1, A flower, much magnified; 2, a legume. LEIBNITZ, GOTTFRIED WILHELM, was born July 3, 1646, at Leipzig, where his father (Friedrich) was professor of jurisprudence. Having lost his father at the age of six years, he was placed at the school of St. Nicholas, in his native city, from which he was removed in his fifteenth year to the university of the same place. Although law was his principal study, he combined the legal lessons of the elder Thomasius with those of Kuhn in mathematics, and applied at the same time with great diligence to phi . lology, history, and, in short, to every branch of knowledge. Of antient writers, Plato, Aristotle, and the Pythagoreans seem to have exercised the greatest influence on his menta. character, and his profound knowledge of their writings has furnished many an element in his own philosophy, while it suggested a wish, as bold as it was impracticable, of reconciling their several systems and combining them into one consistent whole. After further prosecuting his mathematical studies at Jena under Erhard Weigel, Leibniz returned to Leipzig, where he passed successively to the degrees of bachelor and master in philosophy. On the latter occasion (A.D. 1664) he read his treatise De Principio Individuationis, in which he took the side of the nominalists against the realists. His pursuits at this time were chiefly of a mathematical and juristical character. In 1664 appeared the treatise Quæstiones Philosophica ex Jure collectæ,' which was followed in the next year by the Doctrina Conditionum.' The treatise 'De Arte Combinatoria' was published in 1666. This important and remarkable work contained a new method of combining numbers and ideas, and was intended to exhibit the scientific advantages of a more extensive design, of which it was only a particular application. This general design, which is sketched in the Historia et Commendatio Lingua Characteristica Universalis' (Posthumous Works, by Raspé, p. 535), was the invention of an alphabet of ideas, to consist of the most simple elements or characters of thought, by which every possible combination of ideas might be expressed; so that by analysis or synthesis the proof or discovery of all truth might be possible. Notwithstanding such early proofs of his genius and talents, Leibnitz was refused a dispensation of age which he had asked for at Leipzig in order to take the degree of Doctor of Laws, which however he obtained at Altorf. His exercise on this occasion was published under the title De Casibus in Jure Perplexis,' which was everywhere received with approbation. Declining a professorship here offered to him, in all probability from a distaste for a scholastic life, he proceeded to Nürnberg, where he joined a society of adepts in the pursuit of the philosopher's stone, and, being appointed secretary, was selected to compile their most famous works on Alchemy. For such an occupation he is said to have proved his fitness by composing after the style of the Alchemists, that it was unintelligible a letter, requesting the honour of admission, so completely even to himself. From these pursuits he was removed by the Baron Von Boineburg, chancellor to the elector of Mainz, who invited him to proceed to Frankfort in the capacity of councillor of state and assessor of the chamber of justice. He here composed the valuable and important essay Nova Methodus docendi discendique Juris, cum subjecto catalogo desideratorum.' At this time Leibnitz began to prosecute the study of philosophy with greater energy, and to extend his fame to foreign countries by the republication of the work of Nizolius, De veris Principiis et vera Ratione Philosophandi,' to which he contributed many philosophical notes and treatises. To this date belong two original compositions which are remarkable for their boldness of views, and as containing the germ of his later philosophical system. Of these two works, the Theoria Motus Concreti' was communicated to the Royal Society of London, and the Theoria Motus Abstracti' to the Academy of Sciences of Paris. The latter city he first visited in 1672, in company with the son of his patron, and there formed the acquaintance of the most learned and distinguished men of the age; among others, of Malebranche, Cassini, and Huyghens, whose work on the oscillation of the pendulum attracted Leibnitz to the pursuit of the higher mathematics. Leibnitz next proceeded to London, where he became personally acquainted with Newton, Oldenburg, Wallis, Boyle, and others, with many of whom he had previously maintained an active correspondence. Upon the death of the elector of Mainz, he received from the duke of Brunswick Lüneburg the appointment of hofrath and royal librarian, with permission however to travel at pleasure. He accordingly visited London a second