commenfurate height of all Grecian columns; paffing then to the difcutfion of the lonie capital, badly underftood by the moderns, and worse practifed. PHILO-TECHNON. al, or contraction of fhaft, widening the foffit for this purpofe, aud then the end on the pilafter will be but 2 minutes within the fides of the faid piJafter: but all that this amounts to, after changing the fymmetry of the epifiyle, is that the evil is only half removed; and that at the expence of an nnwarranted liberty taken in the foft.AM afraid your correfpondent, who of the epiftyle. It may here be faid, jadeed, and truly enough, that it is eafier to find a fault than to mend it. However, to mend it shall be attempt ed; and if Philo-echnon cannot enfure fuccefs, he may at leaft join hands with thofe that have failed before him, and fay with the poet, nil tentare no cebit. He humbly fuggefts, then, firfi, to make the contraction of column only 3 minutes on each fide, as one example of the antique has 26 from central line, and this will be 27. Then to contract the diameter of pilafter top and bottom to 27 from central line infead of 30. In this cafe, the only difcordance will be difcerned in the bates of the pilafters, their plinths wanting 3 minutes more projecture to range with the plinths of the column's bafe. To remedy this (fuppofe the attic bafe), give the upper torus of the pilafler's bafe 1 minute more projecture than it had, and the other torus 3 minutes; it then will appear to project 14 minute only more than the difference between the two torufes as they were before, which, compared with the column's bafe, will not be perceived by the most penetrating eye, by reafon that the difference of their form, the one circular the other ftrait, defeats vifual examination. And as to the upper torus in the pilatter's bafe, projecting the 1 in addition to what the column's bafe has, the fillet under the apophyge may project over one moiety of it, and the apophyge take the other. It cannot be denied but that the imperfection in this change of fymmetries is trifting and the advantage gained is not only the complete removal of the previous evil, as the epifivles will exactly range as they ought, but a great beauty alfo is procured; for the capitals of the pilaf ters will then correfpond exactly with the projectures of thofe on the columns, which in the ufual way have rather a difgufting appearance. In the next Number, fome obfervations on the fluting of the fhafts of columns, with reafons for increafing the (To be continued.) Mr. URBAN, April 9. deferibes himself an erring member of the Church of England, and ligns himelf a Jolafonian, will think me incorrigibly tenacious of my own opinion refpecting the impropriety of occafionally ufing the Liturgy in private families, if I do not fubmit to the formidable negative he has brought against me. Dr. Johnfon was unquestionably a very great man in the province of literature, and his authority on religious and moral fubjects is also highly refpectable: but, like other great men, he often affumes a dictatorial ftyle in matters of opinion, without condefcending to align his tealons. I believe he mentions, in his life of one of the Poets, that it was his cuftom to read the Church Service, or fome part of it, in his family every day, and gives it as an intance of his piety; but I do not recollect any part of Dr. Johnson's writings in which he informs us that it was his own practice, or takes upon him to be an advocate for it. This, however, may be the cafe; and his arguments, if I had perufed them, might have corrected my opinion. Your correfpondent, in foine of the queftions he propofes, may pofibly have used Dr. Johnfon's words; but as he advances nothing from the Doctor to decide them but his ipfe dixit, and nothing for himfelf but what has been already answered, or is totally irrelative to the point, I muft own I do not at prefent fee any caufe to relinquish it. There is certainly no form of public worship comparable to that of the Established Church;; and, if I have not fufficiently evinced my veneration for it in every line that I have written on the fubject, I really know not in what terms to exprefs myfelf more forcibly, although I dilapprove the use of it in private konfes, and think there are fome devotional books more