first eruption, it is probable it broke through a roof of calcareous rock, the portions of which afforded thefe fragments. These would be expelled by the elaftic force of the escaping vapours; numbers of them lighting on the interior edge of the newly formed cone, would again fall in, and probably be again expelled without remaining a moment, as often happens repeatedly to the fame ftone in every eruption. From the degradation of the cone during intervals of quiefcence, a large portion of these stones would again fall in, and with other rubbish choke the crater, as always happens in the intermiffions of volcanic fury, till the next eruption drives them all out. Thus the fame ftone may be again and again ejected from the volcano, without ever approaching the heated part. It may be obferved, that excepting fuch ftones as may have been accidentally lodged in the crater, Vefuvius has never ejected limeftones in its recent eruptions. The limeftones and the other premordial substances are all found buried in the rubbish of the Somma, and are only revealed by the ravages of torrents. Gioeni has been induced to attribute them all to one epocha, which perfectly accords with the explication that has been attempted above.

As to the other fuppofed primitive ftones which Vefuvius has ejected, there feems less reason to difcufs them. If they be primitive, the fame explication which ferves for the limeftone may account for their remaining untouched. Some of them have hi therto been deemed peculiar to this mountain, and they are affociated with the limeftone and with each other in a manner which has never been obferved in any other part of the world.

We have entered at fuch length into these interesting fpeculations, that many points of inferior confequence remain undifcuffed; and we relinquifh their farther confideration with the leís regret, because there are not many occafions on which we are inclined to diffent from the opinions of Scipio Breiflac. For the many curious and valuable facts which he details, we must refer our readers to the work itself, which they will find illuftrated by a general geological map of the Campania, and by other maps of particular diftricts.

We cannot conclude without expreffing our wish that he may be enabled to complete what he has projected, and that a furvey of the volcanic diftricts of the ftates of the Church may be added sa his prefent work.

ART,

ART. III. Sketches on the intrinfic Strength, Military and Naval Force of France and Ruffia; with Remarks on their prefent Connexion, Political Influence, and future Projects. In two Parts. Part 1. London, 1803. pp. 216.

THIS

HIS is altogether a very fingular work. The language is that of a foreigner pretty well acquainted with English, or of an Englishman who, by long refidence abroad, has both loft the free ufe of his native tongue, and mingled it with foreign idioms. From internal evidence we are inclined to believe the author's own affertion, that he is a Briton: for his fentiments, though with fome confiderable exceptions, are generally of that description which we ufually compliment with the epithet of British; an ap pellation more honourable, if poffible, in the present day, than at any former period of our story. The typography of this book is certainly foreign, although London is marked on the title-page, without either printer's or publifher's name. The preface is dated from the Hague, and the poftfcript from Paris. Not even in external character is it eafy to claffify this curious performance. Its fhape is fomething between that of a quarto and an octavo; and its leaves are of a confiftency between that of paper and of pafteboard. The matter and ftyle of the book are not lefs origi nal; and we think they are of fufficient intereft to warrant a pretty full character and abstract, with fpecimens.

Although we differ widely from the author in many particulars, and highly disapprove of the fpirit in which fome of his statements are conceived, we should nevertheless find it very difficult to enter into any general refutation of his doctrines, or to give a full examination of the foundations upon which he refts them. This difficulty arises from the want of general principles, which prevails through all his fpeculations, and from the very queftionable fhape in which his facts come before us. He appears to have wandered a good deal over the Continent, and to have obferved, and perhaps inquired, with fome acuteness, but, we are convinced, without any great diligence or minutenefs, and, we are perfectly certain, with out the guidance of thofe enlarged views which alone can enfure accuracy of detail, or render it at all ufeful in fyftematic reafonings. Not that he can be accused of seeing without a preconceived theory; on the contrary, like all thofe who affume the title of plain matter of fact men, he is perpetually under the influence of fome vague hypothefis, rafhly adopted from a limited range of obfervation, and confidently relied upon as a fafe guide, from ignorance of the maxim, that, in political science, infulated facts can never lead to any folid or general conclufions. He has thus acquired the habit of forming the most hafty opinions on things neceffarily

involved

involved in all manner of difficulty and doubt; of ftating, as matter of fact, things which no man can fee or know without a long and delicate process of reafoning; and of drawing pofitive inferences from fuch statements, as if, in the first place, they were capable of being verified, and as if, in the next, they formed, however true, the whole materials of the calculation. This intrepid reafoner fees no difficulties in questions the most complex, and treads the delicate ground of political arithmetic as confidently as he could plod in the fure tracks of abstract mathematics. He regulates the internal arrangements of ftates by the compass and fquare, as if thofe ftructures were built of inanimate materials; and applies his rafh and partial calculations to the action of the great political machine, as if it moved without either friction or refiftance. He frequently difplays liveliness of fancy, and fometimes acutenefs and powers of difcrimination; but we look in vain for enlargement and expansion of intellect, or even for fuch a reach of thought as would be required to manage a long chain of obvious reafoning. If he obferve on a fmall scale, he reasons on one yet more confined, feeing only a part of what he looks at, and comparing only parts of what he fees.