time, in order to make known his mathematical studies and to exhibit his arithmetical machine. machine, either an improvement of that of Pascal, or an original invention, is described in the first volume of the Miscellanea Berolinensia,' and is still preserved in the museum at Göttingen. From London Leibnitz returned to Hanover, where he was engaged in arranging the library and in the discovery and development of the method of in This finitestata, which was so similar to the method of fluxions of Newton as to lead to a bitter dispute between the admirers of these great men, and ultimately between themselves, as to the priority of discovery. To decide this dispute the Royal Society of London, at the request of Leibnitz, nominated a commission, which decided in favor of Newton. [FLUXIONS; COMMERCIUM EPISTOLICUM.] There is little doubt however that the two methods were equally independent and original; but if the two claims are irreconcilable, the priority of publication gives the presumption in favor of Leibnitz. To this period belong also the important works of a mixed historical and political nature, Scriptores Rerum Brunsvicensium,' and the Codex Juris Gentium Diplomaticus,' the materials of which he had collected during his travels through France, Suabia, Bavaria, and Austria, which he undertook at the instance of Duke Ernest Augustus of Brunswick. In 1683 he joined Otto Mencke in publishing the Acta Eruditorum" of Leipzig, and from 1691 he was also a constant contributor to the Journal des Savans,' in which many of his most important essays on philosophy first appeared. To this period belong the composition of the Monadologie' and the Harmonie Préétablie.' In 1702 Leibnitz was appointed president of the Academy of Sciences at Berlin, which the elector of Brandenburg, afterwards Frederick I. of Prussia, had established at the instance of his queen, a princess of the nouse of Brunswick, and by the advice of Leibnitz himself. In 1710 the Theodicée' was published, with a view to oppose the tendency of the writings of Bayle; and two years afterwards the Nouveaux Essais sur l'Entendement Humain,' in answer to the essay of Locke. In the previous year Leibnitz formed the personal acquaintance of Peter the Great, who, at Torgau, consulted him on the best means to be adopted for the civilization of Russia, and rewarded his valuable suggestions by the title and dignity of councillor of state and a pension of 1000 rubles. Shortly afterwards, at the instance of Prince Ulrich of Brunswick, the emperor, Charles VI., elected him aulic councillor and baron of the empire; and, in consequence, he visited Vienna, where he became acquainted with the Prince Eugene of Savoy and the chancellor Count Sinzendorf. Upon the elevation of the elector of Hanover to the throne of England, Leibnitz returned to Hanover, where, after the publication of a few political and philosophical works, he expired on the 14th November, 1714. He was buried on the esplanade at Leipzig, where a monument, in the form of a temple, indicates, by the simple inscription Ossa Leibnitii,' the place of his burial. The best éloge of Leibnitz,' to use the words of Dugald Stewart, is furnished by the literary history of the eighteenth century, a history which, whoever takes pains to compare with his works and with his epistolary correspondence, will find reason to doubt whether, at the singular æra when he appeared, he could have more accelerated the advancement of knowledge by the concentration of his studies than he has actually done by the universality of his aims.' ་ The first object of the philosophical labours of Leibnitz was to give to philosophy the rigour and stability of mathematical science. The latter derives this character both from its formal portion, or demonstration, and also from the nature of its object-matter. With a view to the former, Leibnitz assumed the existence of certain universal and necessary truths which are not derived from science, but grounded in the very nature of the thinking soul. (Principia Philosophiæ, s. 30-7.) As the object-matter of mathematics may be supposed to be constructed of points or units, Leibnitz was led to the assumption of certain primary constituents of all matter. These are his famous monads, which form the basis of his system. These monads are simple substances without parts, out of which all bodies are compounded by aggregation. They are real, because without real simple principles the composite would not possess reality; and consequently, if there were no monads, nothing of any kind could exist really. These monads must not be confounded with the atoms of Democritus or Epicurus. They are real' units, the grounds of all activity, or forces, and the prime absolute principles of all composite things, which may ultimately be resolved into