the problem of the perturbations of the planets, that had, several years before, been prefented to the Academy.

In 1759, he published his Elements of Philofophy; a work remarkable for its precifion and perfpicuity; full of important truths, analyzed with fuch clear nefs and fimplicity, that they are intelligible to thofe who are the leaft accustomed to abstract notions, and therefore adapted to general ufe. Such is the fubftance of our Panegyrift's opinion of this work; in which, however, we find fome tenets, relative both to metaphysics and moral science, that are far from being admiffible.

We should be wanting in the juftice due to the Marquis DE CONDORCET, if we paffed over in filence the fuccinct view he gives us of the principles of M. D'ALEMBERT's philosophy, and his difcuffion of fome cenfures, to which the opinions of this eminent man seem more or lefs liable. This view is prefented with uncommon fagacity and judgment, and the difcuffion is conducted with impartiality and candour; but the paffage is too long for our infertion. We fhall therefore confine ourselves to fome lines of the philofophical picture, and refer our readers to the work before us for an idea of the whole of this excellent compofition.

Our Eulogift obferves, that, by a long and affiduous study of mathematical fcience, M. D'ALEMBERT had contracted a habit of being little affected by any truths that were not susceptible of a rigorous proof. He faw certainty diminishing in proportion as acceffory ideas were added to the fimple ones, on which pure geometry and rational mechanics are employed; and his tafte for the other sciences was much affected by this habit: he esteemed them only in proportion to their approach to ftrict demonftration, or entire and full evidence; and he was, on this account, accufed by fome of paying little regard even to natural philofophy. Our Panegyrift finds this accufation unjuft; but he confeffes, that M. D'ALEMBERT carried too far his rigorous demands of evidence. He might have added, that there was a kind of pedantry in fubmitting every thing to ftri& calculation, because he was powerful in that line: he puts us in mind of an architect, who having heard that the face of a certain lady was expreffive of fine moral feelings, pulled out his rule and compass, and begged leave to try the matter by taking its dimenfions. In natural philofophy, as our Author confeffes, it was a proceeding unfavourable to the advancement of knowledge to treat with contempt, hypothefes, conjectures, and probable explications; fince thefe tend to multiply experiments and obfervations, to exhibit objects under different afpects, and thus often lead to important difcoveries.

In metaphyfics, morals, and political fcience, M. D'ALEMBERT has cramped genius and inveftigation with the fame fet

ters.

ters. He has reduced to a small number of general truths, or first principles, all that we can know with certainty in thefe important branches of human knowledge. Perhaps, fays our Author, he has reduced here the human mind within too narrow limits. There is, indeed, no perhaps in the cafe; and we dare to calculate his demerit, in this refpect, at a very confiderable quantum; fince he was led by his method, and would lead us, if we minded him, to partial views of evidence, and to treat with indifference, if not to reject, truths of a higher and more important order than thofe that come under the jurifdiction of algebra; and that, forfooth, under the pretext that the terms, which exprefs metaphyfical and moral ideas, are borrowed from vulgar language, and have only a vague and indeterminate meaning. What then becomes of that moral evidence, that high and fatisfactory probability, which is the only guide of man in the highest concerns of human life and moral conduct? What becomes of diftinct, and even intuitive, notions, with the deductive evidence that flows from them? They are involved, by M. D'ALEMBERT's method of philofophifing, in doubt and uncertainty: the most important queftions relative to the happiness of mankind, according to his doctrine, depend for their folution upon vague and arbitrary principles; and corrupt men will readily avail themselves of this pernicious doctrine to decide thefe queftions according to their caprice, or their personal views. M. CONDORCET fairly and candidly avows all this; and we mention it to his honour, that he has not been blinded by the partiality of friendship in this matter, though he foftens the reproach as well as he can, confiftently with truth; and comforts himfelf by fome keen and violent ftrokes at the prefumptuous dogmatifts that fall into the contrary extrème. With all our hearts. We profefs nearly an equal difpleasure with thofe who put out our candle, and those who substitute a Will with a whisp in its place.

