no such asylum to be found. We learn, in fact, from the depositions accompanying his lately discovered will, that at the era of the Restoration, and until he married his third and last lady in 1662, his domestic life was rendered miserable by the conduct of his ungrateful children.'

It was whilst thus suffering from the base and barbarous treatment of his unnatural daughters*, and just previous to his last marriage, that he wrote his Sampson Agonistes; and a passage in that composition, the most gloomy and distressingly pathetic of all his allusions to his loss of sight, was no doubt intended by the poet as a faithful picture of himself and of his wrongs, during this disastrous period of his existence.

That against privations and disadvantages, great and apparently overwhelming as were these, blind, infirm, ill-treated, and forsaken, the intellectual vigour of Milton should have struggled with such success, as to have carried on, during their operation, the noblest work which ever issued from uninspired man, is one of the most astonishing facts in the history of the human mind; for it was precisely in the years elapsing between the death of his second wife in 1655, and his entering again into the conjugal state in 1662, the most forlorn and wretched portion of his days, that the greater part of his Paradise Lost was written!

What a magnificent and sublime idea of mental energy and fortitude breaks in upon us from this occurrence in the life of Milton! and how do the sufferings of Homer and of Ossian disappear when contrasted with those of our immortal countryman! The Grecian bard, though blind, and, perhaps, poor, appears to have passed, notwithstanding, lightly and cheerily on his path, honoured and admired by the monarchs and the nobles of his land; and though Ossian had fallen from his high estate, and, sightless and in years, was left the sole surviving mourner of his princely house; yet had he enjoyed the love, and gloried in the celebrity of his children; yet was he still the object of a nation's praise, not only as the first of bards, but as among the first of heroes, and even to the tomb of his fathers was he accompanied by beauty and affection.

and

Whilst Milton who had voluntarily sacrificed his eye-sight on what he esteemed the altar of his country's good; whose mind was the chosen seat of all that is tender, holy, and sublime; and at the very period, too, when he was occupied in the construction of a work which has conferred an ever-during honour on the which gave him birth; stood stript apparently of every human comfort, the mark of public outrage and of private wrong! and who, when he had but just escaped the sanguinary vengeance of triumphant party, had to feel at home, the spot to which he had once fondly looked for sympathy and peace,

It should be recollected, however, that Deborah, his youngest and favourite daughter, was at this time but nine years old, and can scarcely therefore be implicated in this charge.'

1

1

How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is

To have a thankless child!

Though political enmity, the most rancorous perhaps of all human prejudices, threw over the mighty name of Milton, whilst yet alive, a veil of hatred and of obloquy, there were not wanting, even then, some great, and good, and liberal spirits, who loved, and honoured, and admired the man, and who beheld him in the storm that wrecked his peace, though not devoid of error, yet exhibiting the unconquerable mind and upright heart.

Yes, in the prophetic eye of genius and of generous freedom did Milton close his race in glory; and now, when the clouds of faction and licentiousness, which perturbed the air he breathed, are passed away, in what a lovely and endearing light appears the injured bard! To Homer, sightless and in years, to Ossian, dark, and mournful, and forlorn, the sigh of sympathy belongs; but for Milton, the divine and hallowed Milton, the sport of evil days and evil tongues, blind, and aged, and forsaken, persecuted by his country, and deserted by his children, an added tear must fall!”

The fifteenth number of this volume notices with excessive panegyric a poem by Mr. Hillhouse, intitled "The Judg ment, a Vision:" but the adduced specimens do not support the high character given of the poetry.

Dr. Drake merits in a considerable degree the gratitude and admiration of his readers, and of his country, for providing a work of amusement so unexceptionable and of instruction so entertaining. To young persons of the fair sex it is peculiarly adapted, by indulging in desultory graces and versatile attention...

ART. XI. Remarks on the present Defective State of the Nautical Almanac. By Francis Baily, F.R.S. and L.S. 8vo. pp. 72, Richardson. 1822.

OUR

UR astronomical readers are probably aware that Mr. Baily, who is so well known and esteemed as one of the most disinterested supporters of the celestial science in this country, published at his own charge, and for private circulation only, in the beginning of the present year, a small volume of astronomical tables; his object being to furnish his friends and fellow-laborers in the field of astronomy with a set of tables, of constant reference in the Observatory during the year, some of them computed by himself and others! taken from foreign works. In the explanation prefixed to these tables, he found himself under the necessity of commenting on the present state of the "Nautical Almanac;" which was such, in the year 1818, as to induce the Secretary

to the Admiralty to declare in his place in Parliament, that its errors had caused it to become "a bye-word among the literati of Europe."

Mr. Baily's remarks, however, were not directed so much against the errors of this national work, (which he stated to be less numerous than they were for some preceding years,) as against its deficiency in various useful particulars, which he recommended to be introduced in future: but some differences between certain of his tables and those in the Nautical Almanac, for the same year, required both comment and explanation; and, in the preliminary observations prefixed to the tract before us, Mr. B. says,

"I am not aware that those comments exceeded the bounds which the circumstances of the case and the importance of the subject required: and I am yet to learn that there is any impropriety in detecting and exposing error, or in freely discussing the best mode of promoting the advancement of knowledge. But, it appears that, in one quarter at least, my intentions have been either misunderstood, or (unintentionally) perverted: since 1 find that an anonymous writer in the last number of the Journal of the Royal Institution (No. xxv. p. 201.) has replied somewhat sharply! to the Remarks which I had thus published, and stigmatised them with the epithet of "superfluous and frivolous." As the author of that article has not thought proper to annex his name thereto, I can only designate him here by the title of "the Writer of the Reply:" nevertheless, there can be no difficulty in determining the source whence it came. And since the rank which he holds in the literary circles of this country, and his peculiar intimacy with the subject now under review, give a more than ordinary weight and importance to his opinions, it is the more incumbent on me to remove the charge which has thus been (I hope inadvertently) a made. In attempting this, I am compelled, however reluctantly, to enter more at large into the nature, design, and present defective state of the Nautical Almanac, than I had originally any intention of doing.'

