moral leffon to after-ages. If tradition told us that BEN JONSON went to the Devil Tavern ; that SHAKSPEARE ftole deer, and held the ftirrup at playhouse doors; that DRYDEN frequented Button's Coffee-houfe; curiosity was lulled afleep, and Biography forgot the best

part of her function, which is to instruct mankind by examples taken from the fchool of life. This tafk remained for Dr. Johnfon, when years had rolled away; when the channels of information were, for the most part, choaked up, and little remained befides doutful anecdote, uncertain tradition, and vague report.

"Nunc fitus informis premit et deferta Vetuftas."

The value of Biography has been better understood in other ages, and in other countries. Tacitus informs us, that to record the lives and characters of illuftrious men was the practice of the Roman authors, in the early periods of the Republic. In France the example has been followed. Fontinelle, D'Alembert, and Monfieur Thomas, have left models in this kind of compofition. They have embalmed the dead. But it is true, that they had incitements and advantages,

vantages, even at a diftant day, which could not, by any diligence, be obtained by Dr. Johnfon. The wits of France had ample materials. They lived in a nation of critics, who had at heart the honour done to their country by their Poets, their Heroes, and their Philofophers. They had, befides, an Academy of Belles Lettres, where Genius was cultivated, refined, and encouraged. They had the tracts, the effays, and differtations, which remain in the memories of the Academy, and they had the fpeeches of the feveral members, delivered at their first admiffion to a feat in that learned Affembly. In those speeches the new Academiciau did ample juftice to the memory of his predeceffor; and though his harangue was decorated with the colours of eloquence, and was, for that reafon, called panegyric, yet being pronounced before qualified judges, who knew the talents, the conduct, and morals of the deceased, the fpeaker could not, with propriety, wander into the regions of fiction. The truth was known, before it was adorned. The Academy faw the marble, before the artist polished it. But this country has had no Academy of Literature. The public mind, for centuries,

h 2

turies, has been engroffed by party and faction by the madness. of many for the gain of a few; by civil wars, religious diffentions, trade and commerce, and the arts of accumulating wealth. Amidst fuch attentions, who can wonder that cold praife has been often the only reward of merit? In this country Doctor Nathaniel Hodges, who, like the good bishop of Marfeilles, drew purer breath amidst the contagion of the plague in London, and, during the whole time, continued in the city, adminiftering medical affiftance, was fuffered, as Johnfon ufed to relate with tears in his eyes, to die for debt in a gaol. In this country, the man who brought the New River to London was ruined by that noble project; and in this country Otway died for want on Tower Hill; Butler, the great author of Hudibras, whose name can only die with the English language, was left to languish in poverty, the particulars of his life almoft unknown, and scarce a veftige of him left except his immortal poem. Had there been an Academy of Literature, the lives, at leaft, of thofe celebrated perfons would have been written for the benefit of pofterity. Swift, it feems, had the idea of fuch an inftitution, and pro

pofed

pofed it to Lord Oxford; but Whig and Tory were more important objects. It is needless to differnble, that Dr. Johnfon, in the Life of Roscommon, talks of the inutility of fuch a project. "In this country," he fays, "an Academy could be expected to do but little. "If an academician's place were profitable, it "would be given by intereft; if attendance

66

were gratuitous, it would be rarely paid, and "no man would endure the least disgust. Una"nimity is impoffible, and debate would fepa"rate the affembly." To this it may be fufficient to answer, that the Royal Society has not been diffolved by fullen difguft; and the modern Academy at Somerset-house has already performed much, and promises more. Unanimity is not neceffary to fuch an affembly. On the contrary, by difference of opinion, and collifion of fentiment, the cause of Literature would thrive and flourish. The true principles of criticism, the secret of fine writing, the inveftigation of antiquities, and other interesting fubjects, might occafion a clash of opinions; but in that contention Truth would receive illuftration, and the effays of the feveral members would supply the Memoirs of the Academy.

46

But, fays Dr. Johnfon, "fuppofe the philological decree made and promulgated, what "would be its authority? In abfolute govern"ment there is fometimes a general reverence paid to all that has the fanction of power, "the countenance of greatnefs. How little

66

this is the ftate of cur country needs not to "be told. The edicts of an English academy "would probably be read by many, only that

66

they may be fure to difobey them. The pre

"fent manners of the nation would deride au

66

thority, and therefore nothing is left, but that

every writer fhould criticize himself." This furely is not conclufive. It is by the standard of the best writers that every man fettles for himself his plan of legitimate compofition; and fince the authority of fuperior genius is acknowledged, that authority, which the individual obtains, would not be leffened by an affociation with others of diftinguished ability. It may, therefore, be inferred, that an Academy of Literature would be an establishment highly useful, and an honour to Literature. In fuch an institution profitable places would not be wanted. Vatis avarus haud facile eft animus; and the minifter, who fhall find leifure from party