them. Leibnitz called them metaphysical points and substantial forms. Being without parts, they are necessarily unextended, indivisible, and without figure. As such they are incapable of dissolution, and without natural decay or production, which is only possible in composite bodies. The monads therefore were created at once and momentarily, and in the same manner they must be destroyed or last for ever. Internally they admit not of change, since neither substance nor accident can penetrate what is wholly without parts. Nevertheless they must possess certain determinations or qualities, since otherwise they could not be things. Further, every monad is distinct from all others; for there cannot be two things absolutely identical and without internal difference. This proposition forms one of Leibnitz's necessary and fundamental principles, which he called the principle of iden tity of indiscernibles' (principium identitatis indiscernibilium). According to this principle all things must differ more or less, since otherwise they would be indistinguishable, for identical things are indiscernible. All created things are subject to change; consequently the monads also are constantly changing. This change however is only external, and does not operate internally; on the contrary, the outward change results from an internal principle; and this internal principle of change constitutes the essence of all force: the monads consequently are forces. Besides this principle of change every monad possesses also a certain schema of that which is changed, which, so to say, while it expresses the differences and multiplicity of the monad, yet comprises the multiplicity in unity. All natural changes proceed in gradation; consequently, while one part is changing, another remains unchanged, and the mo nads consequently possess a plurality of affections and relations. This transitory state, which experiences and exhibits the multiplicity of changes in the unity of the monad, is perception, which however is unconscious (sine conscientia). The active force, by which the change or passage from perception to perception is accomplished, is an appetite (appetitus). By its action the monads are ever attaining to new perceptions, in which their whole activity consists, and besides which nought else is in them; consequently they may be termed entelechies, as possessing a certain perfection (rò EvTeλeg) and a certain self-sufficiency (aurapreía), by which they are the sources of their own activity. In lifeless things perception is uncombined with consciousness; in animated, it is combined with it and becomes apperception. The monads endued with apperception may be called souls, and, in combination with the unconscious monads, constitute all animals; the only difference between man and the rest of animals, as between God and man, consisting in a higher degree of perfection. The unconscious perception is also found in the monads endued with apperception, when they are in a state of sleep or are stunned, for in sleep the soul is without apperception, and like the other monads. All perceptions however are closely dependent on each other; and when consequently the soul passes from sleep, the unconscious perceptions which it had during that state form the link which connects its present thoughts with the past. This fact affords an explanation of memory, and that anticipation of like results from like causes which guides the conduct of all animals. Man however is distinguished from the rest by his cogni tion of eternal and necessary truths; by these he rises to a knowledge both of his own and the Divine nature; and these constitute what is called reason or mind. By these necessary truths man becomes capable of the reflex art of distinguishing the subject (ego) and the object (res), and furnishes him with the fundamental principles of all rea soning, namely, the principle of contradiction and the law of sufficient reason. According to the former, whatever involves a contradiction is false, and its opposite true: the latter teaches that nothing can be true or exist, unless some reason exist why it should be as it is, and not other wise. This sufficient reason of all necessary truths may be discovered by analysis, which arrives ultimately at the primary notions which assume the form of identical proposi tions, and are incapable of proof, but legitimate themselves. In the same manner all contingent truths must have an ultimate cause, since otherwise an infinite series of contingencies must be assumed in which reason would be lost. This last cause of all things and of their mutual depend ence in the universe is God, who is absolute infinite perfection, from whom all things derive their perfection, while they owe their imperfection to their own nature, which, as finite, is incapable