you correct what you have written, with some attention. I shall never dislike to see a Letter full of blottings-out and corrections."

"Nov. 17. Your time seems indeed to be completely taken up. Yet I hope you will persevere. No knowledge, you well know, is to be acquired without constant attention and assiduity. I do not wonder that so much Greek is rather tiresome to you. But be assured, it will become less and less so. I am glad Plato is not above your strength. His Apologia Socratis is a masterly composition, and is, as I recollect, the least metaphysical of all his works. Most probably you will be lectured in no other book this term by your Tutor. It is now a good time for you to fix in your mind as clear a conception as possible of general and abstract ideas — those of quantity particularly. I scarce know what to advise you as to writing Latin. But you must see the necessity of being able to write it grammatically at least, if not elegantly. Your misfortune has been, never to have learnt any of the Latin classics by heart, and therefore have none of the Latin phraseology in your memory. Suppose, however, you were to begin with translating some of the Testament from English to Latin. By comparing your own with some other Latin translation, you will easily see where you are wrong. Translating your own themes will also be no bad exercise for you. You will find this more easy to you, if you take care that your sentences are not too long, and do not run into each other. It would be also of use to you, were you to go over the syntax with some attention, and observe the rules, which Holmes has laid down for making Latin." "Has Mr. Parsons yet spoken to you? Dr. Parr has written to him about you, and gives him a most excellent character. Parr presses me

much to make him a visit in Warwickshire, when I go to Oxford. I have not promised him, nor shall I promise him; yet I wish to do it, if I can."

"Nov. 26. I wonder Parsons has not yet spoken to you, as Parr certainly mentioned you to him. I am glad you enter on Euclid with so much spirit. Be sure to understand him thoroughly as you go on, and you will find no difficulty as you go on. The leading and fundamental propositions you must be quite master of. The dependent demonstrations will then follow of course. The principle of supraposition, as I have mentioned before, is the first principle of the elements of geometry. Upon this principle alone can any one line be proved, originally proved, to be equal to any other line. The two lines must be proved to be coincident, and coincidence can only be proved by supraposition. I do not wonder that your young men in general make such wretched work of Euclid. So it was in my days. Not one in ten could demonstrate a single proposition. D'Alembert, as I recollect, explains very clearly the principle of supraposition above-mentioned.

6

"Since I had your last Letter, I have run over Plato's 'Aπоλoyía, and I have read it with the more pleasure, as I could not help fancying that I was reading it with you. Here,' said I to myself, Edward will be puzzled,

here again he will go on well and easily.' The latter part of this defence is finely worked up indeed, and is truly eloquent. When Socrates says that, instead of being punished, he ought to be maintained at the public charge, I always think of poor Rousseau, the modern Plato, as he is sometimes called. He was prosecuted for his Emile both at Paris and Geneva: the book was publicly burnt, I believe in both places. The Archbishop of

Paris issued a Mandement against it: in his answer to which, Rousseau says that for writing that book he deserved to have a column erected to his memory. He took the hint probably from Plato. I am glad to find you do better with Greek, than many of the young men; and I doubt not, but you will in a short time do as well as the best of them. Does Matthew recommend to you no book upon the Greek idioms? Does he explain them to you as they occur? Has he made any attempt towards an explanation of Socrates's Dæmon? I never could satisfy myself about that point: - whether Socrates seriously and enthusiastically fancied that he felt occasionally an inward supernatural admonition, as our Quakers talk of an inward light, and our Methodists of inward feelings and experiencies of the Spirit; or whether he meant only the suggestions of his own reason and conscience, and ascribed them to a supernatural cause, by way of giving greater authority to himself, to his character and conversation, with a superstitious people? Which of these two cases was the fact, I own, I never could decide, nor can now decide, to my own satisfaction. Either of the suppositions bears hard upon his character. The former bears hard upon him as a man of sense and sound judgment; the latter, as a man of sincerity and truth."*

"Jan. 8, 1789. I have just had a Letter from Dr. Parr. He says you are a monkey for not having found your way yet to Hatton. When the weather is better, the days longer,

* [My learned and excellent friend, the Rev. Archdeacon Nares, was the author of an Essay on the Dæmon or Divination of Socrates, Lond. 1782. 8vo. pr. 8s. See the Classical Journal, T. xv. p. 205. His opinion is opposed by my philosophical friend, Thomas Taylor, Esq. T. xvi. p. 160. E. H. B.]

VOL. II.

F

and you have a week to spare, I would have you by all means make him a visit. Hatton is not more than 4 or 5 miles from Warwick; and you will easily ride thither in a day."

"Jan. 16. I shall see Dr. Brown's book, I hope, tomorrow. I am glad to find that Drake speaks so well of it. Parr, you know, spoke of it in the highest terms. You do well to make yourself master of that part of Euclid, in which you have been already lectured. I take for granted you read Ludlam's remarks as you go along. You are right too in rubbing up your algebra. But you must not, at the same time, neglect your Latin and Greek.* Whatever be your future pursuit, a competent knowledge of those languages will be of the highest use to you. Not to mention, that a want of such knowledge will be a great drawback upon your professional reputation, whatever your profession may be. I would advise you to mix always your philosophical and classical studies. I have found that a little variety of reading assists, rather than distracts the attention. Bolinbroke's Letters on History are very masterly, the modern parts especially. He always seemed to me to have perfect command of his subject. His stile, too, I used to think excellent: I do not now think quite so highly of it. He has a dashing, petulant, over

*

[A friend of mine in College found out a notable plan for uniting classical and mathematical learning, which is worthy of record. I called on him one morning, and observed that he was reading Euclid in Latin! I expressed my surprise, but was silenced, when he gravely assured me that he had adopted the plan for the purpose of saving time, as he could thus acquire a Latin style, while he was studying mathematics. E. H. B.]

--

bearing manner. But he is animated and vigorous. Upon the whole, his stile is fitter for speaking than writing, especially de rebus gravibus et philosophicis. I have not much to say about his Letter on Retirement and Study. It is written with spirit, but it is too general to be of much use. It says little, too, but what every body knows; for every body knows that all prejudices are to be laid aside in the investigation of truth, and that evidence, pure evidence, is alone to be attended to. But there are various kinds of truths, and the evidence for them differs both in kind and degree. It is, therefore, of the utmost consequence to have clear and fixed ideas of the various kinds and degrees of evidence. Otherwise we shall in some instances be apt to expect a stronger degree of evidence, than the nature of the thing admits, and in others may be satisfied with less evidence, than the nature of the subject requires. D'Alembert has many excellent suggestions, as I recollect, upon the nature of evidence; and Condillac is still more full. In almost every other book, too, of logic and metaphysics, you will find more or less upon this subject, though not perhaps systematically drawn out. Dr. Reid has a system, in which, I think, he is sometimes right, but oftener wrong. Shall I amuse myself by talking to you a little upon this subject in my own way? I hope you also will receive some amusement at least, if not benefit.

"The first evidence, in order of time, is that of the It is, too, the foundation of all other evidence.

senses.

We see, we hear,—we touch, etc. Of the reality of these perceptions there can be no doubt; nor is it possible to reason with a man, who questions their reality. Whether the objects of these perceptions are equally real, —