346 
to pay the penalty of public ridicule; for 
Foote is said, in Dr. Last and Johnny 
Macpherson, to have caricatured the 
pupil and the tutor. ‘This merry society 
seems to have infused an unfortunate 
comic turn into the subsequent writings 
of our philosopher. ‘ 
In 1772, Fransham returned to Nor- 
wich, and taught the Coopers, an emi- 
ment family, then resident at Srooke, 
On their removal he applied for iiis sti- 
pend, This, he observed, was the first 
fetter he had ever written. To the hos- 
pitality of Counsellor Cooper Mr. Fran- 
sham was indebted about the year 1780, 
for long-remembered notice. 
The occupations of his leisure at this 
period consisted in the composition of 
several dialogues, entitled, “ Sccratice 
‘Charte Hodierne,”’ wherein the forms 
of ancient discussion are applied to to- 
ics frequently modern. ‘These dialogues 
great of 1. Miracles; 2. Pleasure and 
Pain; 3. Industry; 4. Government; 5. 
Plato; 6. Laconic Institutions; 7, Mo- 
dern Education; 8. Singularity; and, 9. 
The Changes of Time. Some Ironical 
Panegyrics, which, by attempting hu- 
mour in antique furms, may remind the 
reader of Ben Jonson’s comedies, eke out 
the ensuing volumes of his lucubrations ; 
but, like the masks in’Terence, the 
laboured grin often fails of exciting 
jaughter. 
Fransham resided from 1784 to 1794, 
with Mr. Thomas Robinson, in St. 
Peter’s Hungate, and kept an evening 
school. ‘The friendship of Mr. Robison 
conferred on every subsequent period 
of Fraisham’s life, the comforts of easy 
converse, and the services of prudent 
attention. In 1785, the nephew of Mr. 
Robinson was attacked with pulmonary 
consumption. Fransham, who could 
observe the progressive decline, ventured 
to prognosticate the death, and guessed 
with a medical exactness which aftonish- 
ed. In this instance he again boasted 
of his divinatory power, comparing in 
conversation his damon with that of So- 
crates. This was, perhaps, practical 
irony, and not done in order to excite a 
belief of any supernatural intelligence 
froma his genius ; but rather in order to 
do away, among his thinking friends, 
any traditional remnant of superstition, 
by supplying an instance analogous to 
what had been superstitiously interpreted, 
where no such interpretation was pro- 
bable: yet the wonder of his sister, and 
ofthe unleained, was a part of the exhi- 
bition which gratified him. ’ 
Memoir of the late John Fransham. 
[May 1, 
Having borrowed of his pupil, Mr. 
Saint, Thomas Taylor’s Proclus on Eus 
clid, he made a mark against a note, 
where the author justifies a belief in 
heathen miracles. Being asked the rea- 
son of this marginal interjection, he 
noted the inconsistency of giving way 
to a belief in Pagan miracles, and ‘re- 
jecting them in the case of Christianity. 
Marvellous narration he considered as 
exoteric forms of preserving real facts; 
and said that Mr. Thomas Taylor showed 
himself initiated only into the lesser 
mysteries of Paganism, by putting upor 
such legends a construction intended for 
the yulgar alone, 
About the year 1790, Counsellor’ 
Frith, now the attorney-general of Upper 
Canada, refreshed, under Fransham’s 
care, his classical attainments. At his 
house the writer of this memoir formed 
an acquaintance with Fransham, which 
was not afterwards discontinued. 
His physiognomy was thought to re- 
semble the portraits of Erasmus; it had 
this in common with the busts of Plato— 
there were two tips to the nose; his 
countenance was sedate, and expressive 
of intellect; his complexion dusky; his 
giey hair hung loose about his shoulders, 
and gave a picturesque, or antique air 
to the bust: he woreashort green jacket, 
drab-coloured breeches, worsted stock- 
ings, and large shoes ; and seldom, if ever, 
varied his attire. He did not sacrifice te 
the Graces; he wasnot evena worshipper 
ef Nausicaa, if that may be taken for 
the name ef the nymph who presides 
over cleanliness. This cynical negligence 
was an error of Fransham’s philosophy. 
He would have had more pupils of the 
higher rank, and would thus, with less 
labour, have earned a competence, if he 
had attended duly to personal appear= 
ance. He would also have been a more 
welcome and frequent guest in the fa- 
milies of the polished citizenry. His 
conversation was interesting by its sine 
gularity, by its studiously Socratic cha- 
racter, by its carrying back the imaginae 
tion to che porticoes of the Serapeum, 
by its disdain of transient topics, and by 
its courageous antipathy to prejudice and 
superstition: vet it depended, latterly 
at least, rather on remembered, than on 
immediate resource, and drew from the 
cistern more than from the well. 
The democratic character of the 
French revolution he disliked, not its 
antichristian character. He blamed the 
philosophers for not adhering to the no- 
bility of the country, The laeahitel © 
& 
