tural admonition, meant to direct our conduct, is a notion extremely dangerous. As nothing can be more ill-founded, it ought to be strenuously combated. Innumerable reasons might be offered; but it will be sufficient to say, that it is inconsistent with the general design of Providence; it would overturn the principles that regulate society. The benign intention of the author of nature is in no instance more eminently displayed than in witholding from us the certain knowledge of future events. Were it otherwise constituted, man would be the most miserable of beings; he would become indifferent to every action, and incapable of exertion; overwhelmed with the terrors of impending misfortune, he would endure the misery of criminals awaiting the moment of execution. The proof unanswerable and decisive, that dreams are not to be considered as prognostics, is, that no example can be produced of their successful effect, either in pointing out means of preventing harm, or facilitating benefit. Certain instances may be alleged, where the conformity of a dream, with some subsequent event may have been remarkable; but we may venture to assert, that such discoveries have generally happened after the facts, and that fancy and ingenuity have had the chief share in tracing the resemblance, or finding out the explanation. If it be granted that thought never stops, and that the mind is perpetually employed; the wonder should rather be, that so few cases of similitude have been recorded. If millions of the human species through the whole extent of time have been, during their state of slumber, continually subject to dream; perhaps the calculators of chances would be apt to maintain, that near coincidences have probably happened much more frequently than they have been either noticed or recollected. Amongst the various histories of singular dreams and corresponding events, we have lately heard of one, which seems to merit being rescued from oblivion. Its authenticity will appear from the relation; and we may surely pronounce, that a more extraordinary concurrence of fortuitous and accidental circumstances, can scarcely be produced, or paralleled. One Adam Rogers, a creditable and decent person, a man of good sense and repute, who kept a public-house at Portlaw, a small hamlet, nine or ten miles from Waterford, in the kingdom of Ireland, dreamed one night that he saw two men at a particular green spot on the adjoining mountain, one of them a small sickly looking man, the other remarkably strong and large. He then saw the little man murder the other, and he awoke in great agitation. The circumstances of the dream were so distinct and forcible, that he continued much affected by them. He related them to his wife, and also to several neighbours, next morning. After some time he went out coursing with greyhounds, accompanied, amongst others, by one Mr. Browne, the Roman Catholic priest of the parish. He soon stopped at the above-mentioned particular green spot on the mountain, and, calling to Mr. Browne, pointed it out to him, and told him what had appeared in his dream. During the remainder of the day he thought little more about it. Next morning he was extremely startled at seeing two strangers enter his house, about eleven o'clock in the forenoon. He immediately ran into an inner room, and desired his wife to take particular notice, for they were precisely the two men that he had seen in his dream. When they had consulted with one another, their apprehensions were alarmed for the little weakly man, though contrary to the appearance in the dream. After the strangers had taken some refreshment, and were about to depart, in order to prosecute their journey, Rogers earnestly endeavoured to dissuade the little man from quitting his house, and going on with his fellowtraveller. He assured him, that if he would remain with him that day, he would accompany him to Carrick next morning, that being the town to which the travellers were proceeding. He was unwilling and ashamed to tell the cause of his being so solicitous to separate him from his companion. But, as he observed that Hickey, which was the name of the little man, seemed to be quiet and gentle in his deportment, and had money about him, and that the other had a ferocious bad countenance, the dream still recurred to him. He dreaded that something fatal would happen; and he wished, at all events, to keep them asunder. However, the humane precautions of Rogers proved ineffectual; for Caulfield, such was the other's name, prevailed upon Hickey to continue with him on their way to Carrick, declaring that, as they had long travelled together, they should not part, but remain together until he should see Hickey safely arrive at the habitation of his friends. The wife of Rogers was much dissatisfied when she found they were gone, and blamed her husband exceedingly for not. being absolutely peremptory in detaining Hickey. About an hour after they left Portlaw, in a lonely part of the mountain, just near the place observed by Rogers in his dream, Caulfield took the opportunity of murdering his companion. It appeared afterwards, from his own account of the horrid transaction, that, as they were getting over a ditch, he struck Hickey on the back part of his head with a stone; and, when he fell down into the trench, in consequence of the blow, Caulfield gave him several stabs with a knife, and cut his throat so deeply that the head was observed to be almost severed from the body. He then rifled Hickey's pockets of all the money in them, took part of his clothes, and every thing else of value about him, and afterwards proceeded on his way to Carrick. He had not been long gone when the body, still warm, was discovered by some labourers who were returning to their work from dinner. The report of the murder soon reached to Portlaw. Rogers and his wife went to the place, and instantly knew the body of him whom they had in vain endeavoured to dissuade from going on with his treacherous' companion. They at once spoke out their suspicions that the murder was perpetrated by the fellow-traveller of the deceased. An immediate search was made, and Caulfield was apprehended at Waterford, the second day after. He was brought to trial at the ensuing assizes, and