of receiving into itself infinite perfection. The Divine intellect is also the source of all eternal truths and ideas, and without God nothing could possibly be actual, and nothing could exist necessarily, God alone, as possessing infinite perfection, exists of neces sity; for as nothing obstructs his potentiality, ne is without negation or contradiction, and is unlimited. But although the eternal truths have their reason in the nature of God, they are not therefore arbitrary or determined by the will of God. This is the case only with contingent truths. God, as the prime monad by whom all created monads were produced, is omnipotent; as the source of the ideas after which all things were created and from which they receive their nature, he is intelligent, and he also possesses a will which creates those finite things which his intelligence recognises as the best possible. These same properties of intelligence and will constitute the subject, or ego, in man, by which he is capable of perceiving or desiring. While however these attributes are in the highest degree of perfection in the Deity, in finite things they are variously limited, according to the respective degrees of perfection. As imperfect, the activity of the created monads tends without themselves; consequently they possess activity so far as they possess clear perceptions (apperception), and are sive so far as they perceive obscurely. Of two composite substances, that is the more perfect which possesses the ground of the contingent changes of the latter: but simple substances cannot exert any influence on each other, unless by the intervention of the Deity, who, at the creation, arranged them in due co-ordination with each other. This adjustment of the monads was in accordance with certain sufficient reasons in each monad, by which the Divine will was moved to place the passivity of one and the activity of one in an harmonial relation; this sufficient reason was their comparative perfection: hence the famous principle of Leibnitz, which has been designated by the term Optimism-that of all possible worlds, God has chosen and produced the best. As every monad stands in harmonious relation to all others, it expresses the relations of all, and is, as it were, a mirror of the universe which is represented in a peculiar manner by each. Hence the greatest possible variety is combined with the greatest possible harmony. God alone can embrace all these relations, while finite minds have only a very obscure perception of them. All in the world is full, and bound together into one continuous and coherent whole. The motion of each single monad, whether simple or in aggregation, affects all according to distance; and God therefore sees all future things, as well as present and past. But the soul is only cognizant of what is present to it; and although indeed it represents the whole universe, yet the infinity of objects surpasses its capacity, and its clearest representations are of those which immediately affect the body with which it is united. The soul pursues its own laws, and the body likewise its own; both however, by reason of the harmony established at the creation among all monads, as representatives of the universe, act in unison. The soul strives after means and ends, and works by the laws of final causes; the body, by those of efficient causes. Both species of causes are in harmony with each other. Such is the system of pre-established harmony, according to which the body and soul act independently of each other, and each as if the other did not exist, and yet nevertheless both as if they had an influence on each other. This harmonious relation of the body and soul Leibnitz illustrates by the supposition of two clocks, one of which points, while the other strikes the hour; both harmonise in their movements, but nevertheless are independent of each other. The power and goodness of God are displayed in the whole universe, but it is in the moral world that they are chiefly visible. Between the natural and the moral worlds, or between God as creator of the mundane machine and as ruler of spirits, the strictest harmony subsists. God as architect of the world is consistent with himself as lawgiver; and agreeably to the mechanical regulation of the course of nature, every transgression is followed by punishment, as every good act is by rewards, since all is so disposed as to contribute to the good and happiness of the whole. This is the grand principle of the 'Theodicée. In this work Leibnitz shows that God, as all-powerful, all-wise, and all-good, has chosen and created the best of all possible worìds, notwithstanding the seeming objections which may be drawn from the existence of evil. If a better constitution of things had been possible, God would have chosen it in preference; and