and fair hair. His large prominent eyes, of a light colour, were weak, nearsighted, and not very animated. His nose was long and high, his mouth wide, and both ill-shaped. His whole exterior to strangers appeared unengaging, trifling, and mean; and his deportment was timid and obsequious. The prejudices naturally excited by these disadvantages at introduction, were, however, dispelled on acquaintance; and, as he became easy and pleased, gradually yielded to agreeable sensations; till they insensibly vanished, and at last, were not only overlooked, but, from the effect of contrast, even heightened the attractions by which they were so unexpectedly followed. When in company he esteemed, and which suited his taste, as restraint wore off, his eye imperceptibly became active, bright, and penetrating; his manner and address quick, lively, and interesting—always kind, polite, and respectful; his conversation open and gay, humorous without satire, and playfully replete with benevolence, observation, and anecdote."—Brown's edition of the Gentle Shepherd, 1808.
The author who thus forcibly delineates his external appearance, gives the following character of his genius. "As a painter, at least in his own country, he neither excelled in drawing, composition, colouring, nor effect Like Hogarth, too, beauty, grace, and grandeur, of individual outline and form, or of style, constitute no part of his merit He was no Corregio, Raphael, or Michael Angelo. He painted portraits as well as Hogarth, below the middle size; but they are void of all charms of elegance, and of the claro-obscuro, and are recommended by nothing but a strong homely resemblance. As an artist and a man of genius, his characteristic talent lay in expression, in the imitation of nature with truth and humour, especially in the representation of ludicrous scenes in low life. His eye was ever on the watch for every eccentric figure, every motley group, or ridiculous incident, out of which his pencil or his needle could draw innocent enter iainment and mirth."
ALSTON, Charles, M.D. an eminent botanist, was born in 1683, in Lanarkshire, and spent his early years at Hamilton palace, under the patronage of the duchess of Hamilton. Her grace wished him to study the law, but he preferred botany and medicine, and accordingly, in 1716, set out for Leyden, where those sciences were at that time taught by the illustrious Boerhaave. Here he found a great number of young Scotsmen engaged in the same pursuit, and all inspired with an uncommon degree of enthusiam in their studies, which they had caught from their master. Alston, after taking his degree as doctor of physic, returned to his native country, and began to practise in Edinburgh. He obtained the sinecure office of king's botanist, through the influence of the duke of Hamilton, heritable keeper of Holyrood-house, to which the garden was attached. This garden he enriched by large collections which he had made in Holland, where botanical science was then more highly cultivated than in any other country in Europe. In 1720, notwithstanding that a botanical class was taught in the college by a professor of eminence named Preston, he began a course of lectures in the king's garden. Preston, at length waxing old, Alston was, in 1738, chosen to succeed him, as professor of botany and materia medica united. He was exceedingly laborious in his duties as a professor, giving a course on botany every summer, and one on materia medica every winter; and never sparing any pains whick he thought could be conducive to the progress of his pupils. The celebrated^ Dr Fothergill, in his character of Dr Russell, bears ample testimony to the assiduity of Dr Alston, who had been his master; and describes in glowing language the benefit which those who attended him had the means of reaping, his caution in speculation, and how laborious he was in experiment For the assistance of his pupils, be published, about 1740, a list of the official plants cultivated in the Edinburgh medical garden. Of Linnaeus's system, which was first promulgated in