appropriate, notwithstanding there are others extremely objectionable; amongst the latter I include all the weekly preparations that I have feen, which do indeed require much amendment. I have furely faid nothing to lead any one to fappole that that I think it wrong for the mafter of a family to afleinble his household, and read to them a fermon, or the Holy Scriptures; or that I would have him adopt any form of private devotions that fhould favour the principles of a Dif Senter; and I am equally at a lofs to conceive how fuch an idea could arife in the mind of your correfpondent, as I am to understand his conclufion, that the Church would be better attended for the practice of ufing the Service at home. W. B. ** For four corrections in a former letter of this correfpondent,fee p. 188, col. 2. I Mr. URBAN, April 8. CANNOT help thinking both you and I recognife an old correfpondent in Q [in the corner], p. 136. If he can awaken the "Old English Gentleman" to answer challenges already fent him in your Mifcellany, he will do more than any "modern English Gentleman" can effect. Suppofe, Mr. Urban, we touch him on the fide of an English Clergyman?" Will he be more fenfitive? 66 I hope you intend that the Worthies of the Eighteenth Century fhould ftand at the head of your prefent volume. They ough, in ftrict propriety, to have introduced the prefent Century *. I wifh any of your correlpondents would fay on what authority Epitaphs record the Ashes of their fubjects. I know the funeral fervice of our Church joins afhes to afhes" with "duit to duft;" but, as the burning of bodies was certainly done away in Rome Chriftian, and I never yet faw a shovelfull of ashes brought into a churchyard, I am at a lofs to account for the unmeaning words. Wheatley gives no farther account of the phrafe than that it was in ufe in the firft Common Prayer Book, Edward VI. I must have better authority than Mr. Hume for the ftory of Queen Elizabeth and the ring, pp. 129, 208. I cannot encourage Mr. Jones, p. 209, to expect portraits of Milo Fitz-Walter and his fons, or of the Bohuns; but of Henry Stafford duke of Buckingham, t. Edw. IV. there is one among Houbraken's illuftrious heads, from a pic ture at Magdalen college, Cambridge; and one of his fon Edward among Faber's portraits of founders of Cambridge colleges, 1714. They may cafly he bound ad libitum. P. 228. The Yelverton MSS. vol. LXXI. p. 423, are, it is believed, in Ld. Calthorpe's family by intermarriage. Ibid. John Wynne was tranflated from St. Afaph, 1714, to Bath and Wells, 1727. P. 229. Bowles's Introduction to the Natural Hiftory of Spain was tranflated into French. The application, or perhaps, as your correfpondent more rightly deems it, mifapplication of the words of Erafmus, vol. LXXI. p. 1110, are only one additional instance of the power of partyfpirit, and the difference of difcernment between a jaundiced and a clear eye. P. 279. The statement from Lithon has been found to be falfe, as it might have been forefeen it must have been. P. 294. Not Edward bit Henry Berkeley Portman, efq. of Brianfton, Dorfet, who died March 22, was eldest fon of Henry William P. efq. who died Jan. 16, 1796, whofe eftate in the Welt of England and ground-rents of Portman-fquare and fireets, valued at 13,000l. per annum. He married, 1799, Lucy Elizabeth, fecond daughter of Charles Lord Dormer. He reprefented Wells in the last parliament, and was elected for Boroughbridge 1803. Yours, &c. D. H. Mr. URBAN, March 27. NOTWITHSTANDING all the importance that has been attached to the researches of the favans belong. ing to the French Army of Egypt, fomething was left for the curiofity of their fucceffors to glean, and for their ingenuity to develope. It appears by the infeription on the pillar commonly called Pompey's, that this pillar, contrary to all former opinions, was erected in honour of Diocletian, by the then Prefect of Egypt. For this difco very the learned are indebted to Lieut. Dundas, of the Royal Engineers, and Lieut. Defade, of the Queen's German Regiment, aid-du-camp to Lord Ca van, who accomplished it with much perfeverance and difficulty. The let ters were fo much defaced by time, that it was only during the hours when the fun caff a fhadow from them that any obfervation could be made. In fome parts a