question, the fact is clear that we cook, and all agree in desiring something palatable on their tables. Mr. Frederic Accum has given us a treatise on Culinary Chemistry (London, Ackermann, 1821, 8vo.); but much remains to be done to put cookery on a scientific footing. The maxim, that "people will easily find out what is best for them," is by no means applicable to cookery. Every body who has travelled, and has observed the manner of cooking among different nations, must. have seen, that, with the exception of those countries where man lives chiefly upon fruits, or in an almost savage state, people generally spoil what nature affords them as nourishment; and he would be a great benefactor to his nation, who should teach them to adopt a system of cookery which would make their dishes at once palatable and wholesome. How much money would be saved, how many diseases prevented, how much comfort gained, if cookery were placed on a more rational basis, and were accommodated judiciously to the respective products of different countries! Rumford has attained deserved celebrity for his efforts to improve the food of the poor; and he would be no small benefactor of his species, who should be equally successful in improving the diet of the people at large. Most modern books on cookery are devoted to the preparation of refined dishes; and a very unfounded prejudice prevails, as if the culinary art were too trivial a matter to engage a reflecting mind. We are acquainted, however, with one book, the editor of which, a gentleman of literary reputation in Germany, has applied himself to the investigation of the culinary art, with a view of throwing light upon many points in the practice of cookery, which are, in general, but insufficiently understood, and of teaching the preparation of wholesome and palatable dishes, within the reach of the people at large. This excellent work, of which we should be glad to see a translation, is called Geist der Kochkunst, von König, herausgegeben von C. F. von Rumohr, Stuttgard, 1822 (The Spirit of Cookery, by König, edited by the Baron von Rumohr). As architecture is divided into two sorts, the useful and the ornamental, so cookery might be divided into the useful and the luxurious; and again, as the pharmacopaia of some countries is divided into a general one, and one for the poor, so useful cookery might also be divided into common and pauper cookery. Prizes might be offered for the invention of cheap and wholesome dishes,

and more care might be taken to provide good cooks, by setting on foot establishments where particular instruction should be given to girls desirous of becoming cooks. It is a little surprising, that, while so much care is bestowed on the improvement of the fruits of the earth, and the animals used for food, so little attention, comparatively speaking, is given to improving the culinary processes, which render them fit for affording nourishment. In addition to the work of the baron Rumohr, above-mentioned, two of the best books on this subject are the Cook's Oracle and Housekeeper's Manual, by William Kitchener, M. D., adapted to the American Public, by a Medical Gentleman, New York, 1830; and the French Cook, by Louis Eustache Ude, reprinted at Philadelphia, in 1828. The latter work, however, is adapted more particularly for those who say, with Voltaire, Qu'un cuisinier est un mortel divin! The history of the art of cooking is well given in the above-mentioned work of the baron von Rumohr. The melody of Homer's verse can hardly reconcile us to the cookery of his countrymen, described in his flowing hexameters. All the beauty of the Ionian dialect cannot give a charm to the process of preparing the pork for the feast of Penelope's suitors. How much the Egyptians, so far advanced in many branches of civilization, had accomplished in the art of cookery, Champollion has not as yet informed us. The early Romans did not disdain to direct their attention, not only to husbandry, but also to cookery. Cato, in his book on agriculture, gives several receipts for dishes of flour and vegetables. The introduction or successful cultivation of important vegetables was frequently the occasion of surnames, in the early times of Rome, as Lentulus, Fabius, Cicero. The meals of the Romans consisted generally of three courses: the first contained light food, eggs, oysters, and the like, to excite the appetite; next came the brunt of war, as the ancients called it, made up of roast and boiled dishes, of every description; then followed the dessert (mensæ secundæ) of fruit and pastry. Luxury in eating increased, when the Romans became acquainted with Asiatic magnificence, to such a degree that laws were required to keep it within bounds. Lucullus carried epicurism to the extreme. He erected several dining halls in his palaces, and gave to each of them the name of some deity, which was a guide to the steward in regulating the etiquette and the expenses of the banquet: a cœna,