even if another equally good had been possible, there would not have been any sufficient reason for the existence of the present world. The existence of evil is both metaphysical and physical. As to the former the antecedent will of God designed infinite good; but this A more immediate source of evil is the freedom of the human will, which however exists for the sake of a greater good, namely, the possible meritoriousness of man and his consequent adaptation to a state of felicity to be attained by his spontaneous acts. This freedom of man is intermediate between a stringent necessity and a lawless caprice. That man is free who, of several courses which in certain circumstances are physically possible, chooses that which appears the most desirable. This choice however cannot be without a motive or sufficient reason, which however is of such a nature as to incline only, and not to compel. Every event in the universe takes place according to necessity; but the necessity of human actions is of a peculiar kind; it is simply moral, and is not destructive of its contrary, and consists merely in the choice of the best. Even the Divine omniscience is not destructive of human liberty. God unquestionably knows all future events, and among these consequently the acts of all individuals in all time who act and sin freely. This prescience however does not make the contingency of human actions a necessity. Such was the philosophical system by which Leibnitz sought to correct the erroneous opinions of his age, which had been drawn from the theory and established on the authority of Des Cartes. The broad and marked distinction which the latter had drawn between matter and mind had led to an inexplicable difficulty as to the reciprocal action of the body and soul, to get rid of which Spinosa had advanced his theory of substance, and denied or got rid of the difference. Leibnitz attempted to solve this difficulty by resolving all things into spirit, and assuming nothing but mental powers or forces. Nevertheless he has only presented the dualism of the Cartesian theory under another form; and the equal difficulty of explaining the community of action between the conscious and unconscious forces so as to account for the reciprocal influence of body and mind forced him to have recourse to the gratuitous assumption of the pre-established harmony. As to the charge of fatalism, which Dugald Stewart has objected to, his objection seems to have arisen from that antagonism of error which takes refuge from a blind necessity in irrational chance. The theory of optimism has been the subject of the satire of Voltaire; but it is not more misrepresented in 'Candide' than in the 'Essay on Man. Pope and Leibnitz agree in the position that of all possible systems infinite wisdom must form the best; but by the coherency of all, the former understood the coexistence of all grades of perfection, from nothing up to Deity; the latter, that mutual dependence of all in the world by which each single entity is a reason of all others. By the fullness of creation Leibnitz denied the existence of any gap in the causal order of co-existent things; Pope asserted by it the unbroken series of all degrees of perfection. The Divine permission of evil Pope referred to the indisposition of the Deity to disturb general by occasional laws. There is consequently evil in the world which the Deity might have got rid of, if he were willing in certain cases to inter rupt his general providence. Consequently he admits evil in the world which does not contribute to the perfection of the whole. Leibnitz however denies that God could remove the existing evil from the world without prejudice to its goodness. He moreover does not admit of the opposition of general and particular providence, but makes the general law of the universe to be nothing else than the totality of all special laws. (On this subject consult Mendelsohn, ‘Kl. ph Schriften,' p. 538.) Leibnitz has been more principally spoken of as a metaphysician, but it should be remembered that his mathematical fame is as high among mathematicians as bis metaphysical reputation is among metaphysicians, and perhaps higher. Of the works of Leibnitz several editions and collections have appeared. The two principal are the following: G. W. Leibnitii, Opp. omnia nunc primum coll. stud.' Dutens, Geneva, 6 vols.; and 'Euvres Phil., Lat., et Franc., de feu M. Leibnitz, pub. par. M. Raspé, Amstelod., 1765, 4to. The Commercium Philosophicum et Mathematicum,' two volumes, quarto, containing the correspondence of Leibnitz with John Bernoulli, was published at Lausanne and Geneva in 1745. In 1585 Leicester took charge of some forces sent to the Low Countries, and was invested with great powers for the settlement of some differences that had arisen