few characters are totally incapable of being traced. Thele characters have been filled up by Mr. Hayter, an English clergyman at Naples, employed in deciphering the an tient tient manufcripts found at Herculaneum. Thefe filled-up characters are of courfe open to criticifi; but they accord fo well with the difcernible parts of the infeription, and render the whole fo clear and intelligible, that found judgment can find no good objection to charge against them. The moft material part, the name of the perfon to whoni the pillar is dedicated, is quite legible. The copy of the infeription, with the detail of the circumftances, have been given to Sir Robert Wilfon, for the fecond edition of his Hiftory of the Egyptian Expedition. In that publication a fac fimile of the infeription and infertions will appear. The following is a tranflation of it: TO DIOCLETIANUS AUGUSTUS, CONSECRATES THIS. The Society of Antiquaries received from Dr. Raine the following copy of the infeription on Pompey's pillar at Alexandria, as decyphered by Capt. Leake, of the artillery, Capt. Squire, of the engineers, and Mr. Hamilton, private fecretary to the Earl of Elgin : ΤΟΝ ΚΟΡΙΩΤΑΤΟΝ ΑΥΤΟΚΡΑΤΟΡΑ ΤΟΝ ΠΟΛΙΟΥΧΟΝ ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΕΙΑΣ ΔΙΟΚΛΗΤΙΑΝΟΝ ΤΟΝ CEBACTON ΠΟΜΠΗΙΟΣ ΕΠΑΡΧΟΣ ΑΙΓΥΠΤΟΥ KAI O ARMOC ErEPTETHN Dr. R. conjectures that the name of the prefect who caufed the pillar to be erected was TIOMIнIOC, for there are precifely fix characters wanting to fill up the hiatus. Dioclefian, after appealing the rebellion in Egypt, was particularly honoured in Egypt; and architecture was his peculiar paflion. The infeription could only be read for a few minutes of the day, when the fun fhone obliquely on the pillar; and a fac-fimile in melted fulphur may be expected when our troops return from Egypt. Capt. Walsh, in his journal of the campaign in Egypt, gives an engraving of the infeription, as made out, by fix weeks application, by Capt. Dundas, of the royal ftaff corps, and Licut. Defade, of the Queen's German regiment, aid-de-camp to Sir Eyre Coote and the Earl of Eigin. ΤΣΙΜΩΤΑΤΟΝ ΛΥΓΟΚΡΑΤΟΡΑ TOY II AIGTKON AAEK ANAPEIAC ΔΙΟΚΛΗΤΙΑΝΟΝ ΤΟΝ ΑΓΩΝ Mr. URBAN, B. B. April S. THOSE of your readers who may have been to view the skeleton of the Mammoth exhibited in Pall-mall, 11 feet high, 174 long, and 5 feet 8 in. wide, may find fome brief account of by which it appears that it was granithis animal in your vol. LXXII. p. 493; vorous. The thigh-bone is 3 feet 9 in. long, 18 inches in circumference. A fingle tooth, 18 inches in circumferlarge tufk, with the point much worn, ence, 4lb. 10 oz. weight, part of a are (hewn at the fame place; together with a plafter caft of bones found in a cave in Virginia, evidently belonging to an animal of the clawed kind. Yours, &c. Mr. URBAN, NATURALIST. April 4. IT has been my fingular misfortune more than once to be reprefented in ferver; and I have been reduced to the your pages as a moft fuperficial ob difagreeable neceifity of either fuffering fuch an imputation to reft on me, or elfe to fight my way through oppofing fhadows; for, luckily, when viewed with attention, they are nothing more. Corrector tells me, p. 238, that I am pointed out by act of Parliament, and "not aware that a mode is already daily practifed in and about London, to where elfe, which fuperfedes the nemy knowledge, and, I conclude, every ceflity of any new inftitution for that purpose." Now this affertion reads extreinely well; but, Mr. Urban, as I am confident the gentleman, Corrector, is not personally acquainted with me, how can he alledge to confidently that I am ignorant of my fubject? To prove that he is either ignorant of what daily pales in London, or has for. gouen what he muji haye read, fhall be the the unpleafant tafk to which he has driven me. I am heartily forry that any man fhould wish to clofe the doors of benevolence, becaufe he thinks it anneceflary that he should pafs through them; if Corrector has his hobby, let him fubfcribe to it and welcome. When guineas are an incumbrance to me I will apply to him as an almoner; till then they are at my own difpofal, and my guardian genius be their guide. and conveys him back to his first fituation; he is found again and again conveyed across the ftreet, and at feven in the morning