haps is not unhappy in being out of the reach of the present times; but whether he is, even in the prefent times, out of the reach of evil tongues, let the readers of the new narrative candidly judge. Impudence is an attribute with which our Biographer hath qualified Milton more than once; and it feems to have fhocked the modefty of Dr. Johnson that a blemish of that kind fhould deform the character of his hero. Parcius ifta, good Doctor! Novimus et qui te-But Churchill and Kenrick are no more, and the Doctor may easily annihilate their authority by writing new narratives of what they were. There is however, it feems, one of Milton's profe-tracts, in which the Doc tor tor finds no impudence; it is his treatife of True Religion, berefy, fchifm, toleration, and the best means to prevent the growth of popery. "This little tract," fays he, "is mo"deftly written, with refpectful mention "of the Church of England and the "thirty-nine articles." True, fo far as the Church of England declares against Popery. But, unhappily for this respect, Milton brings thefe declarations in reproof of the church's practice; and moft ably confutes the pretence of the Church of England, "that the only enjoins things in"different." And even this he calls per fecution. • If H 4 "If it be asked," fays Milton, "how "far it fhould be tolerated? I answer, doubtless equally, as being all Protef"tants; that is, on all occafions to give "account of their faith, either by ar guing, preaching in their feveral af"femblies, public writing, and the free"dom of printing." If fuch toleration fhould have its free course, unrestrained by canons, fubfcriptions, and uniformity-acts, unallured by temporal emoluments, and unterrified by temporal cenfures, there must of course be an end of the civil Eftablishment of the Church of England; which is here as effectually condemned, as it is in thofe former tracts of the author's in which he is fo fevere on prelatical ufurpations. pations. The only difference is, that there, in the Doctor's account, he is impudent, and here he is modeft. "Fortune," fays the Doctor, "ap66 pears not to have had much of Milton's 66 care How is this character fup ported by the inftances that follow, confiftently with the account above given, that Milton," having tafted the honey of public employment, would not return "to hunger and philofophy ?" "There is yet no reason to believe "that he was ever reduced to indi"gence t;" and we will add, "nor to "the prospect of it;" for what the Doctor fays, that he was "given up to *Milton's Life, p. 137. poverty poverty and hopelefs indignation," upon his foliciting the repayment of his loan to the parliament in vain, only ferves to fhew how dextroufly the Doctor can fill up the chafms of authentic hiftory by the fertility of his imagination. And that his wants being few, were com"petently fupplied," is an argument that he could as eafily return to his philofophy as part with his affluence. From this character of Milton the Doctor would fhrink if he could, and put down the merit of it among the topics of falsehood; but his draw-backs upon it only end in furmifes palpably inconfiftent with that unabated conftancy of mind in Milton, which even the new narrative could not difguife; an obfer |