there: he sailed in December, and was received at Flushing with great pomp. He was unfit however for a military commander, and so fully manifested his incapacity while opposing the troops of his experienced adversary the Prince of Parma, that on his return to the Hague the States expressed their dissatisfaction at his tactics, and suspicions of his fidelity. He returned to England in November, 1586. [BARNEVELDT.] Tower; she relented however, and again received him at court with undiminished esteem. There were other persons to whom, for other reasons, Leicester's marriage was likewise a source of anger. There were suspicions that foul means had been resorted to for its accomplishment. These suspicions, as in the previous cases, could not be proved; for such inquiries as were not suppressed through fear were foiled by artifice; but considering Leicester's character. they were warranted by the facts. He had becom enamoured of Lady Essex during her husband's life-time Lord Essex died suddenly of a peculiar sickness which LEICESTER. [LEICESTERSHIRE.] could not be accounted for, and two days after his death LEICESTER, ROBERT DUDLEY, EARL OF, one Leicester was married to his widow. Accusations for this of Queen Elizabeth's principal favourites, was born about and other offences were not only made in private, but the year 1531, of an antient and noble family, an account attacks against him were published in a book entitled 'Leof which may be seen in the Biographia Britannica.' Ed-cester's Commonwealth,' which the queen caused her mund Dudley, the rapacious minister of Henry VII., was council to contradict upon her own personal knowledge and his grandfather. His father was John Dudley, duke of authority. Northumberland, who, after attaining considerable celebrity during the reigns of Henry VIII. and Edward VI., was executed in August, 1553, for his adherence to the claims of Lady Jane Grey, who was his daughter-in-law. Robert Dudley was knighted by Edward VI.; was imprisoned at the same time and for the same offence as his father; was liberated in 1554; and was afterwards appointed master of the ordnance to Queen Mary. He had all those exterior qualities which were likely to ingratiate him with a queen; a youthful and handsome person, a polite address, and a courteous insinuating behaviour: and Elizabeth was no sooner on the throne than she bestowed upon him a profusion of It was at the time of his arrival that Elizabeth was anxgrants and titles. He received from her lordships, manors,ious to determine what course to pursue with her prisoner and castles: he was made master of the horse, a privy-counsellor, a knight of the garter, high-steward of the University of Cambridge, baron of Denbigh, and earl of Leicester; to which other dignities were subsequently added. Leicester was continually in attendance at court, and the queen delighted in his society. At an early age he had married Amy, the daughter of Sir John Robsart. In 1560 this lady died suddenly at Cumnor under suspicious circumstances, murdered, as many supposed, at the instigation of her husband, who, seeing no bounds to the queen's friendship for him, found his wife an obstacle to his ambition. The queen admired him, trusted him, and allowed him great influence; she also projected a marriage for him, but it was not with herself. She proposed him as a husband for Mary, Queen of Scots. We doubt however whether the offer was sincerely made, and whether, if other parties had been willing, she would have given her consent. It is scarcely necessary to say that the union did not take place; and that Leicester, continuing to reside at court, played his part with the queen with consummate dexterity and cunning. During this residence he engaged in an intrigue, or, as some writers say, a marriage with the widow of Lord Sheffield, who bore him a son, to whom he bequeathed the bulk of his property in a will which designated him his base son. Lady Sheffield afterwards narrowly escaped death from some poison that was administered to her, and being menaced by the earl of Leicester, consented to marry Sir Edward Stafford. Whether Leicester caused the poison to be given cannot be ascertained, but it is certain that his anxiety to destroy all connexion with himself was the cause of his promoting her marriage. It would have been most dangerous to his ambition that the queen should hear of his intrigue, and he was successful in concealing it. His favour continued, and the queen was prevailed upon to visit his castle at Kenilworth, in Warwickshire, where he entertained her for many days with pageants and feasting, prepared in a style of magnificence unequalled even in those days. (Strype's Annals.) Mary, Queen of Scots. When Leicester was consulted, it was his advice that she should be privately put to death, a