1808.4 " 
fervent piety, and chaste and elegant language. 
As a disputant, Dr. Hurd appeared to greut 
advantage in a pamphlet entitled. ¢* Remarks 
on Mr, Hume’s Essay on the Natural History 
of Religion.” This anonymous performance 
irritated the philosopher considerably, and he 
expressed his resentment in terms that shewed 
how much he had been hurt by the castiga- 
tion. The attachment manifested by Dr. 
Hurd to Bishop Warburton often brought 
upon him very illiberal censures. About the 
time of his first connexion with that great 
prelate, he printed an * Essay on che > Deli- 
cacy 0; Kriendship,” in which Dr. Jortin and 
Dr, Leland of Dublin were treated rather 
roughly for their want of due respect to the 
author’s patron. When we recoliect the mo- 
tives which proiuced this essay, we see no 
reason to blame Dr. Hurd; his zeal for his 
friend . was commendable, t though it erhaps 
carried him rather beyond the line of pru- 
dence. When reflection operated on his 
mind, he accordingly saw reason to disapprove 
of his hastiness ; and, much to his honour, 
took great pains to suppress the obnoxious 
parhphiet, Tt would have been, perhaps, 
better if the book had been suffered to sink 
into that oblivion which the author wished ; 
as unfortunately, on his lordship’s publishing 
a large and magnificent edition of his friend’s 
werks in 1788, one of the greatest scholars 
of this age, too officiously, perhaps, and too 
much in that very spirit which-he wanted to 
expose, reprinted the Essay, with some other 
‘© Tracts by Warburton and da Warbur- 
tonian,” When Bishop Hurd’s 
Warburton’s works appeared, the world was 
greatly disappointed at not finding the long 
expected life of that celebrated character. 
This afforded fresh ground for censure, which 
was by no means spared. in consequence of 
this complaint, he printed a pretatory dis- 
course, by way of introduction to the work, 
containing a brief but elegant memoir of the 
author. “The merit of the deceased prelate 
as a writer has been variously estimated, and © 
literary men have gone into opposite ex- 
tremes. It must be acknowledged that his 
veneration for the author of the Divine Le- 
gation seduced him into excessive panegyric, 
soth of the work itself andthe author, and 
caused him to depreciate the merits and the 
labours ef all who differed from him in their 
opinions. With much ingenuity in yeni 
shere will be discovered some wanecessary ‘te 
finement, and, in this instance, the , 
of the two prelates will descend to posterity 
as perfectly congenial. As an author he cer- 
tainly possessed acute discernment, sound 
judgment, and general erudition ; but he was 
also eminently distinguished by an elegance 
of manners, for which he was not less indebted 
to nature than to his connection with the 
court. f 
[ Further particulars of Fames Paull, esq. 
the circumstances of whose death are record- 
edat page 359.J—Mr. Paull was born. at 
Perth, in Scotland, about the year 1770; he 
2 
Account of the late J. Paull; Esq. 
‘crative branch of commerce. 
edition of 
2655 
received but a common education. His father 
was a clotlier of some property, but had the 
incumbrance of a large family ; by means of 
a fortunate connection, he procured for his 
son jamesa writership in the civil, employ- 
ment of the Kast India Company, In this 
service Mr. Paull gradually rose to moderate 
wealth 5 and was employed up the country in 
Superintending some commercial concerns .of 
very greut importance. .By permission of the 
Company be begento trade for himself, and 
continued for some time to carry on a very lu- 
Upon the ar- 
rival of the Marquis Weilesley in India, he 
was employed as a delegate from some mer- 
chants to that nebleman, anda correspond- 
ence commenced between them.~ Mr. Paull 
has always confessed that upon the first ar- 
rival of the marquis he was most handsomely. 
treated, and even patronized by him. Upon 
some he ede icant of which we know 
neither the secret nor the provocation, Mr. 
Paull left India, and his first appearance as. a 
public character in England, was im the quality 
‘of a member of parliament moving an im- 
peachment against the marquis. It is well 
known that he was encouraged to this prose- 
cution by the promised support ef the oppo-\ 
sition members of toat day, who were desir- 
ous, probably, of making him an instrument 
to check the influence of the Wellesley con- 
nection, and to cast an unpopularity upen the 
British minister’s government of India. Mr. 
Paull pressed the subject upon the house 
with considerable vigour and pertinacity, 
though with litrle talent; he accumulated 
papers beyond -bounds, and never relaxed i in 
his search after matter of crimination. He 
was, in truth, a public accuser, coming for- 
ward and moving for materials of accusation. 
As Mr, Paull always voted with the opposi- 
tion, he became introduced to, and was in- 
timate with the Carleton-house party 3 he afs 
firmed, indeed, ina publication, that he re- 
ceived great promisds and’ pledges of support 
from 4 certain personage, all of which were 
either broken or shufficd off. On the other 
hand, the friends of this illastrious person 
accuse Mr. Paull of gross self-delusion, and a 
most ungentlemanly breach of contidence. 
Upon the breaking up of Mr, Pitt’s adinitis~ 
tration, and the subsequent success uf Mr. 
Fox’s party, Mr. Paull conceived that his im- 
peachment was now siiling with wind and 
tide He was disappointed; the opposition 
were content to employ him. in the time in 
which they wanted him,asan instrument, but 
they meat nothing mere. He was too in- 
significant a$ a principal 5 and a better reasony 
there was no piace to give him. ‘The coali- 
tion Ministers conceiving the india impeache 
lucot a mill-stone about their necks, and une 
willing to produce a gchict in the party 
wich would have been the consequence ify 
co itrary to the inclination ofthe Grenvilles, 
they had supported Mr. Paull’s attack upon 
Lord Wellesley, endeavoured to.silence ‘him 
by very splendid offers, In this situation 
Mr, 