We pass over our Panegyrift's account of the refentment that was kindled (and of the difputes that followed it) by the article Geneva, inferted in the Encyclopedie. The ftory is old and ftale; its fubject is local; yet, in the courfe of the controversy, talents were displayed, and incidental objects were exhibited, which gave rife to difcuffions more generally interefting. We fhall only obferve, that M. D'ALEMBERT did not leave this field of controverfy with flying colours. The conteft certainly was neither fair nor fuccefsful on his fide, though our Panegyrift is at no fmall pains to disguise his defeat; a thing not unufual with his fuperiors in battles of another kind. Votaire was an auxiliary in this conteft; but as, in point of candour and decency, he had no reputation to lose; and as he weakened the blows of his enemies, by throwing both them and the fpectators into fits of laughter,

laughter, the iffue of the war gave him little uneafinefs. It fell more heavily on D'ALEMBERT, and expofed him, even at home, to much contradiction and oppofition.

It was on this occafion that the (late) King of Pruffia offered him an honourable afylum at his court, and the place of prefident of his Academy; and was not offended at his refufal of thefe diftinctions, but cultivated an intimate friendship with him during the rest of his life. He had refufed, fome time before this, a propofal made by the Emprefs of Ruffia, to entrust him with the education of the Grand Duke ;-a propofal accompanied with all the flattering offers that could tempt a man, ambitious of titles, or defirous of making an ample fortune: but the objects of his ambition were tranquillity and study.

In the year 1765, he published his Differtation on the Deftruction of the Jefuits. This piece drew upon him a fwarm of adverfaries, who confirmed the merit and credit of his work by their manner of attacking it.

Befide the works of this eminent man already mentioned, he published nine volumes of memoirs and treatifes, under the title of Opufcules; in which he has folved a multitude of problems relative to aftronomy, mathematics, and natural philofophy; of which our Panegyrift gives a particular account, more especially of those which exhibit new fubjects, or new methods of inveftigation.

He publifhed allo Elements of Mufic, and rendered, at length, the fyftem of Rameau intelligible; but he did not think the mathematical theory of the fonorous body fufficient to account for the rules of that art. He was always fond of mufic; which, on the one hand, is connected with the most subtle and learned refearches of rational mechanics; while, on the other, its power over the fenfes, and the foul, exhibits, to philofophers, phenomena no lefs fingular, and ftill more inexplicable.

In the year 1772, he was chofen fecretary to the French Academy. He formed, foon after this preferment, the defign of writing the lives of all the deceafed Academicians, from 1700 to 1772; and, in the space of three years, he executed this defign, by compofing feventy eulogies.

M. D'ALEMBERT died on the 29th of October 1783. There were many amiable lines of candour, modefty, difinterestedness, and beneficence in his moral character; which are here defcribed with a diffufive detail, whofe length and uniformity (as the fe lines exhibit nothing very ftriking or extraordinary) make their impreflion more faint than it would have been, if the defcription had been reduced within a narrower compaís. M. CONDORCET concludes this moral portrait in the following manner:

"M. D'ALEMBERT pafled the laft days of his life in a numerous company, liftening to their converfation, and animating

it

it frequently by witty jokes and pleafant ftories. He was the only perfon of the company who remained calm, and could occupy his mind about other objects than himself; the only one who had ftrength of mind fufficient to give himself up to merriment and frivolous amusements."—(This is fomething like DAVID and CHARON).

[The MEMOIRS will be reviewed in another Article]

ΜΟΝΤΗ L' Y

CATALOGUE,

For MARCH, 1787.

UNION with IRELAND.

