great fervour; and magnanimous moderation with the feverity of vindictive juftice. The author speaks with amiable liberality of Mr. Bowle, in saying," that gentleman had firft collected materials "for an answer to Lauder," and "has the justest "claim to the honour of being the original de"tector of this ungenerous critic." The writer of this valuable pamphlet gave also an admonition to Johnson, which breathes the manly fpirit of intelligence, of justice, and of candour. "It is to be ❝hoped (he said) nay it is to be expected, that the elegant and nervous writer, whofe judicious fen"timents and inimitable style point out the author "of Lauder's preface and poftfcript, will no longer "allow one to plume himself with his feathers, who σε appeareth fo little to have deserved his affistance, "an affiftance which, I am perfuaded, would never "have been communicated had there been the "leaft fufpicion of those facts, which I have been "the inftrument of conveying to the world in "these sheets, a perufal of which will fatisfy our "critic, who was pleased to fubmit his book to "the judgment of the two univerfities, that it has "been examined and carefully read at least by "fome members of the university of Oxford." The defence of Milton, which I have mentioned, by Mr. Richardfon, proves alfo, for the honour of Cambridge, that her men of letters were by no means deficient in fuch regard, as they peculiarly owe to the reputation of the poet, who "flames "in the van" of that poetical hoft, which has contributed to her renown.

When the pamphlet of Dr. Douglas had completely unveiled the most impudent of literary frauds, Johnson, whom his prejudice against Milton could no longer render blind to the unworthinefs of Lauder, recoiled from the wretch whom he had too credulously befriended, and finding him as deficient in the truth of facts as he was in propriety of fentiment, and decency of language, made him address to his antagonist, who had convicted him of fome forgeries, an ample avowal of more extensive fraud, and a moft humble fupplication for pardon. This expiatory addrefs was dictated by Johnson, whofe conduct on the occafion was manly and moral-but it failed to correct his affociate, for prejudice against Milton in Lauder arofe almoft to madness; in Johnson it amounted only to a degree of malevolence, too commonly produced by political difagreement; it had induced him to cherish too eagerly a detractive deception, fabricated to fink an illuftrious character, without allowing himfelf the due exercife of his keen understanding to investigate its falfehood, or to perceive its abfurdity. Lauder feems to have hoped, for fome time, that a full confeffion of his offences would restore him to the favour of the public; for in the year 1751 he ventured to publish an apology, addreffed to the Archbishop of Canterbury, foliciting patronage for his projected edition of the scarce Latin authors, from whom he had accufed Milton of borrowing. The chief purpose of fo extraordinary an attack on the renown of the poet, appears to have been a defire, prompted by indigence, to intereft the

public in the re-appearance of these neglected writers, whom he meant to re-publifh. In clofing his apology to the Archbishop, he fays, with fingu lar confidence:

"As for the interpolations (for which I am fo "highly blamed) when paffion is fubfided, and "the minds of men can patiently attend to truth, "I promise amply to replace them, with paffages

66

equivalent in value that are genuine, that the public may be convinced that it was rather paffion "and refentment, than a penury of evidence, the "twentieth part of which has not as yet been pro"duced, that obliged me to make use of them."

He printed the collection of Latin poets as he propofed, one volume in 1752, and a fecond in 1753. The book may be regarded as a literary curiosity, but it seems to have contributed little to the emolument of its miferable editor, who had thoroughly awakened univerfal indignation; and as Dr. Douglas obferved, in a poftfcript, to his pamphlet, reprinted in 1756, "The curiosity of the pub

lic to fee any of these poems was at an end ; "the only thing which had ftamped a value upon

them, was a fuppofition that Milton had thought "them worthy of his imitation. As therefore it

66

now appeared, by the detection of Lauder's fyf"tem of forgery, that Milton had not imitated "them, it is no wonder that the defign of reprint"ing them fhould meet with little or no fuc " cefs."

The affertion of this learned and amiable writer, that Milton had not imitated thefe poets, is not to

be understood in a strict and literal fenfe; for af furedly there are paffages in fome of them that Milton may be fairly supposed to have copied, though his obligations to thefe Latin poets are very far from being confiderable; and had they been infinitely greater, the inference drawn by the malevolent reviler of Milton would still have been prepofterously severe.

The detected flanderer was foon overwhelmed. with the utter contempt he deserved; but, contemptible as he was, the memory of his offences and of his punishment ought to be preserved, not so much for the honour of Milton, as 'for the general interest of literature, that if the world can produce a fecond Lauder, he may not hope for impunity.

Part of his fubfequent hiftory is related in the following words by Dr. Douglas:

"Grown defperate by his difappointment, this very man, whom but a little before we have seen as abjet in the confeffion of his forgeries, as "he had been bold in the contrivance of them, "with an inconfiftence, equalled only by his im

66

pudence, renewed his attack upon the author of "the Paradife Loft; and in a pamphlet, published "for that purpose, acquainted the world, that the "true reafon which had excited him to contrive "his forgery was, becaufe Milton had attacked the "character of Charles the Firit, by interpolating "Pamela's prayer from the Arcadia, in an edition "of the Eicon Bafilike; hoping, no doubt, by this "curious key to his conduct, to be received into "favour, if not by the friends of truth, at least by

"the

"the idolators of the royal martyr-the zeal of "this wild party-man against Milton having at the "fame time extended itself against his biographer, "the very learned Dr. Birch, for no other reafon "but because he was fo candid as to exprefs his "difbelief of a tradition unfupported by evidence."

Were it requifite to give new force to the many proofs of that malignant prejudice against Milton in a late writer, which I have had too frequent occafion to examine and regret, fuch force might be drawn from the words juft cited from Dr. Douglas. That gentleman here informs us, that Lauder directed his intemperate zeal against Dr. Birch, for rejecting the ill-fupported ftory that reprefented Milton as an impoftor, concerned in forging the remarkable prayer of the king. Yet Johnfon ungenerously laboured to fix this fufpicion of difhonefty on the great character whofe life he delineated, by infinuating that Dr. Birch believed the very ftory, which Lauder reviled him for having candidly rejected. Is it not too evident from this circumstance, that Lauder's intemperate hatred of Milton had in fome degree infected his noble coadjutor? though he very justly difcarded that impoftor, when convicted of forgery, after writing for him a fupplicatory confeffion of his fraud, for which he was afterwards cenfured by the half-frantic offender, who, finding that it procured him no favour from the public, declared it infinitely too general and too abject for the occafion.

The malevolence of Johnfon towards the great poet has been reprefented as a mere fiction of

party

rage,