In pursuance of this object, the author gives first à verbatim copy of the Reply in question: he next describes the several particulars which are to be found in the other nautical Ephemerides of Europe, and do not occur in the English Nautical Almanac; and then he proceeds, paragraph by paragraph, to discuss the remarks of his anonymous opponent.

in

Considering the political insignificance of the kingdom of Portugal, it is remarkable that the Nautical Ephemeris of that country should be deemed the most complete of any Europe: but we know, independently of the pamphlet before us, that it is so considered by all our most scientific navigators, not only in the India service but in the British navy.

The

The Coimbra Almanac is therefore the first here brought under review; and in it not fewer than eighteen tables, columns, or particular modes of arrangement, are pointed out, which it is supposed might be advantageously introduced into our Ephemeris. In the Milan Almanac, are seven which do not occur either in that of Coimbra or in the English; in that of Berlin, six; and in the Connaissance des Tems, eight: making in all thirty-nine particulars of greater or less value to the practical astronomer, some of which at least might be introduced with advantage into our national Ephemeris; which, when it was first published, was stated by Dr. Maskelyne to contain "every thing essential to general use that is to be found in any Ephemeris hitherto published, with many other useful and interesting particulars never yet offered to the public in any work of this kind." This,' says Mr. Baily, was doubtless true at the time it was written, and ought to be true at the present day: but the rapid strides which have since been made in this department of science by our continental neighbours have now left us far in the back ground.'

We cannot undertake here to particularize the several omissions to which we have alluded, and which the author has detailed at length: but it will be sufficient, perhaps, to mention one. The position of the four new planets for every sixth day during six months, the time of their opposition being respectively chosen as the middle of such period, is stated in the Milan Ephemeris; the place of Ceres, in particular, is also given in that of Berlin, in the usual order of the Almanac; and the places of the others are generally published in the subsequent volumes of that work, previously to the times of their respective oppositions. Their places (for one half of the year at least) ought to form a regular portion of every Ephemeris; and we are a little surprized that, though these omissions are permitted in our national Almanac, they are not supplied in those which are published by the Stationers' Company but with the exception of one only, viz. the "Imperial Almanac," we know of none which notice in any way the places of these new planets. In the Imperial Almanac, besides various other useful particulars, we have the place of Ceres marked for six days in each month. It is probably, as the author observes, for want of such information that we are not possessed of more numerous observations on the position of those planets; and, as their elements have not yet acquired that degree of precision which is so requisite in the present state of astronomy, too great facilities cannot be given to the means of multiplying observations.

On

On the subject of accuracy, the author of the Reply ob

served:

"But with regard to the general accuracy of the computations, and the impression, it is already acknowledged throughout Europe, that the Nautical Almanac is the most correct of all the Ephemerides which are intended for nautical uses. Let Mr. Baily only turn to pages 374, 372, and 373. of the Connaissance des Tems for the present year, and see how those pages are filled, and from whom the materials were received; let him consider that the Nautical Almanac is always published six months before the Connaissance des Tems; and let him examine the eclipses of the fourth satellite of Jupiter for 1824, and, after this, let him pronounce a distinct opinion upon the comparative accuracy of the two publications.'

To which Mr. Baily answers:

I have referred to those pages in the Connaissance des Tems, where I find a list of 117 errors pointed out in the volume for 1821. And I have also referred to the printed errata at the end of my copies of the Nautical Almanacs for 1819 and 1820: in the former of which I find a list of 150 errors in this work also; and, in the latter, a list of 162 errors, besides others which I have myself discovered. After this, I find no difficulty in pronouncing "a distinct opinion upon the comparative accuracy of the two !publications."

In another place, the author of the Reply stated in answer to some remarks of Mr. Baily relative to the catalogue of northpolar distances of the principal stars, which are erroneously given in the Nautical Almanac for 1824 :

"With respect to the remarks in p. xix. the editor of the Nautical Almanac would think it unbecoming to interfere in any manner in a catalogue furnished officially by the Astronomer Royal, upon the basis of his own observations; and he would not hesitate to admit still greater fluctuations from the mean determination of former years, if they were supported by such authority." "

Mr. B. very properly rejoins:

How far a feeling of etiquette would have prevented the writer of the Reply from interfering in any manner (not even by requesting an explanation) with a catalogue which, on the very face of it, bore evident marks of inaccuracy, I cannot pretend to say: but the act of parliament distinctly states that "it is highly expedient to the interests of navigation and the honour of this country, that the said Nautical Almanac should be accurately computed, compared, and published;" and that it is the duty of the editor to superintend the correct publication of the same. A celebrated mathematician has said, "La philosophie, ne reconnaît aucune autorité, pas méme celle de Newton:" and the writer of the Reply seems for a moment to have forgotten the celebrated motto of that

Society,