recommendation which somewhat strengthens the suspicions of him which had been previously entertained. In 1587 he returned to the Low Countries with a considerable force, both horse and foot, and was received with honours; but before long fresh quarrels arose between him and the States; he was again accused of mismanagement, and the queen recalled him after an absence of five months. In 1588 he was appointed lieutenant-general of the infantry mustered at Tilbury Fort for defence against the Spaniards. This was the last trust conferred upon him. He was seized with illness at his house at Cornbury, in Oxfordshire, which he had visited on his road to Kenil worth, and died on the 4th of September, 1588. His body was removed to Warwick for interment. 'Leicester,' says Mr. Hume, was proud, insolent, interested, ambitious; without honour, without generosity, without humanity. Neither his abilities nor his courage were worthy of the trust that was reposed in them. His dexterity as a courtier was remarkable; and he is a rare instance of a favourite maintaining a long and uninterrupted ascendency until the end of his life.' After the fashion of the age, he gave lands for charitable endowments, and the hospital of Robert, earl of Leicester, at Warwick, still remains as a monument of his liberality, or perhaps only of his vanity and conformity to the practice of his times. (Biog. Brit.; Aikin's Elizabeth; Hume's Hist., &c.) LEICESTERSHIRE, an English county, bounded on the north by Nottinghamshire, on the north-east by Lincolnshire, on the east by Rutlandshire, on the south-east by Northamptonshire, on the south-west by Warwickshire, and on the north-west by Derbyshire. It is included between 52° 24′ and 52° 59' N. lat., and between 0° 39′ and 1° 37′ W. long. The greatest length is, from north by east to south by west, from the junction of the three counties of Nottingham, Leicester, and Lincoln, to the neighbourhood It is not surprising that Leicester, on account of the of Lutterworth, 44 miles; its greatest breadth, at right undue eminence to which he had risen, should have been angles to the length, is, from the neighbourhood of Ashbyodious to Cecil, Essex, and many of the principal English de-la-Zouch to that of Rockingham, 40 miles. The area is nobility; neither can it be wondered at that the foreign estimated at 806 square miles. The population, by the ambassadors who came to treat for the hand of the queen census of 1821, was 174,571; in 1831 it was 197,003; should have felt hostility towards a courtier who, aspiring to showing an increase in ten years of 22,432, or about 12:5 be her suitor himself, was known to be adverse to her per cent., and giving 244 inhabitants to a square mile. In making a foreign alliance. To undermine his power was size it is the twenty-eighth of the English counties, rankthe interest of many persons; and it was with this viewing between Nottinghamshire and Westmoreland; in popu that Simier, the ambassador of the duke of Anjou, acquainted Elizabeth with a fact which had been hitherto concealed from her, namely Leicester's marriage with Lady Essex. The queen was violently angry when first the disclosure was made, and threatened to commit him to the lation the twenty sixth, ranking between Worcestershire and Northamptonshire; in density of population it is the twelfth, ranking between Somersetshire and Yorkshire. Leicester, the county-town, is on the river Soar, about 90 miles in a direct line north-north-west of London, or 98 t The Wreak is a tributary of the Soar. It is reputed to rise at Ab Kettleby, near Melton Mowbray; but the true head is near Oakham in Rutlandshire, from whence it flows in a winding channel to Melton, below which it receives the short stream from Ab Kettleby: before this junction it is called Eye, or Eie. It then flows into the Soar near Mount Sorrel, after a course of about twenty-five miles. Its channel, so far as it is navigable, forms part of the Leicester and Melton Mowbray Navigation. miles by the road through St. Alban's, Dunstable, Stony | between Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire: the upper Stratford, Northampton, and Market Harborough. A part belongs wholly to Leicestershire. It was antiently detached portion of Derbyshire near Ashby-de-la-Zouch is called Leire, from which the town and county of Leicester surrounded on three sides by Leicestershire, and on the derive their name. This river has a gentle current: it is fourth side by Warwickshire and Staffordshire. navigable for about seven miles from its junction with the Surface and Geological Character.