pofitions of thefe ancients have been loft, yet enough have re mained to serve as models for our greatest poets; to instruct our orators in the arts of eloquence; our hiftorians in the compofition of history, and to leave nothing for our moralists, but an amplification of the obfervations of Seneca and Epictetus.

Had one of our modern philofophers lived in thofe ages, would he not, in the enthusiasm of his meditations, have expreffed the flattering fentiment now fo prevalent; and throwing his glance into remote futurity, have prognofticated a faturnian age, when every citizen fhould be a philofopher, and the univerfe one entire Rome? But it is the error of men, who, presuming to defcribe at fo vaft an interval, imagine circumftances and connexions which have no existence; as it is often found that lands, which appeared united when obferved remotely, are in reality eternally feparated by the occan.

Among the most fanguine, and the most fingular of modern philofophers, is the worthy Abbè de Saint Pierre, The honefty of his heart exceeded the rectitude of his understanding. His project of "An Univerfal Peace," by the infelicity of his ftyle, could find no readers; a philanthropift as fingular, but more eloquent, the celebrated Rouffeau, embellifhed the neglected labour, enabled us to read the performance, and perceive it's humane imbecility. It was no dull conception of a Dutch trader, who having infcribed on his fign the words " Perpetual Peace." had painted under it, a church-yard. Our good Abbè had a notion that an age was not diftant, when fuch would be the progrefs of that mafs of light, which was daily gathering, that it would influence every fpecies of knowledge, and penetrate to the lowest orders of fociety. This future generation is to be remarkable for the force of it's reason, and the feverity of it's truth. is therefore only to permit works of utility; to contemn the ornaments of eloquence, and the charms of poetry; but it may be neceffary to obferve, that our prophet was neither an orator nor a poet. He was once prefent at the recitation of one of those works which are only valued for the graces of their compofition, and the felicity of their manner. A performance of fuch tafte would not therefore be read by the more reasonable beings of his metaphyfical age. He appeared frigid and unmoved, while the audience was enraptured. His opinion was asked; he smiled, and faid-"It is a thing which is YET thought to be fine!"

It

Another of these chimerical, yet grand fpeculators, appears to me to have been the celebrated Leibnitz, who conceived the extravagant notion of forming one nation of all Europe; for he propofed to reduce Europe under one temporal power, in the Emperor, and under one fpiritual, in the Pope; and to conftru& an univerfal philofophical language. This great fcholar is an example of the fatal attachment which a fuperior mind may experience for a fyftem of which it is blindly enamoured, and to which it facrifices it's own fenfations, and it's own convictions.

Leibnitz was a genuine philofopher, and a friend to humanity; his project of an univerfal language evinces this; but having once fixed on a fyftem, he yielded up that dearest interest to a philofopher, the profperity of the human mind; for what tyrant could have forged more permanent chains for intellectual freedom, than placing man under two fuch powers? If this project had been poffible to effect, the other of the philofophical language had been ufelefs; philofophy then would not have been allowed a language.

He who thinks, will perceive in every enlightened nation, three kinds of people; an inconfiderable number inftructed by reason, and glowing with humanity; a countless multitude, barbarous and ignorant, intolerant and inhofpitable; and a vacillating peo ple with fome reafon and humanity, but with great prejudices, at once the half-echoes of philofophy, and the adherents of popular opinion. Can the public be denominated enlightened? Take an extensive view among the various orders of fociety, and obferve how folly ftill wantons in the vigour of youth, and prejudice ftill ftalks in the stubbornness of age.

To trace the human mind as it exifts in a people, would be the only method to detect this fallacious expreffion. The unenlight ened numbers, who are totally uninfluenced by the few, live in a foul world of their own creation. The moral arithmetician, as he looks for the fum total of the unenlightened, must resemble the algebraist, who riots in incalculable quantities, and who smiles at the fimple favage, whofe arithmetic extends not further than the number of three.

