logistic forms. He answered the arguments of the impugners in common language, and the proctor reduced his replies into syllogism, the candidate thus displaying a degree of ignorance of what was then miscalled the art of reasoning, which must of itself have called forth the mark of incapacity which was attached to his degree. Yet such was the strength of Swift's memory, that, after thirty or forty years, he could repeat to Sheridan the propositions, as they were attacked and defended, in their proper scholastic technicality.

The disgraceful note with which his degree had been granted, probably added to Swift's negligence, and gave edge to his satirical propensities. Between the periods of 14th November 1685, and 8th October 1687, he incurred no less than seventy penalties for non-attendance at chapel, for neglecting lectures, for being absent from the evening roll-call, and for town-haunting, which is the academical phrase for absence from college without license. At length these irregularities called forth a more solemn censure, for, on 18th March 1686-7, with his cousin, Thomas Swift, his chum, Mr Warren, and four others, he incurred the disgrace of a public admonition for notorious neglect of duties. His second public punishment was of a nature yet more degrading. On 20th November 1688, Swift, the future oracle of Ireland, was, by a sentence of the vice-provost, and senior fellows of the university, convicted

of insolent conduct towards the junior dean (Owen Lloyd), and of exciting dissension within the walls of the college. He shared with two companions the suspension of his academical degree, and two of the delinquents, Swift being one, further were sentenced to crave public pardon of the junior dean.* The bitterness of spirit

* Such is the account of this matter inferred by Dr Barrett from the college records; and his aquaintance with the mode of keeping them, and the purposes for which they are made up, entitle his judgment to the greatest weight. His opinion is also confirmed by that of Mr Theophilus Swift, who expresses his conviction, that, in consequence of his share in the acade mical satires upon the Fellows of Trinity College, Swift was in danger of losing the testimonium of his degree, without which he could not have been admitted ad eundem at Oxford. And he supposes that, mortified at the recollection of the humiliating conditions imposed as his terms of pardon, his great kinsman was not unwilling that the particulars of the case should be sunk in a general report, that he had been refused his degree for insufficiency,-a mode of stating the fact, which was likely to throw more discredit on the discernment of the heads of the university, than on his own acknowledged talents. Yet an ingenious correspondent has alleged the following reasons, to prove that this degrading ceremony never was submitted to.

"An ingenious friend to whom I lent Dr Barrett's Essay on the Early Part of the Life of Swift, returned it to me with the following observations thereon. I present them for your consideration.

"From Dr Barrett's Life of Swift, it appears that he graduated above a year before the usual time, which in Trinity College, Dublin, is four years and a half, therefore speciali gratia must mean that he got it by interest or merit; or, if it

with which Swift submitted to this despotic infliction, if indeed he obeyed it, for of this there is no absolute proof, may be more easily conceived than described. The sense of his resentment shows itself in the dislike which he exhibits to his Alma Mater, the Trinity College of Dublin, and the satirical severity with which he persecutes Dr Owen Lloyd, the junior dean, before whom he had been ordained to make this unworthy prostration *.

This unpleasant circumstance of the Dean's academical life, has become gradually confound

was suspended after, as Dr B. suggests, it might have been re stored to him on intercession of friends. But there appears little to countenance the supposition that he was ordered to beg pardon on his knees, and nothing to warrant the asser. tion that he submitted to such an indignity, as there is no trace of his remaining in college after the revolution, which is the date Dr B. assigns for that censure. The dates are very confused and contradictory as to the two Swifts; and, while he allows Thomas Swift to have had a scholarship, and suspects that Jonathan had not, he forgets that very few ever remain in Trinity College, Dublin, after graduating, unless they enjoy scholarships; and that Jonathan Swift had one, appears farther from his remaining in Commons, and being, according to Dr B., suspended from Commons, by way of punishment, after graduating, which could be no punishment at all to him, if his Commons were not at the charge of the university."

* See Vol. IV. p. 155. in which Dr Lloyd is said to have been bribed by a Deanery to take a cast-mistress off the hands of Lord Wharton.

ed with the yet more severe penalty of expulsion, inflicted upon John Jones, one of his companions. Mr Richardson has recorded a tradition, that Swift was expelled from college for writing a Tripos, as it is called, or satirical oration, uttered by him as Terræ Filius*. The research of the learned Dr Barrett has ascertained, that such a tripos was actually delivered, 11th July 1688. He had published its contents, which are preserved in the Lanesborough MS. and he has proved, from the college records, that Jones, the Terræ Filius of the period, was actually deprived of his degree, for the false and scandalous reflections contained in that satire, though the sentence was afterwards mitigated into a temporary suspension of his degree and academical rights. But Jones,

Vol. VI. page 171. Richardson to Lady Bradshaigh, April 22, 1752.-" I am told my Lord [Orrery] is mistaken in some of his facts; for instance, in that wherein he asserts, that Swift's learning was a late acquirement. I am very well warranted by the son of an eminent divine, a prelate, who was for three years what is called his chum, in the following account of that fact. Dr Swift made as great a progress in his learning at the University of Dublin in his youth, as any of his contemporaries; but was so very ill-natured and troublesome, that he was made Terræ-Filius, on purpose to have a pretence to expel him. He raked up all the scandal against the heads of that university, that a severe inquirer, and a still severer temper, could get together into his harangue. He was expelled in consequence of his abuse; and having his discessit, afterwards got admitted at Oxford to his degree."

not Swift, was the Terræ-Filius so degraded. The inaccuracy of Richardson's informer may be easily pardoned: he was recollecting the events of a remote period, when Swift and Jones, friends and associates, both experienced punishment for petulant satire and insubordination. It is not, therefore, wonderful, that he confounded the circumstances attending their delinquencies, and attributed the more weighty offence, an offence, too, of which Swift was likely to have been guilty, and the more severe punishment, to him who afterwards became the object of general attention. It is probable, likewise, that the tripos may have been heightened by the satirical strokes of Swift; though I cannot think it likely that he was the principal author of the work, for which Jones sustained the sentence of expulsion, since, with all his grossness, it exhibits little of his humour.

In 1688, the war broke out in Ireland; and Swift, then in his twenty-first year, without money, and if not without learning, at least without the reputation of possessing it, with the stains of turbulence and insubordination attached to his character, and without a single friend to protect, receive, or maintain him, left the College of Dublin. Guided, it may be supposed, more by affection than hope, he bent his course to England, and travelled on foot to his mother's residence, who was then in Leicestershire. Herself in a dependent and precarious situation, Mrs Swift could only recom