for example, in the hall of Apollo, commonly cost 50,000 drachms, or 4687 dollars. Under Pompey, M. Aufridius Lurco invented the fattening of peacocks, and, in this way, earned, in a short time, 60,000 sestertia. During this period, an actor had a dish prepared, which cost 1875 dollars. It consisted of singing and talking birds, each of which was valued at 112 dollars. The son of the same actor entertained his friends with pearls, which he dissolved in vinegar. Under Tiberius, there were schools and teachers of cookery in Rome. One of the family of the Apicii invented many new dishes; for example, a salt dish of fishes' livers; also many cooking utensils, and the art of fattening swine on dried figs. Another wrote a book on cookery, and invented the art of keeping oysters fresh. The emperor Vitellius was once entertained by his brother with 2000 choice fishes and 7000 birds. Vitellius himself once had a single dish prepared of the livers, the young, and the brain of many select birds and fishes. Roman cookery was remarkable for the almost universal use of oil or oily substances. In the later ages of Roman greatness, the object of the cook was to please the palate, rather than to provide for the healthful nourishment of the system. In the middle ages, the Italians, who outstripped the rest of the nations of Europe in every branch of civilization, attained, also, much earlier, a degree of accomplishment in the culinary art. They carried it to much perfection as early as in the sixteenth century, and probably earlier, as some passages of their novelle lead us to suppose. The artists of that country delighted much in convivial assemblies, and the chief cook of St. Pius V, Bartolommeo Scappi, published, in 1570, an excellent work on the art of cookery (Opera di Bartol. Scappi, cuoco secreto di Papa Pio V divisa, etc. con il discorso funerale, che fu fatto nelle esequie di Papa Paolo III, 4to.). The princesses of the house of Medici appear to have transplanted the Italian cookery to France, at least to the French court. The Italian cookery was, however, very similar to that of the ancient Romans, as even the mode of preparing dishes at present prevalent in Italy has still retained much of the ancient character. We refer particularly to the abundant use of oil. In fact, this character prevails more or less in the cookery of all nations of Latin descent. However great the influence may have been which Italian cookery exercised on the French system, it is to the inhabitants

of France that we owe the usage of seasoning meat mostly with its own gravy, whereby a much greater variety is obtained, and the dishes are, at the same time, more wholesome than those prepared in the old modes. From the accounts of the household of Louis XV, it appears that the court dined with moderation. From eight to nine dishes only were served; but two thirds of the meat used in the kitchen was taken for gravy. Of course, this was possible only in a royal kitchen; but the tendency of the modern culinary art appears clearly enough from this instance. The French, probably, were induced to make this change because only a small portion of the southern part of their country furnishes oil, and good butter is produced only in a small part of the north. When the French revolution brought the "third estate" into honor, the old national French soup, pot au feu, came into notice-a dish on which the French pride themselves justly. The new mode of cooking became now more and more popular. But, soon after the great excitement of the revolution had subsided, and men had leisure to think of their palates, an over-refined style of cookery was introduced, and gave rise to works like the Almanac des Gourmands. The dishes of this latter period are not to be rashly ventured on, but to be eaten with a wise circumspection. The cookery of the English took quite a different turn from that of the Italians and French. Owing to their situation on an island, which prevented them from constant association with other nations, at least as far as respected the people at large, and probably owing, in part, to their national disposition, their cookery has been mostly confined to simple, strong and substantial dishes. The art of roasting has been carried by them to much perfection. With other English customs, the British cookery likewise came to the U. States; but this country, which has departed from the English standard in regard to many things of more importance, has not confined itself to a servile imitation of English cookery, but has borrowed much from the European continent. Soup has become general; and, in preparing vegetables, the French way has been followed more than the English. But the system of cooking in the U. States has many defects. Many dishes are spoiled by butter and fat, and, on the whole, far too much meat is eaten-a very natural consequence of which is the everlasting complaint of dyspepsy. A country so rich in fruits ought to allow

them a large place in its cookery. If the culinary art should be properly investigated, many facts would be brought to light, which have as yet been little attended to. Thus, for instance, it would be very interesting, in a medical point of view, to show the intimate connexion of different diseases, in various countries, with the common dishes.