convicted of the fact. It appeared on the trial, amongst other circumstances, that when he arrived at Carrick, he hired a horse, and a boy to conduct him, not by the usual road, but by that which runs on the north side of the river Suir, to Waterford, intending to take his passage in the first ship from thence to Newfoundland. The boy took notice of some blood on his shirt, and Caulfield gave him half-a-crown to promise not to speak of it. Rogers proved, not only that Hickey was seen last in company with Caulfield, but that a pair of new shoes which Hickey wore, had been found on the feet of Caulfield when he was apprehended; and that a pair of old shoes which he had on at Rogers's house were upon Hickey's feet when the body was found. He described with great exactness every article of their clothes. Caulfield, on the cross-examination, shrewdly asked him from the dock, whether it was not very extraordinary that he, who kept a public-house, should take such particular notice of the dress of a stranger, accidentally calling there? Rogers, in his answer, said, he had a very particular reason, but was ashamed to mention it. The court and prisoner insisting on his declaring it, he gave a circumstantial narrative of his dream, called upon Mr. Browne, the priest, then in the court, to corroborate his testimony, and said, that his wife had severely reproached him for permitting Hickey to leave their house, when he knew that, in the short footway td Carrick, they must necessarily pass by the green spot in the mountain which had appeared in his dream. A number of witnesses came forward; and the proofs were so strong, that the jury, without hesitation, found the panel guilty. It was remarked, as a singularity, that he happened to be tried and sentenced by his namesake, Sir George Caulfield, at that time lord chief justice of the King's Bench,* which office he resigned in the summer of the year 1760. After sentence, Caulfield confessed the fact. It came out, that Hickey had been in the West Indies two and twenty years; but falling into a bad state of health, he was returning to his native country, Ireland, bringing with him some money his industry had acquired. The vessel on board which he took his passage was, by stress of weather, driven into Minehead. He there met with Frederick Caulfield, an Irish sailor, who was poor, and much distressed for elothes and common necessaries. Hickey, compassionating his poverty, and finding he was his countryman, relieved his wants, and an intimacy commenced between them. They agreed to go to Ireland together; and it was remarked on their passage, that Caulfield spoke contemptuously, and often said, it was a pity such a puny fellow as Hickey should have money, and he himself be without a shilling. They landed at Waterford, at which place they stayed some days, Caulfield being all the time supported by Hickey, who bought there some clothes for him. The assizes being held in the town during that time, it was afterwards recollected that they were both at the court-house, and attended the whole of a trial of a shoemaker, who was convicted of the murder of his wife. But this made no impression on the hardened mind of Caulfield; for the very next day he perpetrated the same crime on the road betwixt Waterford and Carrick-on-Suir, near which town Hickey's relations lived. He walked to the gallows with a firm step, and undaunted countenance. He spoke to the multitude who surrounded him; and, in the course of his address, mentioned that he had been bred at a charter-school, from which he was taken, as an apprenticed servant, by William Izod, Esq. of the county of Kilkenny. From this station he ran away on being corrected for some faults, and had been absent from Ireland six years. He confessed also, that he had several times intended to murder Hickey on the road between [* Frederick Caulfield was tried and found guilty at the Waterford assizes, before the Lord Chief Justice Saint George Caulfield (not Sir George), on July 25, 1759, and executed on Wednesday, the 8th of August following.See Gent. Mag. for August, 1788. E.] Waterford and Portlaw; which, though in general not a road much frequented, yet, people at that time continually coming in sight, prevented him. Being frustrated in all his schemes, the sudden and total disappointment threw him, probably, into an indifference for life. Some tempers are so stubborn and rugged, that nothing can affect them but immediate sensation. If to this be united the darkest ignorance, death, to such characters, will hardly seem terrible, because they can form no conception of what it is, and still less of the consequences that may follow. 1787, Dec. Yours, &c. A. LL. LXXIX. Influence of particular Studies with respect to Longevity. MR. URBAN, A GENTLEMAN who has made the tour of Europe, and is a minute inquirer into the different modes of life in different countries, has observed with great attention the influence of particular studies and pursuits on the health and long life of the professors. He finds that all, or many of those who study the more refined arts, particularly music, are in general of great age. He means those who are real admirers and artists, from true feelings of its powers to soothe and compose the mind to peace and serenity, and who have distinguished themselves by celebrated works and compositions. As to mere mechanical performers, their lives are in general shortened by dissipation and debauchery. Among the real admirers and composers, he gives remarkable instances in his own country, as well as Italy, Germany, and other parts, and instances the following professors and dilettanti: Antoniotto, Geminiani, 80 and upwards. Tartini, ditto. ditto. Leveridge, 90. Mr. St. André, ditto. Handel, 75. Old Cervetto, 95 and upwards. Farinelli, 90. Faustina, 80. Dr. Creighton, 90. dro Scarlatti, 87. Dr. Pepusch, 85. Rosingrave, sen. ditto. Old Tallis, ditto. Several of the Harrington family, 80. Colonel Blaythwayte, 80. The elder Bach, in Germany, 89. Sir Robert Throckmorton, with many more at this time abroad, of distinguished abilities and ages. Dr. Child, 91. Dr. Blow, 60. Dr. Holder, 82. Stanley, 70, and upwards. Dr. Arne, about 74. Keeble, about 73. Dr. Boyce, ditto. Sir John Hawkins, about 80. |