found dead. Corrector, this was not commanded by the last; but it fuffers it. Corrector, has Cultom never outraged Humanity before? Is this a folitary intance of accidents happening during the conveyance of paupers? If Law and Cufiom are not to be arraigned for this horrid conflict of paffions, your correfpondent may refi the blame on what or whom he will. I totally exculpate the overleers, churchwardens, and veftries of both parishes ; they have publikly removed all imputation from themfelves. If fuch an eftablishment as I have recommended exifted in every parish, the overfeers' first fep fhould be to leave Law and Custom in the back ground, and fend the fuffering fick pauper to the Legal ceremonies ought to be difpenfed with when a foul hangs quivering between the body and the world of fpirits. If a miferable wretch is found perishing in the streets, he fhould be taken to a comfortable beds not to the Manfion-houfe. Corrector might have done me the juftice to fuppofe I was not quite fo ignorant as to imagine any of the poor laws authorized the errors I wish to alleviate; but perhaps this gentleman is prepared to fay no untoward, not to fay cruel, circumftances arife during their execution; indeed, he has called upon me to acknowledge that Law and Cuftom peak a very different language fromthat which I have imputed to them." Whatever emanates from the Legiflature of the land, I firmly believe to be well intended: but human nature is liable to error collectively as well as individually; and what thinking mau can do otherwife than perceive that many horrid evils attend each parish providing for its own poor? Has Corrector never heard of the contest between two parithes on a cold night of the last winter, when two careful watchmen, auxious to keep the victim of mifery from their own diftrict, forbad him to die on either Gide of a ftreet? How fay you, Corrector, would it not have been better that thofe moft humane guardians of the night should have had one of thofe propofed receptacles, to which they. might have conveyed the expiring Negro, where parish charges would be fuperfeded, and no expences occur but thofe the fubfcribers would difcharge with pleasure? A Negro was found dying in a fireet; he faid fo: the watchman exclaims, "You fhall not die in my parish," and conveys him across the fireet, where he is dropped in another parith; the watchman of that district makes the fame affertion, I fuppofe that either Law or Custom demand, that previous to the removal of a pauper he shall be examined before a magifirate. Now I infift that a fick pauper is not a proper object for exa nination (except in one of my propofed afylums by a phytician). To prove this, I hall quote two inftancos; one from the Gentleman's Magazine for Jan. 1803, p. 91. "Mr. William Canner, the junior city marshal, was engaged in purtance of the duties of his office in procuring pafles for fome pampers. Among the indigent perfons who ap plied, one of them was infected with fo loathfome a complaint that it was neceflary to put him out of the room in which the Lord Mayor fat. Mr. Cannerincautioully remained near this man, and ⚫me time afterwards remarked that he could not get the fell out of his nofe. The infection had feized him and in a very fhort period produced his death." Why did this man apply for a pafs? I fuppofe because he knew Law and Cestom nrade it neceffary; but as Corrector may fay this is not a cafe quite in point, owing to the pauper himfelf making the application, I hall recommend the fecond inftance from the Morning Chronicle of Satur day, April 2, 1803, to his ferious confideration, begging him to reflect that oppofition to fuch a plan as that I propofe may potlibly caufe (by preventing its adoption) many deaths eventually. Every feeling mind muft lament that the parish of St. Mildred did not furnith one of my afylums where the victim might have died in quiet, if pafi recovery. " Manfion houfe. Yefterday, an unfortunate pauper died foom after he had been conveyed for examination. It ap peared that he had been noticed by churchwarden of St. Mildred's £ dał at a door in Grocers' hall court in a wretened fituation. The humanity of the gentleman occafioned him to fend the ftreet-keeper to afford him every relief, and to convey him to his parish, previous