he has obtained it, he will want something else, which perhaps he never can obtain. But if his good fortune should reach this last something, which is to complete his felicity, then ask him again if he would be willing to go back to his infancy, and act the very same parts in life a second time; and I much doubt whether he would undertake the labour, although he were to be rewarded at the end of it with Mahomet's paradise*.

* Since I wrote this, I perceive that the learned M. Maupertuis hath confirmed my opinion. Who, says he, would chuse to live his life over again, and to pass through the same individual scenes? The author of a book published last year, entitled VARIOUS PROSPECTS OF MANkind, Nature, and PROVIDEnce, endeavours to answer this question and confute M. MAUPERTUIS's proposition. His answer is ingenious, but very unsatisfactory. He reasons from data which cannot be allowed him. A better argu

I HOPE that I shall not offend orthodoxy, as it is not inconsistent with the religion which I profess, if I assert, that this world is a place of punishment, as well as a place of trial; which is a proposition, I think, that will almost admit of a mathematical demonstration.

A PRESENCE OF MIND is a very rare, but a very happy and useful talent, and is a certain guard against many mischiefs and inconveniences, to which human life is continually exposed. It is something very different from impudence, or a vain assurance. A PRESENCE of MIND is always well-bred, and is generally accompanied with wit and courage.

ment than any he hath used would have been to assure his readers, That he himself would be glad to live his life over again.

Amongst all my acquaintance I cannot recollect more than three persons who were eminently possessed of this quality, Dr. ATTERBURY, Bishop of Rochester, the Earl of STAIRS, who was our ambassador in France the beginning of the last reign, and Dr. JAMES MONRO, who was many years physician of Bethlem hospital.

In 1715 I dined with the DUKE of ORMONDE at Richmond. We were fourteen at table. There was my Lord MARR, my Lord JERSEY, my Lord ARRAN, my Lord LANDSDOWN, Sir WILLIAM WYNDHAM, Sir REDMOND EVErard, and AtTERBURY, Bishop of Rochester. The rest of the company I do not exactly remember. During the dinner there was a jocular dispute (I forget

how it was introduced) concerning short prayers. Sir WILLIAM WYNDHAM told us, that the shortest prayer he had ever heard was the prayer of a common soldier just before the battle of Blenheim, O God, if there be a God, save my soul, if I have a soul!' This was followed by a general laugh. I immediately reflected that such a treatment of the subject was too ludicrous, at least very improper, where a learned and religious prelate was one of the company. But I had soon an opportunity of making a different reflection. ATTERBURY, seeming to join in the conversation, and applying himself to Sir WILLIAM WYNDHAM, said "Your prayer, Sir WILLIAM, is indeed very short but I remember another as short, but a much better, offered up likewise by

a poor soldier in the same circumstances, O God, if in the day of battle I forget thee, do thou not forget me!" This, as ATTERBURY pronounced it with his usual grace and dignity, was a very gentle and polite reproof, and was immediately felt by the whole company. And the Duke of ORMONDE, who was the best bred man of his age, suddenly turned the discourse to another subject.

CARDINAL POLIGNAC, the author of the Anti Lucretius, was a fine gentleman, as well as an elegant and polite scholar. He had a most engaging affability, and a peculiar art and manner of obliging every man, who was introduced to him, to lay aside all restraint. I had not been with him a quarter of an hour, when I found myself as easy as if I had been