Art. 13. An Union of England and Ireland proved to be practicable and equally beneficial to each Kingdom. With fupplementary Obfervations relative to the Abfentees of Ireland, pointing out the conftitutional Means of removing Complaints, arifing from that and other Caufes of Difcontent. To which is added, a Reply to the Dean of Gloucester's Advice to the Irish, to trade with Foreign in preference to the British Colonies. By John Williams, Efq. late of Merton College, Oxon. 8vo. 1s. 6d. Kearley. 1797.

as a

HIS Writer is ftrenuous in favour of an union between Britain and Ireland, as a general propofition, without feeming to be aware of objections urged to its practicability; and he is equally zealous in diffuading the Irish from any efforts toward independence. When a man evidently intends well, it is difagreeable to check his ardour, by telling him he had better leave the publication of fentiments to thofe who poffefs more addrefs in digefting and expreffing them. Every honeft well-meaning man is an honour to his country, and cannot fail of doing public fervice by inculcating good principles in his private capacity; but before a fpeculator ventures to publish his thoughts, he ought to be well affured of having fomething to communicate fufficiently important to challenge public attention. When two acquaintances meet in the rain, it is very natural for one of them to tell the other that it is a wet day; a imple affent to fo evident a pofition is given, without flopping to controvert it, and fo the matter ends. But it is far otherwife when a man is charged eighteen pence, and required to read fifty pages, to be informed of matters that he knew before.

Art. 14. Confiderations on the Political and Commercial Circumftances of Great Britain and Ireland, as they are connected with each other; and on the most probable Means of effecting a Settlement between them; tending to promote the Interefts of both. 8vo. 2s. Debrett. 1787.

This Writer enters largely into thofe obftacles that render a legiflative union with Ireland impracticable, and thews the advantages of a commercial union on fuch terms of liberal equality as, confidering the two iflands as one extended country, may produce from every part of it the moft that its foil or fituation is capable of affording.

This can only be accomplished by a reciprocal interchange of commodities, which are either the natural growth of the feveral diftriets, or the artificial productions of induftry, brought nearly to perfection there any thing that tends to reftrain this freedom of exchange, fo far as it operates, counteracts the defign of promoting the general cultivation of local advantages.' He confirms this doctrine by a fimple illuftration. If every yard of cloth manufactured in York-fhire, fhould be taxed a fhilling as foon as it entered Lancashire, it would produce a double effect prejudicial to both countries; it would diminish the demand for cloth in Lancashire, and therefore narrow the Yorkshire market, and fo far as the remaining confumption of cloth in Lancashire became neceflary to fubfiftence, it would lay a charge upon every work carried on in that county.'

But the fond idea of equality and independence, withstands a conformity with our navigation-act, and a contribution of revenue, until fome expedient can be invented, to fecure those indispensable objects and at the fame time cheat the devil; which we never fcruple when we have a good end in view, to cover a fraud upon one whofe part is taken by nobody. Our Author, under the influence of a liberal policy,' would leave thefe grand points open to the difcretion of the Irish legiflature; in full confidence that their wifdom and generofity would operate with all the force of obligation. We honeftly confefs, we never faw caufe to juftify any reliance on political generofity, and leaft of all, to expect it from fluctuating bodies of men; if, therefore, any hazards are to be incurred, we are cordially difpofed to leave them to the fhare of the perfonage before mentioned.

COMMERCIAL TREATY with FRANCE. Art. 15. Obfervations on the Agricultural and Political Tendency of the Commercial Treaty. 8vo. Is. Debrett.

The fubject of this treaty is faid to prefent itself in a threefold point of view, its commercial, agricultural, and political tendency. This Author directs his attention to the two latter confiderations; premifing, That if the treaty with France breaks in upon any approved principle of national policy, however great may be its commercial advantages, it ought not to be adopted. That it has such a tendency is all that its opponents have to demonftrate, while those who defend it, muft, to entitle it to the public fupport, fhew that it is conducive to the interefts of commerce, without probable injury to our agriculture, and without violating any important principle of policy. He foon after extends his condemnation of the treaty to all the three points without exception.

The refult of his political examination is, that from the earliest ages there has fubfifted on the part of France toward this country and its liberties, a difpofition neither to be fubdued by force, nor conciliated by kindness:' and, that the empire fill exifts, we owe to the defeated projects of her boundless ambition, by a tenacious adherence to the found maxims of our ancestors.' Thefe maxims then dictating a perpetual deadly feud, when was it that we vainly tried thole conciliatory acts of kindnefs he reproaches the French with fpurning Our ancestors never tried them, by his own statement;