C H A 
are three communications from Briftol, with the fame 
fignature D. B. one of them intituled “ Obfervations upon 
Saxon Heraldry, with drawings of Saxon Achievements;” 
and, in the fubfequent months of 1769 and 1770, there 
are leveral other pieces, which are undoubtedly of his 
compofition. In April 1770 he left Briftol, difgufted with 
his profeflion, and irreconcileable to the line of life in 
which he was placed; and coming to London, in hopes 
of advancing his fortune by his pen, he funk at once from 
the fublimity of his views to an abfolute dependence on 
the patronage of bookfeilers. Things however, leem foon 
to have brightened up a little with him'; for. May 14, 
he writes to his mother, in high fpirits, upon the change 
in his fituation, with the following farcaftic reflection 
upon his former patrons at Briftol. “ As to thofe, they 
rate literary lumber fo low, that an author in their efti- 
mation mult be poor indeed: but here matters are other- 
wile. Had Rowley been a Londoner inltead of a Briftow- 
yan, I could have lived by copying his works.” In a 
letter to his filler, May 30, he informs her that he is to be 
employed in writing a voluminous “ Hiftory of London,” 
to appear the beginning of next winter. Meanwhile, he 
had written fomething in praife of alderman Beckford, 
then lord mayor, which had procured him the honour of 
being prefented to his lordihip ; and, in the letter juft 
mentioned, he gives the following account of his recep¬ 
tion, with certain obfervations upon political writing. 
“ The lord mayor received me as politely as a citizen 
could: but the devil of the matter is, there is no money to 
be got on this fide of the queltion. However, he is a poor 
author who cannot write on both fides. Eflays on the 
patriotic fide will fetch no more than what the copy is 
fold for. As the patriots themfelves are fearching for 
places, they have no gratuity to lpare. On the other 
hand, unpopular elfays will not even be accepted, and 
you miift pay to have them printed; but then you fel- 
dom lofe by it, as courtiers are fo fenfible of their defi¬ 
ciency in merit, that they generoufly reward all who 
know how to daub them with the appearance of it.” He 
continued to write incelfantly in various periodical pub¬ 
lications ; yet all thele exertions of his genius brought 
in fo little profit, that he was foon reduced to the ex- 
tremeft indigence; lo that at laft, opprefled with pover¬ 
ty, and all'o with difeafe, he put an end to his exiftence 
in a fit of defpair, Augult, 1770, by a dofe of poifon. 
This unfortunate perfon, though certainly a moft extra¬ 
ordinary genius, feems yet to have been a moft ungra¬ 
cious charafter. He was violent and impetuous to a 
ftrange degree- From the firlt of the above-cited letters 
to his After, he appears to have had a portion of ill-hu¬ 
mour and fpleen more than enough for a lad of feven- 
teen; and the editor of his Mifceilanies records, “ that 
he pofleffed all the vices and irregularities of youth, and 
that his profligacy was at leaft as confpicuous as his abi¬ 
lities.” 
In 1777 were publilhed, in one volume 8vo, “ Poems, 
fuppofed to have been written at Briftol, by Thomas 
Rowley and others, in the fifteenth century : the greateft 
part now firft publilhed from the moft authentic copies, 
with an engraved fpecimen of one of the manufcripts. To 
which are added, a preface, an introductory account of 
the feveral pieces, and a gloflary.” And, in 1778, were 
publilhed, in one volume 8vo, “ Mifceilanies in profe and 
verfe, by Thomas Chatterton, the fuppofed author of the 
poems publilhed under the names of Rowley, &c.” Con¬ 
cerning the authenticity of the poems under the name 
of Rowley, that is, whether they were really written by 
a perfon of that name, or are only, what they are now 
generally believed to be, the forgeries of Chatterton, let 
us advert to the editors of the above works. The pre¬ 
facer of Rowley’s poems gives this account of them, in 
the words of Mr. George Catcot ot Briftol, to whom, he 
fays, the public is indebted for them. “ The firft dil- 
covery of certain manufcripts having been depofited in 
Redclift church, about three centuries ago, was made in 
Vol. IV. No. 183. 