-The surface of Lei-Trent to the neighbourhood of Loughborough; a canal concestershire consists almost entirely of gently rising hills. tinues the navigation up to that town. The length of the The north-eastern part is occupied by the southern ex- Soar is nearly forty miles. tremity of the Kesteven Cliffe Row, which extends through a considerable part of Lincolnshire, and skirts the basin of the Trent and of the Upper Witham. These hills overlook the vale of Belvoir, which is partly in Leicestershire and partly in Nottinghamshire. The south-eastern portion of the county, from Owston, not far from Melton Mowbray, to Lutterworth, is occupied by the hills which separate the basin of the Soar from that of the Wellaud. The northwestern portion, between Mount Sorrel, Loughborough, Ashby-de-la-Zouch, Market Bosworth, and Leicester, constitutes the district which, though now bare of wood, retains its antient designation of Charnwood Forest. This district is occupied by a group of hills of inconsiderable elevation, but of a rugged character, with distinct, sharp prominences. Bardon Hill, between Leicester and Ashby, is the most elevated point of the group, and commands probably a greater extent of landscape than any other point in the island. In one direction Lincoln Cathedral, distant sixty miles, forms a prominent object in the horizon; in another direction, with a good glass, the Dunstable Hills, distant nearly eighty miles, may be seen. The Malvern Hills in Worcestershire, the Wrekin in Shropshire, and even some eminences in North and South Wales, are distinguishable. The Derbyshire Hills, to the highest point of the Peak, are also visible. Right lines described from the extremities of the view would include nearly one-fourth part of England and Wales. The height of Bardon Hill is 853 feet above the level of the sea. The Anker skirts the border of the county for two or The Mease, a feeder of the Trent, which rises just within The Deven, which joins the Trent at Newark, has its source in Croxton Park in this county: the Smyte, or Smite, which waters the vale of Belvoir, rises just within the county, near Nether Broughton. These are all the streams belonging to the system of the Trent which claim notice. The Avon, a tributary of the Severn, forms the boundary of the county for seven or eight miles on the southern side, separating it from Northamptonshire. The Swift, a small stream which flows by Lutterworth, falls into it. The Welland, which rises just within Northamptonshire, forms, for sixteen or eighteen miles, the boundary between that county and Leicestershire. A small feeder of the Welland divides, for about seven miles, the counties of Leicester and Rutland. Some portions of the east side of Leicestershire are oc- Leicestershire has several canals. The Leicester Naviga- Hydrography and Communications.-The county is chiefly included in the basin of the Trent, which just touches the county, and for a few miles divides it from Derbyshire. The principal tributary of the Trent belonging to this county is the Soar, which is formed by the junction of several small streams that rise near the south-western border of the county between Hinckley and Lutterworth. It forms a crescent, the line joining the extremities of which runs north and south, from the heads of the river to its junction with the Trent below Kegworth. In the lower part of its course the Soar forms the boundary P. C., No. 838. The Leicestershire and Northamptonshire Union Canal extends from the Leicester Navigation at Leicester, to Foxton near Market Harborough, with a cut from Foxton to Harborough. It is carried for the first two or three miles along the bed of the Soar. Its whole length is about seventeen miles: or, including the branch to Harborough, twenty-one miles. At Saddington there is a tunnel half a mile long, through which the canal passes. The rise in the canal is about one hundred and twenty feet from Lei The Grand Union Canal forms a communication between the Grand Junction Canal, at Long Buckby in Northamptonshire, and the Leicestershire and Northamptonshire Union Canal at Foxton. Its whole length is nearly fortyfive miles, of which about eight are in Leicestershire. In the Leicestershire part there are a tunnel and a short branch canal to Welford in Northamptonshire. The Oakham Canal runs from Oakham in Rutlandshire to Melton Mowbray, where it unites with the Leicester and Melton Mowbray Navigation. Its whole length is about fifteen miles, of which more than half is in Leicestershire. The Ashby-de-la-Zouch Canal commences in the Coventry Canal, about three miles from Nuneaton in Warwickshire, and runs to the coal-field south-west of Ashby. Its whole length is above twenty-six miles, of which twenty-one are in Leicestershire or in the detached portion of Derbyshire. It is on one level throughout. It is principally used for the conveyance of the coal and lime procured in the neighbourhood of Ashby. There are three railways connected with this canal VOL. XIII.-3 F |