COOMBE, William, author of several popular works, including the Diaboliad; the Devil upon two Sticks in England, a continuation and imitation of Le Sage's novel, but far inferior, in spirit and graphic delineation, to the original; the Tour of Dr. Syntax in Search of the Picturesque, &c. The last mentioned poem was orig inally written for Mr. Ackermann, and published, by him, in the Poetical Magazine with Rowlandson's illustrations. Mr. Ackermann, in 1812, published a history of Westminster Abbey, in two volumes, 4to., from the pen of this gentleman, who also was a principal contributor of essays, short pieces illustrative of engravings, &c., to many of his miscellanies. Mr. Coombe's last poem was the History of Johnny Quæ Genus, which, like his Syntax, English Dance of Death, and Dance of Life, was accompanied by Rowlandson's prints. In his youth, Mr. Coombe inherited a moderate fortune, which he soon dissipated; and, during the last years of his long life, literature was his principal support. He died, June 18, 1823.

COOPER, Anthony Ashley, first earl of Shaftesbury, and a statesman of considerable eminence in the reign of Charles II, was born in 1621. At the age of fifteen, he entered Exeter college, Oxford, whence he removed to Lincoln's Inn, with a view to the study of law; but was chosen representative for Tewkesbury, in 1640, while only in his nineteenth year. At the commencement of the civil war, he sided with the king's party, though he appeared to deem mutual concession necessary. In consequence of this opinion, finding himself distrusted by the court, he went over to the parliament, and, in 1644, stormed Warham, and reduced all the adjacent parts. He had some share in the private negotiation between the king and lord Hollis, at the fruitless treaty of Uxbridge, and is said to have contrived the insurrection of the club

men.

When Cromwell turned out the long parliament, sir Anthony was one of the members of the convention which succeeded. He was, nevertheless, a subscriber to the protestation, which charged the protector with arbitrary government,

a fact which did not prevent him from becoming one of his privy council. After the deposition of Richard Cromwell, he was privately engaged in a plan for the restoration of Charles II, which he subsequently aided with all his influence. He was one of the twelve members who carried the invitation to the king, and was, soon after, made a privy counsellor, and a commissioner for the trial of the regicides. In 1661, he was raised to the peerage, by the title of baron Ashley, and appointed chancellor of the exchequer, and a lord of the treasury. He was also a leading member of the Cabal. He promoted the declaration for liberty of conscience; but, on the other hand, he supported the Dutch war, and issued illegal writs for the election of members of parliament during a recess, and, in other respects, exhibited much latitude of principle and of practice. In 1672, he was created earl of Shaftesbury and lord high chancellor. His conduct on the bench was able and impartial. He had not, however, been more than a year in office, when the seals were taken from him; and, from that moment, he became one of the most powerful leaders of the opposition. For his warmth in asserting that a prorogation of fifteen months amounted to a dissolution of parliament, he was committed to the Tower, and was not released until after a full submission. Whether the popish plot, in 1678, was of his contrivance, is uncertain; but he made use of it to force out the earl of Danby's administration, and produce the formation of a new one, in which he was himself made president of the council. Amid many violent party proceedings which followed, he was the author of that bulwark of liberty, the habeas corpus act. He only remained in the administration four months, when the interest of the duke of York once more prevailed against a statesman whose endeavors to promote a bill for his exclusion from the succession had been unremitting. On his dismissal from office, he was charged with having attempted subornation of perjury. He was, in consequence, once more committed to the Tower, and tried for high treason; but was acquitted by the jury, amidst prodigious acclamations of the people-a circumstance which stimulated Dryden to the production of his celebrated poem of Absalom and Achitophel, in which Shaftesbury is so unfavorably conspicuous. Not long after this acquittal, the earl withdrew to Holland, where he arrived in November, 1682, and where he