to which he was taken to the Manfion houfe, where he expired," &c. How pitiful and futile are Corrector's words, when he fays the removal of paupers is always fufpended till after their recovery. Thus, Mr Urban, ftand the Law and the Cuitom." Let me inform this gentleman, although I am neither phyfician nor furgeon, that fymptoms may deceive the most humane magifirate, the mofi fkilful phyfician, and the beft of furgeons, in a deceafed pauper. They may pronounce he is fit for removal: yet that motion which is the unavoidable confequence of a long journey deranges many a well fed healthy perfon; what may not its effects be on a half starved pauper? But I have done; my confcience is difcharged by propofing a remedy for defects in Laws and Cuftoms; and here the conteft on this fubject ends. J. M. will accept my thanks for his explanation of indulgences, and will excufe my faying, that if punifhinents, however trivial, are held over the guilty head, and thofe are remitted for gain, either to build churches or for worfe purposes, the bishop who grants indulgences has even a worfe chance for Heaven than the Proteftant heretick of the English church. Yours, &c. J. P. MALCOLM. Mr. URBAN, April 5. LETTER intended for Decem returned, the accounts are not fo complete as in those which preceded them. I would wish to illuftrate my obfervations in the county of Wilts. Of Boulton I find no mention in the population accounts, and therefore conclude it must be fome hamlet or cha pelry within the county, and compre hended in its parish of fome other name. This is one of the supplemen tary returns. Of Cricklade, one of the places fiated to have made no return, it seems to be meant of Cricklade St. Mary. I know not whether it is within the limits of the borough; yet, being conti guous and having probably no burial ground, and is alfo ferved by the incumbent or minifter of Cricklade St. Sampfon, it is more than probable that they may have only one regifter to comprehend both parishes. Ditchridge, in the hundred of Chippenhain, may be under the fame predicament; and, if my recollection or memory does not mislead me, I have fome idea of having heard as much. Of Wellow-weft, at the other extremity of the county, I can be much more pofitive. It is true it is fituate within the county of Wilts; but it is alfo true that it is in the parifh of Wellow-Eaft, in Thorngate hundred, and in Andover divifion, in Hants. There can be no doubt, there fore, that both the population and regifters will be found in that return. They neither have, nor is there any tradition that they ever had, any chapel of their own, or any regifier. I ftate thefe facts to thew that the returns, fuppofed to be omitted, are de Aber Magazine of last year, and monfirably much fewer than 280, from referred to at the commencement of my laft of Feb. 4 (fee p. 212), as it has never appeared, muft, in ali probability, have mifcarried. As your readers may feel difappointed, I lofe no time to tranfinit you the fubftance of that, which was intended to introduce the other; but as it mufi now be contented with a fubfequent fituation, a few alterations have been neceflarily made. Previous to my laft, excepting a general abftract of the population, none of your correfpondents feem to have nouced the nature of the returns. To an inquifitive mind they certainly af ford much ground of remark. Though the mode of flating the amount of the population is entitled to every commendation, it is perhaps to be regretted, that in the parishes ftated as not duly which, as Mr. Rickman has obferved, "returns could not be procured. Thefe are almoft without exception CHAPELRIES, of whofe regifters many are fuppofed to be included in the returns made from the registers of their respec tive mother churches." The above inflances, as to fome of the places defi cient in returns, are proofs of the ebfervation; and in other counties and other places, the deficiency probably may for the most part be accounted for in the fame way, fo as in reality to lead one almoft to conclude, that fearce any deficiences are to be fuppofed. Indeed there is, in my mind, another very ef fential remark to be made in this refpećt: that the parochial clergy, of all people, would be leaft likely to neglect a return of the fate of their registers to |