Eminent jurist and historian, born at Edinburgh in the year 1742. He was educated in the public school and in the University of his native city. To the pursuit of jurisprudence he devoted himself with uncommon ardour; but although he had a strong relish for the study of law, he anticipated no delight from its practice, and he was never called to the bar. Of his early progress in this study he exhibited a very conspicuous specimen in a work published without his name; An Historical Dissertation concerning the Antiquity of the English Constitution, Edinb., 1768, 8vo. Stuart’s Dissertation, distinguished by so much vigour of intellect and maturity of juridical learning, procured him from the university the degree of LL.D., which is very rarely bestowed upon so young a scholar. A second edition, bearing the author’s name, was published at London in the year 1771, and he then prefixed a dedication to the Earl of Mansfield. The dedication is dated at London in the month of January 1770; and before this period he had become a regular contributor to the Monthly Review, with which he continued his connection from 1768 to 1774. We likewise find him employed as the editor of An Historical Treatise on the Feudal Law, and the Constitution and Laws of England; with a Commentary on Magna Charta, and necessary Illustrations of many of the English Statutes; in a Course of Lectures read in the University of Dublin, by the late Francis Stoughton Sullivan, LL.D., Royal Professor of the Common Law in that University, Lond., 1772, 4to. A pseudonymous work, of a very different denomination, has been ascribed to Dr. Stuart. It bears the title of Animadversions on Mr. Adam’s Latin and English Grammar; being an Exhibition of its Defects, and an Illustration of the Danger of Introducing it into Schools. By John Richard Busby, Master of Arts, Edinb., 1773, 8vo.
Dr. Stuart now undertook the management of The Edinburgh Magazine and Review, of which the first number bears the date of November 1773. Smellie was the printer, and Stuart was the principal writer. Lord Hailes, Dr. Blacklock, Professor Richardson of Glasgow, Professor Barron of St. Andrews, and Smellie, were among the number of the contributors. The work was certainly clever, but much too satirical; and it consequently merely outlived the fifth volume, and expired in August 1776. Notwithstanding the failure of this project, Dr. Stuart had displayed so much talent in his principal articles, that his reputation as a man of letters suffered no diminution. He however felt a very painful mortification at the unsuccessful result of his labours; and his mind was so badly regulated that, instead of reflecting on the natural tendency of his own conduct, he continued to cherish a most bitter and indiscriminate resentment. He was still in the early vigour of manhood, and he speedily roused himself to new and greater exertions. After an interval of less than two years, he produced what we are disposed to regard as the best of his works, A View of Society in Europe, in its Progress from Rudeness to Refinement; or, Inquiries concerning the History of Law, Government, and Manners, Edinburgh, 1778, 4to. The style of this work, though never languid or feeble, may, however, be considered as deficient in fluency and variety. His periods are, perhaps, too uniformly short. “This brevity,” he avers, “is a conspicuous part of oratory, and is consistent with the greatest elevation and dignity. Where Cicero himself is most eloquent, and where the tide of his language is most rapid and powerful, his sentences are concise; and he avoids with care the periodic swell, as cold, artificial, and unnatural. And, indeed, it is to be laid down as a general rule, that where sentences are uniformly long, as in Milton and in Clarendon, there is no eloquence in the composition, and little connection in the argument.”—Edinburgh Magazine and Review, vol. v., p. 250.
Being disappointed in his expectations regarding the professorship of civil law in Edinburgh, he allowed his embittered spirit to find vent in all his future publications. This spirit is very easily to be discerned in his next publication, Observations concerning the Public Law and the Constitutional History of Scotland: with occasional Remarks concerning English Antiquity, Edinb., 1779, 8vo. This publication was speedily followed by The History of the Establishment of the Reformation of Religion in Scotland, Lond., 1780, 4to. The work is written with his usual ability, but it cannot be affirmed that such an undertaking was peculiarly adapted to his habits of thinking. He however displays a greater degree of impartiality than could well have been anticipated. Of this work, his next publication may be considered as the sequel: The History of Scotland, from the Establishment of the Reformation till the death of Queen Mary, Lond., 1782, 2 vols. 4to. Here the author has made a great, and indeed a splendid effort, to eclipse the reputation of Robertson, whom he both envied and hated. As the one historian considered Mary guilty of some of the foulest crimes laid to her charge, it was almost an obvious consequence that the other should represent her as innocent. The preface to the History of Scotland is dated at London on the 1st of March 1782; and soon after this period he undertook the management of the English Review in 1783. How long he continued to conduct the English Review we are not informed. In 1785 he became the editor of The Political Herald and Review. This work, it is believed, only reached a second volume. It is too well known that Stuart’s mode of life had been such as to impair his health and strength. With a constitution undermined by disease, and a mind soured by disappointment, he embarked for Leith, and sought a place of rest under the roof of his father, who having become emeritus professor in 1775, was then residing at Musselburgh. The son was labouring under a dropsy, from which the usual operation afforded him a temporary relief; but all medical aid was ineffectual, and he descended to his grave at the premature age of forty-four. He died on the 13th of August 1786, and his father survived till the 18th of June 1793.
Gilbert Stuart is thus described by a writer who seems to have had some personal knowledge of him: He “was about the middle size, and justly proportioned. His countenance was modest and expressive, sometimes announcing sentiments of glowing friendship, of which he is said to have been truly susceptible; at others, displaying strong indignation against folly and vice, which he had also shown in his writings. With all his ardour for study, he yielded to the love of intemperance, to which, notwithstanding a strong constitution, he fell an early sacrifice.” See also Literary Criticism.