In a metropolis, we contemplate the human mind in all it's inflections. If we were to judge of men by the condition of their minds, (which perhaps is the most impartial manner of judging) we fhould not confult the year of their birth, to date their ages; and an intellectual register might be drawn up, on a totally dif ferent plan from our parochial ones. A perfon may, according to the vulgar era, be in the maturity of life, when by our philofophical epocha he is born in the tenth century. That degree of mind which regulated the bigotry of a monk in the middle ages, may be discovered in a modern rector. An adventurous fpirit in a red coat, who is almoft as defirous (to ufe the wit of South) to receive a kifs from the mouth of a cannon, as from that of his miftrefs, belongs to the age of chivalry, and if he fhould compofe verfes, and be magnificently prodigal, he is a gay and noble troubadour. A farcaftic philofopher, who inftructs his fellow citizens, and retires from their fociety, is a contemporary with Diogenes; and he who reforming the world, graces inftruc tion with amenity, may be placed in the days of Plato. Our vulgar politicians must be arranged among the Roundheads and Olivers, and Tom Paine himself is fo very ancient as to be a contemporary of Shimei. The refult of our calculations would be, that the enlightened public form an inconfiderable number.

It must however be confeffed, that what knowledge has been accumulated by modern philofophy, cannot eafily perish; the art of printing has imparted stability to our intellectual ftructures, in what depends on the mechanical prefervation. A fingular fpectacle has, therefore, been exbibited; and it is fometimes urged by thofe who contemplate, with pleafing aftonishment, the actual progrefs of the human mind, as a proof of the immutability of truth, that in the present day, every enlightened individual, whether he refides at Paris, at Madrid, or at London, now thinks alike no variation of climate, no remoteness of place, not even national prejudices, more variable and more remote than either, deftroy that unanimity of opinion, which they feel on certain topics effential to human welfare.

This appears to be a fpecious argument in favour of the enlightened public. But we fhould recollect, that this unanimity of opinion, which fo frequently excites furprife, proceeds from their deriving their ideas from the fame fources; at Paris, at Madrid, and at London, the fame authors are read, and, therefore, the fame opinions are formed.

Thus we account for this unanimity of opinion; and we may now reasonably enquire whether unanimity of opinion, always indidicates permanent truth? It is certain that very extravagant opinions were once univerfally received; does any one deny that fome of our modern opinions are marvellously extravagant? May we not fay to the greateft genius, look at what your equals have done, and obferve how frequently they have erred. Reflect, that whenever an Ariftotle, a Defcartes, and a Newton appeared, they formed a new epocha in the annals of human knowledge, it is not unreasonable to add one, among your thousand conjectures, and fay, that their future rivals may trace new counections, and collect new facts, which may tend to annihilate the systems of their predeceffors. Is not opinion often local, and ever disguised by custom? is not what we call truth often error? and are not the paffions and ideas of men of fo very temporary a nature, that they fcarcely endure with their century? This enlightened public may difcover that their notions become obfolete, and that with new fyftems of knowledge, and new modes of existence, their books may be closed for their fucceffors, and only confulted by the curious of a future generation, as we now examine Aristotle and Defcartes, Ariftophanes and Chaucer. Our learning may no more be their learning, than our fashions will be their fathions. Every thing in this world is fashion.

It may alfo be conjectured, that amidst the multitude of future difcoveries, the original authors of our own age, the Newtons and the Lockes, may have their conceptions become fo long familiarifed, as to be incorporated with the novel difcoveries, as truths fo inconteftible, that very few fhall even be acquainted with their first discoverers. It would therefore appear, that the

juftnefs, as well as the extravagance of our authors, are alike inimical to their future celebrity.

But this inftability never attends the noble exertions of virtue. Whoever immortalifes his name, by an action of patriotism, or of philanthropy, will meet the certain admiration of posterity. To render a fervice to another is in the power of the meanest individual; but to aggrandife the gentle affections into fublime paffions, to rife from the focial circle to the public weal, to extend our ordinary life through years of glory, is performing that which once raifed men into demi-gods.

