is utterance made his discourses very efficacious.
I once mentioned the reputation which Mr. Foster had gained by his
proper delivery to my friend Dr. Hawkesworth, who told me, that
in the art of pronunciation he was far inferior to Dr. Watts.

Such was his flow of thoughts, and such his promptitude of language,
that in the latter part of his life he did not precompose his
cursory sermons; but having adjusted the heads, and sketched
out some particulars, trusted for success to his extemporary powers.

He did not endeavour to assist his eloquence by any gesticulations;
for, as no corporeal actions have any correspondence with theological
truth, he did not see how they could enforce it.

At the conclusion of weighty sentences he gave time, by a short
pause, for the proper impression.

To stated and public instruction, he added familiar visits and
Personal application, and was careful to improve the opportunities
which conversation offered of diffusing and increasing the influence
of religion.

By his natural temper he was quick of resentment; but by his
established and habitual practice, he was gentle, modest, and
inoffensive. His tenderness appeared in his attention to children,
and to the poor. To the poor, while he lived in the family of his
friend, he allowed the third part of his annual revenue, though
the whole was not a hundred a year; and for children, he condescended
to lay aside the scholar, the philosopher, and the wit, to write
little poems of devotion, and systems of instruction adapted to
their wants and capacities, from the dawn of reason through its
gradations of advance in the morning of life. Every man, acquainted
with the common principles of human action, will look with veneration
on the writer who is at one time combating Locke, and at another
making a catechism for children in their fourth year. A voluntary
descent from the dignity of science is perhaps the hardest lesson
that humility can teach.

As his mind was capacious, his curiosity excursive, and his industry
continual, his writings are very numerous, and his subjects various.
With his theological works I am only enough acquainted to admire
his meekness of opposition, and his mildness of censure. It was
not only in his book but in his mind that _orthodoxy_ was _united_
with _charity_.

Of his philosophical pieces, his Logic has been received into the
universities, and therefore wants no private recommendation: if
he owes part of it to