THE LIFE OF DE FOE. IT is lamented by those who labour the fields of British biography, that after being entangled in briars they are often rewarded with the fcanty products of barrennefs. The lives of literary men are generally paffed in the obfcurities of the closet, which conceal even from friendly inquiries the artifices of ftudy, whereby each may have rifen to emiAnd during the fame moment that the diligent biographer fets out to afk for information, with regard to the origin, the modes of life, or the various fortunes of writers who have amused or instructed their country, the houfe-keeper, the daugh. ter, or grand-child, that knew connexions and traditions, drop into the grave. nence. These reflexions naturally arofe from my inquiries about the life of the Author of THE HISTORY OF THE UNION OF GREAT BRITAIN; and of THE ADVENTURES OF ROBINSON CRUSOE. Whether he were born on the neighbouring continent, or in this island; in London, or in the country; was equally uncertain. And whether his name were Foe, or De Foe, was fomewhat doubtful. Like Swift, B b 2 Swift, he had perhaps reafons for concealing what would have added little to his confequence. It is at length known, with fuffi cient certainty, that our author was the fon of James Foe, of the parish of St. Giles's, Cripplegate, London, Citizen and Butcher. The concluding fentiment of The True-born Englishman, we now fee, was then as natural as it will ever be just : Then, let us boast of ancestors no more, For, fame of families is all a cheat; If we may credit the Gazette, Daniel Foe, or De Foe, as he is faid by his enemies to have called himself, that he might not be thought an Englishman, was born in London *, about the year 1663. His family were probably Diffenters †, among whom he *It is at laft difcovered, by fearching The Chamberlain's books, which have fince been burnt, that our author was the fon of James Foe, of the parish of Cripplegate, London, Citizen and Butcher; who was himfelf the fon of Daniel Foe, of Elton, in the county of Northampton, Yeoman; and who obtained his Freedom by ferving his apprenticeship with John Levit, Citizen and Butcher. Daniel Foe, the fon of James, was admitted to his Freedom by birth, on the 26th of January, 1687-8. I was led to these discoveries by obferving that De Foe had voted at an election for a Reprefentative of London; whence I inferred, that he must have been a citizen either by birth or fervice. But in the parish books I could find no notice of his baptifm; as his parents were Dif fenters. In his Preface to "More Reformation," De Foe complains, That fome Diffenters had reproached him, as if he had faid, "that the gallows and the gallies ought to be the penalty of going to the conventicle; forgetting, that I muft defign to have my father, my wife, fix innocent children, and myself, put into the fame condition. To fuch Diffenters I can only regret," fays he, "That when he received no unlettered education; at leaft it is plain, from his various writings, that he was a zealous defender of their principles, and a strenuous fupporter of their politics, before the liberality of our rulers in church and ftate had freed this conduct from danger. He merits the praife which is due to fincerity in manner of thinking, and to uniformity in habits of acting, whatever obloquy may have been caft on his name, by attributing writings to him, which, as they belonged to others, he was ftudious to difavow. Our Author was educated at a diffenting academy, which was kept at Newington-Green by Charles Morton. He delights to praise "that learned gentleman," whofe inftructive leffons he probably enjoyed from 1675 to 1680, as a mafter, who taught nothing either in politics, or fcience, which was dangerous to monarchial government, or which was improper for a diligent fcholar to know. Being in 1705 accused by Tutchin of illiterature, De Foe archly acknowledged, "I owe this juftice to my ancient father, who is yet living, and in whose behalf I freely teftify, that if I am a blockhead, it was nobody's fault but my own; he having fpared nothing that might qualify me to match the accurate Dr. B or the most learned Tutchint." when I had drawn the picture, I did not, like the Dutchman with his man and bear, write under them--- This is the man; and this is the bear." De Foe exprefsly admits, that he WAS A DISSENTER, though no independent, fifth-monarchy man, or leveller. De F. Works, edit. 1703. p. 326---448.-* Works, 3d. edit. vol. ii. p. 276.† Review, vol. ii. p. 150. De Foe was born a writer, as other men are born generals and statesmen: and when he was not twentyone, he published, in 1683, a pamphlet against a very prevailing fentiment in favour of the Turks, as opposed to the Austrians; very justly thinking, as he avows in his riper age, that it was better the Popish House of Austria should ruin the Protestants in Hungary, than the infidel House of Ottoman fhould ruin both Proteftants and Papists, by overrunning Germany *. De Foe was a man who would fight as well as write for his principles: and before he was three-and-twenty he appeared in arms for the Duke of Monmouth, in June 1685. Of this exploit he boasts † in his latter years, when it was no longer dangerous to avow his participation in that imprudent enterprise, with greater men of fimilar principles. Having escaped from the dangers of battle, and from the fangs of Jefferys, De Foe found complete fecurity in the more gainful pursuits of peace. Yet, he was prompted by his zeal to mingle in the controverfies of the reign of James 2d, whom he efficaciously oppofed, by warning the Diffenters of the fecret danger of the infidious tolerance, which was offered by the monarch's bigotry, or by the minifter's artifice. When our Author collected his writings, he did not think proper to republish either his tract against the Turks, or his pamphlet against the King. De Foe was admitted a Liveryman of London on the 26th of January, 1687-8; when, being allowed his freedom by birth, he was received a mem * Appeal, p. 51 + Appeal. ber |