W

ON CARDS-A Fragment.

E had paffed our evening with fome certain perfons famous for their tafte, their learning, and refinement: But, as ill-luck would have it, two fellows, duller than the reft, had contrived to put themselves upon a level, by introducing a game at cards.

It is a fign, faid he, the world is far gone in abfurdity, or furely the fashion of cards would be accounted no fmall one. Is it not furprifing that men of fense should submit to join in this idle cuftom, which appears originally invented to supply its deficiency? But fuch is the fatality! imperfections give rife to fashions! and are followed by thofe who do not labour under the defects that introduced them. Nor is the hoop the only inftance of a fashion invented by those who found their account in it; and afterwards countenanced by others to whofe figure it was prejudicial.

How can men, who value themselves upon their reflections, give encouragement to a practice, which puts an end to thinking? I intimated the old allufion of the bow, that requires fresh vigour by a temporary relaxation.

He answered, this might be applicable, provided I could fhew, that cards did not require the pain of thinking; and merely exclude from it, the profit and the pleafure.

Cards, if one may guefs from their firft appearance, feem invented for the ufe of children; and, among the toys peculiar to infancy, the bells, the whistle, the rattle, and the hobby-horse, deferved their fhare of commendation. By degrees men, who came nearest to children in understanding and want of ideas, grew enamoured of the use of them as a fuitable entertainment. Others alfo, pleafed to reflect on the innocent part of their lives, had recourfe to this amufement, as what recalled it to their minds. A knot of villains encreased the party; who, regardless of that entertainment, which the former feemed to draw from cards, confidered them in a more ferious light, and made ufe of them as a more decent fubftitute to robbing on the road, or picking pockets. But men who propofe to themfelves a dignity of character, where will you find their inducement to this kind of game? For difficult indeed were it to determine, whether it ap

pear more odious among sharpers, or more empty and ridiculous among perfons of character.

Perhaps, replied I, your men of wit and fancy may favour this diverfion, as giving occafion for the crop of jeft and witticism, which naturally enough arises from the names and circumstances of the cards.

He faid, he would allow this as a proper motive, in cafe the men of wit and humour would accept the excufe themselves.

In fhort, fays he, as perfons of ability are capable of furnishing out a much more agreeable entertainment; when a gentleman offers me cards, I fhall efteem it as his private opinion that I have neither fenfe nor fancy.

I afked how much he had loft-His answer was, he did not much regard ten pieces; but that it hurt him to have fquandered them away on cards; and that to the lofs of conversation, for which he would have given twenty.

GREY CAPS FOR GREEN HEADS. No i.

Dialogue between a Father and a Son.'

Father. WHAT made you out fo late last night?

Son. Mr. invited me to his club at the Noah's ark, where, in a low room, that stunk like a drunkard's morning breath, feveral fat round the fire, complaining of gouts, dropfies, confumptions, pleurifies, palfies, rheumatifms, catarrhs, &c. till more company coming in, cry'd, to the table, to the table! where one began his right hand man's good health, over the left thumb, which having gone round the next was begun, and fo they drank on till each one had pledg'd every man's health in the room.

Father. Many cups many diseases. Too much oil choaks the lamp.

Drinking healths, according to St. Auftin, was invented by pagans and infidels, who in their facrifices confecrated them to the honour, name, and memory of Beel-ze-bub. But

Suppofing health-drinking only a well-wifhing, custom not having made pledging a kind of affront, and wrong, to both toaster and toafted; and fear of offending carrying with it the force, though not the form, of a constraint. Health-drinking infringes king Ahasuerus's royal law, tends to excefs, and is not expedi

ent.

But what followed? for wine immoderately taken makes men think themfelves wondrous wife.

Son. Most of them became like Solomon's fool, full of words. Father. What was it they faid?

Son. E'en what came uppermoft; for as wine had laid reason afleep, each gave the reins to his vanity and folly. For instances

K k