knowledged it to be a fault. Milton perhaps might think it fufficient to teach his family to pray for themfelves; every one as he or she should know the plague of bis or her own heart. Milton had doubtlefs known, by experience, how incongruous it was to truft his own prayers to the mouth of another man; and he might think it equally improper in him to dictate to the individuals of his family prayers unfuitable, for aught he could know without auricular confeffion, to their feveral cafes.

All this however is mere fpeculation on one fide and the other. We learn from a tale of Richardfon's, that one of his family at least attended public wor

ship;

fhip; and more of them might, for any thing the Doctor knows to the contrary. The Doctor next attacks Milton's political character.

66

"His political notions were those of an acrimonious and furly republican." When an honeft man has occafion to characterise his enemy, particularly in matters of opinion, he fhould keep a ftrict watch over himself, that his prejudices do not tranfport him to imputations which are either falfe, or may be retorted upon himself.

The world would have given Dr. Johnfon credit for his inveterate hatred of republican notions, without his qualifying them with the epithets of acrimonious and furly, as exhibited by Milton,

whofe

whofe defenders might, with equal juftice at least, call him an acrimonious and furly Royalift.

But was Dr. Johnfon's quarrel with Milton's notions merely that they were republican, that is to fay, notions adverse to kingly government? Hath he always revered kings as such, kings de facto, or kings only fo and fo qualified?

We confefs ourselves to be of that class of men who are willing to receive inftruction from all quarters; and the news-paper of the day being juft brought in, we learn, from an extract in it from Dr. Johnson's Life of Smith, that Gilbert Walmsley was a Whig with all the virulence and malevolence of his party, and

that the Doctor was of different notions

and opinions*.

But we are well informed, that Mr. Walmfley was no republican, but strongly attached in principle to the fucceffion of the House of Hanover. If for this attachment he was, in Dr. Johnfon's esteem, a virulent and malevolent Whig, we should be glad to know what precife ly are thofe notions and opinions wherein he differed from his friend Walmsley Perhaps at the bottom the grudge is no more than that neither Milton nor Walmfley would allow Dr. Johnfon to chufe a King for them.

i

"It is not known," fays the Doctor, "that Milton gave any better reason

* St. James's Chronicle, July 31, 1779.

" [for

"[for his republican notions] than that a “ popular government was the most frugal; for that the trappings of a monarchy “would set up an ordinary Common"wealth at v

- In the Είκων Βασιλική King Charles fays, or is made to fay," that Kings * are the greatest patrons of law, justice, " order, and religion, on earth."

To this Milton replies, "What patrons they be God in fcripture oft enough hath expreft; and the earth itself hath too long groaned under the burden of their injuftice, diforder, and “irreligion +."

A plain man would think this a better reafon, if true, for a republican govern

*Life, p. 143..

Iconoclaftes, chap. xxviii.

I 2

ment,