C H A 129 
the year 1768, at the time of opening the new bridge at 
Briftol; and was owing to a publication in Farley’s Week¬ 
ly Journal, Oftober 1, containing, ‘ An Account of the 
Ceremonies obferved at the opening of the old Bridge, 1 ’ 
taken, as it was faid, from a very ancient manufcript. 
This excited the curicfity of fome perfons to enquire af¬ 
ter the original. The printer, Mr. Farley, could give 
no account of it, or of the perfon who brought the copy; 
but, after much enquiry, it was difcovered that this per¬ 
fon was a youth between fifteen and fixteen years of age, 
whole name was Thomas Chatterton, and whofe family 
had been fextons of Redclift church for near 150 years. 
His father, who was now dead, had alfo been malter of 
the free-fchool in Pile-ftreet. The young man was at 
firft very unwilling to dilcover from whence he had the 
original; but, after many promifes made to him, was at 
laft prevailed on to acknowledge that he had received 
this, together with many other manufcripts, from his fa¬ 
ther, who had found them in a large chelt, in Redclift 
church.” It is added, that foon after this, Mr. Catcot 
commenced an acquaintance with Chatterton, and partly 
as prefents, partly as purchafes, procured from him co¬ 
pies of many of his manufcripts in profe and verle: as 
other copies were difpofed of in like manner to others. 
It is concluded, however, that whatever may have been 
Chatterton’s part in this very extraordinary tranfaftion, 
whether he was the author, or only (as he conftantly af- 
ferted) the copier of all thefe productions, he appears to 
have kept the fecret entirely to himfelf, and not to have 
put it into any one’s power to bear certain teftimony 
either of his fraud or of his veracity. 
This affair, however, has fince become a fubjeCt of much 
controverfy. The poems in queftion, publilhed in 1777, 
were republilhed in 1778, with an “ Appendix, con¬ 
taining 1'ome obfervations upon their language; tending 
to prove that they were written, not by any ancient au¬ 
thor, but entirely by Chatterton.” Mr. Wartcn, in the 
third volume of his Hiftory of Englilh Poetry, has el- 
poufed the fame fide of the queftion. Mr. Walpole alfts 
obliged the learned world with a letter on Chatterton, 
from his prefs at Strawberry-bill. On the other hand 
has appeared, “ Obfervations upon thefe Poems, in which 
their authenticity is alcertained, by Jacob Bryant, efq. 
1781;” 2 vols. 8vo. and another edition of the poems, 
with a comment, in which their antiquity is confiuered 
and defended, by Jeremiah Miiles, D. D dean of Exeter, 
1782, 410. Then again, in anfwer to thefe two works, 
three pamphlets came out immediately after: 1. Cur- 
lory Oblervations on the Poems, and Remarks on the 
Commentaries of Mr. Bryant and Dr. Miiles ; with a fa- 
lutary Propofal addrefled to the Friends of thofe Gentle¬ 
men. 2. An Archaeological Epiftle to dean Miiles, edi¬ 
tor of a fuperb edition of Rowley’s Poems, &c. 3. An 
Enquiry into the Authenticity of the Poems attributed to 
Thomas Rowley, in which the arguments of the dean of 
Exeter and Mr. Bryant are examined, by Thomas War- 
ton ; and other pieces in the public prints ; all prepara¬ 
tory to the complete fettlement of the bufinefs, in “ A 
Vindication of the Appendix to the Poems called Row¬ 
ley’s, in reply to the anfwers. of the dean of Exeter, Jacob 
Bryant, efq. and a third anonymous writer; with fome 
further oblervations upon thofe poems, and an examina¬ 
tion of the evidence which has been produced in fupport 
of their authenticity. By Thomas Tyrwhitt, 1782,” 8vo. 
Upon the wdiole, the war between Bentley and Boyle about 
Phalaris, though waged with a far moreholtile lpirit, yet 
does not feem to have produced greater commotions and 
difturbances in its day, than the late conteft about Row- 
ley and Chatterton ; which feems finally decided that he 
was himfelf the author of all thofe poems, and the fuc- 
cefsful imitator of the ancient ftyle of poefy. 
CHATS'WORTH, the fuperb feat of the noble fa¬ 
mily of Devonlhire. See the article Bakewxll, vol. ii. 
CHATS'WORTH, a town of United America, in the 
ftate of Virginia ; four miles fouth»eaft of Richmond. 
LI CHATIFGA, 
