimes appears to move retrograde when fwift-gliding clouds are pailing forwards fo much nearer to the eye of the beholder."" Now, as in the latter inftance the mauti does not appear to move, uniels there are clouds perceived between it and the eye; fo, in the former, objets ought never to feem revolving unlels the pera of light or colours be at the fante time obferved. In proof of the contrary, however, I can affirm, that when I make the experiment in a room illuminated by the fun's light reflected irom the atmosphere, or by that of a candie, I never perceive spectra of light or c3lours, except I have previously taken pins to obtain them. Should it ba faid that they exit whether they be parusived

4. But it will be alleged, perhaps, that Dr. Darwin calls the progreffion of jpectra in giddincis apparent because nothing real cn properly be afcribed to mere hallucinations of fight, though he admits that they cover at one moment of time, during the apparent retrogreftion of objects, a different object, or a different part of the tame object, from that which they covered at the priceding moment. If it is be a fair rep elenration of his fentiments, I will afk, by what means are the relative poft cus of the peära and obječis thas changed? To me there isem only two ways in which this can podlib y happen. One is, that, while the led parts of the vetima, which occafion the feara, re main the fame, the pofit.on of the eve shall be altered, in which cafe the pectra will be feen to move correfpondently to that organ. But this, I fup