To the limited endowments of our author, however, the boldnefs of his affertions, and the contemptuous arrogance of his style, form a contraft fufficiently striking. In thefe common failings of political theorists, he, indeed, very far exceeds the ordinary measure. Without giving the fanction of a name to his ftatements, and without referring to any authority, he challenges our affent to a mafs of facts, many of them perfectly new and almost all bordering upon improbability. Many of thofe statements may be true, or they may not. We are told that fome are the refult of perfonal obfervation, and others of inquiries among intelligent freinds. We are not told which of them reft upon the writer's authority and that of his friends, and what proportion is derived from fources open to public investigation; nor are we informed who this author and his correfpondents are, that we should give credit to their averments. The confequence of fo great a defect inevitably is, that we can only confide in such of the facts narrated, as are confiftent with, nay supported by other authorities; and even, after making this deduction, there ftill remains field for fcepticism, fince many of the statements given under the name of facts, belong to a clafs which no man can poffibly know with certainty, and could only exhibit the ignorance or prefumption of him who might bring them forward, if he should avow his name. We have already mentioned one characteristic of our author's manner-the high tone in which he delivers his information, and dictates his opi

Aions. Far from recommending to fpeculative writers an exceffive modesty or punctilious caution, we think the former is generally the outfide of emptinefs and impotence, while the latter is too often allied, in reafoning as well as in conduct, to that bastard kind of prudence, the offspring of cunning, and the cloke of timidity. But on points neceffarily involved in obfcurity, an inquirer fhould fpeak with a correfponding degree of hesitation. On matters which no man can fee clearly, it is unbecoming to dogmatize, as if no one fhould dare to doubt. It is ftill more abfurd to defpife the world for the hesitation with which your dogmas may be received, when you proclaim that you alone have been able to apprehend their truth. Nor should it ever be forgotten, that an affectation of fuperior intelligence upon fubjects in their own nature extremely dark, is mere quackery, if the materials of the calculation are concealed; and that an obfcure individual, who rails abufively at kingdoms, principalities, and powers,' fadly mistakes petulance for dignity and

force.

Of thefe very obvious confiderations, the author of the work before us, feems to be little aware. We have feldom been fchooled by a more dictatorial or prefumptuous master; and when he changes the didactic ftyle for invective, his language is generally that of coarfe and vulgar abufe. He is fond of calling names, when he wishes to be strong; and the appellations which he felects, are frequently cant phrafes, or fcurrilous epithets. From railing at worthy John Bull's magnanimity,' and other heavy ingredients; or, fcouting the ignorance of ⚫ our dotard countrymen,' he fometimes defcends to individual abufe; collects farcafms against the conduct of the British reprefentatives in foreign courts, or reviles the peftiferous inftitutions' of fuch errant quacks as Baron Voght and Count Rumford.' In the part of thefe fketches, already published, the fubject admits lefs of this perfonal kind of invective; but if we may judge of the fecond part by the table of contents annexed to the first, it must confift almoft entirely of that fcandal, half political and half perfonal, which travellers may fo eafily pick up abroad, concerning the ambaffadors of their own country, and to which thofe, who the beft difcharge their duty, and preferve the dignity of their ftation, are commonly moft expofed. It is fingular, that one fo well verfed in what is called fecret hiftory, as our author appears to be, fhould not have reflected on the abfurdity of anonymous publications in this flippery and dangerous branch of literature. When he comes forward with his fecond part, we truft he will rocollect that the individuals against whom it is levelled, have a right to demand his name

and

and his authorities; and we think this claim fufficiently authorifed by a confiderable portion of the prefent volume.

Our author has thrown together his thoughts in a more carelefs manner, and delivered them with much lefs regard to me. thod than even the title of fketches' might have led us to expect. For this defect he in part apologifes, by faying, that his remarks were printed at different times whilft he was travelling on the continent. There are, however, in the whole defign of his work, clumfy and inconvenient irregularities which no degree of hafte in the execution can excufe. He appears to have allowed himself as little time for thinking and digefting, as for comparing and correcting. He brings out his ideas piecemeal, and then quits the topic, until fome cafual affociation recals it; when he repeats and enlarges, and frequently modifies what he had formerly begun to explain. The notes which accompany every page, afford a clear proof that he is deficient in that luminous arrangement of ideas which is equally neceffary to the formation of accurate or enlarged views, and to the communication of knowledge in an intelligible manner. Thofe notes are nearly equal in bulk to the text; and they contain no digreffions. or additional illustrations, but effential parts of the author's opinions and arguments, which he ought to have incorporated with the reft, as they are, indeed, frequently of much more importance to the fubject than the text itfelf. Upon the whole, it is our opinion, that this writer poffeffes confiderable acuteness and great activity of mind; that he has profited lefs by his apparrent opportunities of information, than a man of cooler judgement and greater ftores of previous knowledge might have done; but that he has proved himself capable of affording valuable hints upon parts of the great questions which he difcuffes; provided he can bring himself to reafon more deliberately; to refift the glare of a paradox; to think more modestly of his own powers and acquirements; and to carry with greatér hefitation into the affairs of ftates, that arithmetic, which he may perhaps have found eafy and infallible in the business of his comptoir. His capacity of fyftematic inquiry, or long, connected, comprehenfive reafoning, we are difpofed entirely to doubt; and as a patient, difcriminating obferver of events, he ranks ftill lower in our eftimation.

We proceed to bring before our readers, a view of the very interefting topics which thefefketches' are intended to difcufs. After the general remark which we have made upon the doubtful authority of the matter of fact contained in them, it will hot be neceffary particularly to indicate all those statements which, from their mere want of fupport, appear to deferve no confideration.