died, of the gout in his stomach, on the 22d of Jan. 1683. The career of this able, but dubious and versatile statesman, forms the best commentary on his public principles, and declares him to be rather a bold, active and enterprising man of expediency, than a great politician. Yet the character of a man sincerely esteemed by Locke, and other men of undoubted principle, is not to be implicitly taken from the odium excited by opposing party feelings. On the whole, this extraordinary person appears to have possessed many vices, always redeemed by a great portion of ability, and a leaning to broad and liberal principles of government, when he could freely display it.

COOPER, Anthony Ashley, third earl of Shaftesbury, a celebrated philosophical and moral writer, was born at Exeterhouse, in London, in February, 1671. He was grandson to the subject of the preceding article, who early instructed him in Greek and Latin, placing about him a female who spoke those languages with considerable fluency. He could read them both with ease when only eleven years of age. He was then placed at a private school, and finally removed to Winchester. At the latter establishment he did not remain long, but went on his travels earlier than was customary. On his return to England, in 1689, he became the representative of Poole, in Dorsetshire, and distinguished himself, while in parliament, by his support of measures favorable to public liberty. His health suffered so much by parliamentary attendance, that, in 1698, he gave up his seat, and, visiting Holland in the assumed character of a student of physic, he prosecuted his studies, and became intimately acquainted with Bayle, Le Clerc, and other literary men. On his return to England, he succeeded to the earldom; and, although not a constant attendant of the house of lords, he was always ready on important occasions. King William offered him the post of secretary of state, which his health would not allow him to accept. On the accession of Anne, he took leave of public life, and once more visited Holland, to which he was much attached, where he remained for two years. In 1708, in consequence of the extravagances of the French prophets, he published his Letter on Enthusiasm, in which he opposed prosecution and personal punishments. In 1709, he published his Moralists, a Philosophical Rhapsody; being an eloquent defence of the doctrine of a Deity and providence, on the Platonic model;

which piece is ranked by bishop Hurd among the most finished productions of the kind in the English language. His Sensus Communis soon followed, and, in 1710, his Soliloquy, or Advice to an Author; after which his health declined so rapidly, that he was advised to fix his residence at Naples, in which city he died, in February, 1713, in the forty-second year of his age, but not before he had finished his Judgment of Hercules, and Letter concerning Design. His works appeared, in three volumes, 8vo., in 1713, under the title of Characteristics of Men, Manners, Opinions and Times. In 1716, some of his private letters, upon philosophical and theological subjects, were published, under the title of Several Letters, written by a Noble Lord to a Young Man at the University, 8vo.; and, in 1721, another collection, entitled Letters from the Right Honorable the Earl of Shaftesbury to Robert Molesworth, Esquire, &c. The principal attention of lord Shaftesbury was, however, directed to the writings of antiquity, on which he built a civil, social and theistic kind of philosophy. In his Essay on Wit and Humor, he defends the application of ridicule, as a test of truth, in regard to religion, as well as other matters. His principal merit is a lively and elegant mode of discussion, somewhat fettered by his uncommon solicitude in regard to style, to which no English author has attended with more assiduity. In all his works, lord Shaftesbury appears a zealous advocate for liberty, and a firm believer in the fundamental doctrines of natural religion; but, although he professed a respect for Christianity, he was doubtless sceptical in regard to revelation, and sometimes indulged his humor, on scriptural points, with correspondent indecorum. In a moral point of view, his character was very estimable, both as a public and as a private man, and obtained the suffrages of all who knew him.

