(20) HISTORV of the SOCIEl'T. 



Account of 'Pj^j. j^q£^ remarkable feature of Mr Tytler's charadler was 



an ardour and atflivity of mind, prompted always by a ftrong 

 fenfe of reditude and honour. He felt witli equal warmth the 

 love of virtue .ind the hatred of vice ; he was not apt to dif- 

 guife either feeling, nor to compromife, as fome men more com- 

 plying witli the world might have done, with the fafliion of the 

 time, or the difpofition of thofe around him. He feldom wa- 

 ved an argument on any topic of hiftory, of politics or litera- 

 ture ; he never retreated from one on any fubjedl that touched 

 thofe more important points on which he had formed a decided 

 opinion. Decided opinions it was his turn to form ; and he ex- 

 preflTed them with a warmth equal to that with which he felt 

 them. He took ftrong common-fenfe views of objedls, not from 

 want of acutenefs to perceive lefs palpable relations, but from 

 that warm and ardent caft of mind to which fuch views are 

 more congenial than the fubtleties of abftradl or metaphyfical 

 difquifition. 



Nor was it in opinion or argument only that this warmth 

 and ardour of mind were confpicuous. They prompted him 

 equally in a(5lion and condui5l. His afledlion to his family, his 

 attachment to his friends and companions, his compaflion for 

 the unfortunate, were alike warm and adlive. He was in fen- 

 timent alfo what Johnson (who felt it ftrongly in himfelf, and 

 mentions it as the encomium of one of his friends) calls a good 

 hater ; but his hatred or refentment went no further than opi- 

 nion or words, his better affedlions only rofe into adtion. In 

 his opinions, or in his expreffion of them, there was fometimes 

 a vehemence, an appearance of acrimony, which his friends 

 might regret, which fti-angers might cenfure ; but he had no- 

 afperity in his mind to influence his adual condudl in life. He 

 indulged oppofition, not enmity ; and the world was juft to him 

 in return ; he had opponents, but I fincerely believe not a fni- 

 gle enemy. His contefts were on opinions, not on things ; 

 his difputes were hiftorical and literary. In converfation, he 



carried 



