154 
the generallity of readers, and unavoid- 
ably prevent the name of their writer from 
ring to that degree of fame to which it 
is naturally mtitled. 
~ The firit of Mr, Robertfon’s, publica- 
tions, in order of time, is the fermon in-_ 
titled The Subverjion of Ancient Kingdoms 
_Confidered. twas publifhed in 1761, and 
it had been preached at St. John’s, Weift- 
poinfter, on the 13th of February of the 
- fame year, the day appointed for a General 
Faft. This fermon, which may be con- 
fidered as the firft {pecimen of his abili- 
ties, met with a remarkably good recep- 
tion from the public. It already evinced 
thofe qualifications which were fo confpi- 
cuous in his fubfequent performances— 
purity of language, perfpicuity of ftyle, 
and accuracy of compofition. 
In the year of 1764, we find Mr. Ro- 
bertfon engaged as a wrifer in the Critical 
Review ; in which occupation he conti- 
nued till the year 1785. Itis natural to’ 
fuppofe that, being concerned in this re- 
{pectable periodical work during the 
courfe of twenty-one years, he muft have 
written an amazing number of critical dif- 
quifitions of feveral kinds; and, accord- 
ingly, we find he was the author of above 
two thoufand fix hundred and_ twenty 
theological, claffical, and philological ar- 
ticles; many of them eminently diftin- 
guifhed for depth of learning, for folidity 
of judgment, or delicacy of tafte. If the, 
boundaries of this Biographical Notice: 
would permit us_to expatiate on fome of 
his particular performances, in the capa- 
city of a reviewer, we fhould fele& his 
matterly pieces of criticifm on fome of Dr. 
johnion’s writings, from which it would 
be feen how short, in his opinion, that il- 
duftrious philologer fell of the fovereign 
degree of accurate compofition which 
he was generally thought to have reached, 
We cannot, however, help defcending 
into fome details with refpeét to a critical 
article, of the’ fame kind, concerning the | 
late Dr. Blair. That eminent writer had — 
publifhed his celebrated Ledfures on Khe- 
toric and Belles-Letires, and, as it is known, 
he had analyfed in them forse of the ccm- 
pofitions of Atterbury, Swift, and Addi- 
fon. Whilft Mr. Robertfon did the re- 
{peétable author the juftice which was due 
to him, and candidly acknowledged that 
bis obfervations sn thofe inelegant and un- 
grammaltical expreffions would be ufeful 
to every one who wifbed towrite with pra- 
priety, he thought himfelf authorized to 
take, ashe faid, the liberty to remark many 
analogous inaccuracies in this very work ; 
which inaccuracies, if properly noticed, 
Memairs of the late Rev. 
Mr. Fofeph Robertfon. [March a; 
might likewife prove a caution ‘to fome 
other fubfequent writer. Thisiremark<- 
able piece of criticifm is found in the Re- 
view for October 1783, and it evinces, 
from the claffification, and from the parti- 
culars, that the author was equal to his 
tafk, and completely mafter of his fubject. 
Few perfons there were, indeed, who could 
detect a fignal deficiency of ftyle in Blair’s 
writings ; and fewer {till who could find 
him chargeable with vulgar and colloquial 
language, aukward phrafes, redundancies, 
unlogical comparatives, inconfiftent and con- 
tradiétory metaphors, and numberlefs other, 
faults and improprieties. am 
If any thing could make us regret that 
the ingenious fubject of this Memoir never 
projected a large and methodical work 
in fome of the {cientific departments which 
were moft familiar to him, it would cer 
tainly be the confideration that he might 
have favoured the public with a capital 
publication in philology; for the execu-, 
tion of which little more was required, © 
than to digeft in a proper order, and con- 
vert into one complete fyftem, the ideas 
which he had {cattered through the feveral 
Numbers of the Review, and through his 
fubfequent performances, relative to the 
matter: he might have publitheda Trea- 
‘4 
tife on the Art of Writing, and would, 
in fome meafure, haye filled a great def- 
deratum in the literature of the age. In | 
many converfations on the fubjeét, the 
prefent writer endeavoured to make him ° 
fenfible of the importance’ of fuch a work, 
and of his competency to undertake it. 
Whatever may be faid on the vivalfhip be-- 
tween England and France, in the-fciences 
and the arts, during the courfe of the 18th 
century, and howfoever the fcale may inci- 
dentally have turned on either fide, it is 
inconteftible that we have poffeffed, - 
throughout this period, a decided fuperio-, 
rity over our rivals, in the philofophy of 
the human mind, and in the theory of 
language. ‘The French were ftill amuf- 
ing themfelves with the chimeftas of Des 
Cartes, and the vifions of Maliebranche, 
when Locke had already difleéted the hu- 
man underftanding, and prepared that 
amazing revolution which was fucceffively 
witnefled in the fcience of man and of 
fociety: in the fubfequent generation, 
Du Marfais, Duclos, Beauzée, who fo 
fuccefsfully elicited the philofophy of 
grammar, fell, in the opinion of the 
French themfelves, infinitely fhort ofthe 
immortal author of Hermes, in compre- 
henfivenefs of views, and in beauty of me- 
thed ; and at the prefent day, they have 
nothing to eppofe te the claffical 
I Fo 