COOPER, Sir Astley Paston, bart., F.R.S. This highly distinguished surgeon was born in Gadesborough, county of Hertford, England, Aug. 23, 1768. He has filled the most responsible public offices in his profession, and has enjoyed an unequalled share of private confidence. He was one of the surgeons to Guy's hospital, and lecturer on surgery and anatomy in St. Thomas's hospital, London, is surgeon to the king, and, in July, 1821, was created a baronet. In Burke's Peerage, he is spoken of as having attained to the "highest eminence in the surgical profession;" and no

one who has heard him lecture, witnessed his operations, or studied his published works, will question his claims to this distinction. His principal works are the splendid volume On the Anatomy and Surgical Treatment of Inguinal and Congenital Hernia, which appeared in 1804; the continuation and completion of the same work in the volume on Crural and Umbilical Hernia, in 1807; his work on Dislocations and Fractures; and the Lectures on the Principles and Practice of Surgery, which last have recently been published under his inspection, from notes of his lectures taken by Mr. F. Tyrrell. Besides these extended works, sir Astley has enriched various periodicals, journals and transactions, with papers of great practical value. His latest undertaking is a work in folio, On the Diseases of the Female Breast. Only a part of this has as yet appeared. Sir Astley is highly esteemed for his originality, boldness and success as a practical surgeon. He was the first to operate for carotid aneurism; and the whole profession bears witness to the genius which suggested this great operation; and its blessings are now almost the daily occurrences of practical surgery. Sir Astley was also the first to tie the aorta-perhaps the boldest attempt of the surgical art—and, although the operation was unsuccessful, still it was shown not to be immediately, we may add necessarily, destructive to life; and, in more favorable cases, it may save from death. No foreign surgeon has been so much resorted to by persons from the U. States, whose cases required consummate skill; and they have been among those who have had large experience of its amount and its advantages. As public teacher, too, sir Astley will be long remembered by the profession in the U. States. He had a singular felicity in communicating to others the knowledge he so largely possessed. He was truly a beautiful lecturer. A manner grave, simple, energetic, characterized his prelections. He demanded and received the closest and most respectful attention. The smallest sound, in his crowded theatre, were it but the creaking of a shoe, arrested his mind in the midst of the sentence he was uttering; and, without changing his position, and scarcely altering his voice, he would direct his demonstrator to remove from the room the occasion of his annoyance, and then pass on with his subject as if no interruption had occurred. This control of his audience is particularly mentioned, for there is, perhaps, no place in which, from

the numbers and the variety of the indr. viduals collected, the attention is commanded with more difficulty than in the crowded lecture-room of a foreign hospital. Sir Astley has, within a very few years, retired from his labors at the hospitals, and is now enjoying the fruits of successful industry and talent. His early history has not been glanced at; but there was nothing in its circumstances which distinguished him from the crowds of young men who have to depend upon themselves for success and for fame; and now that he enjoys both these so largely, he yet feels he has a debt to pay, and is still found among the most useful laborers for the public.

COOPER, Samuel, minister in Boston, son of the reverend William Cooper, was born March 28, 1725. He gave early indications of great powers of mind, and, after having been graduated at Harvard college, in 1743, devoted himself to the church. When but 20 years of age, he acquired great reputation as a preacher, and was chosen to succeed his father as colleague with the reverend doctor Colman, in Boston. He continued in this situation until his death, which happened Dec. 29, 1783, in the 59th year of his age. As a preacher, doctor Cooper was, perhaps, the most distinguished man of his day in the U. States. He was a sincere and liberal Christian, and of a charitable disposition. He was not only a great theologian, but was also extremely well versed in other branches of learning, particularly in the classics. He was one of the original founders of the American academy of arts and sciences, of which he was the first vice-president. His patriotism prompted him to take a decided part against Great Britain. He was efficacious in procuring foreign alliances, and was often consulted by some of the most prominent of the revolutionary characters. His manners were those of a finished gentleman. With the exception of his political writings, which were published in the journals of the day, his productions were exclusively sermons.