Opuscula varia utriusque Linguæ Medicinam, 4to 1765—2. a Farewell Oration, 1768, 4to—3. Fragmentum Isaaci Hawkins Browne completum, 1769, 4to—4. Appendix ad Opuscula; six odes, 1770, 4to—5. A proposal on our Coin, to remedy all present and prevent all future disorders 1774, 4to—6. A New years Gift, 1772—7. Corrections in verse, from the father of the College, 4to—8. Speech to the Royal Society, 1772—9. An Eulogy and address, 1773—10. a Latin version of Job, left unfinished, 4to.” From the above sketch the reader will perceive that Sir William Browne was a person of no common cast, or ordinary genius. Men of his sort are not to be seen every day: and when they do appear they are sure to attract observation, and are apt to make a stir wherever they happen to fix their residence. Sir William was at the head of the party which opposed the ruling body here for most part of his long residence in this town: and he appears to have acted his part with no small skill and dexterity, and with considerable effect. When the squabble assumed any thing of a literary aspect, Dr. Pyle seems to have been his chief opponent. At other times he had the whole corporate body at him, and it must be said that he generally defended himself and repelled the attacks of the whole host of those philistines very stoutly and successfully. There is great reason to believe that the opposition which he and his friends so long maintained here, was often of real and not small service to the town. At the contested election in, 1747, he bore a very conspicuous part, as appears from Dr. Pyle’s Letter already quoted. The part he acted on that occasion is supposed to have laid the foundation of that intimacy between him and Mr. Folkes which issued in an alliance between the two families, by the marriage of that gentleman with Sir William’s only daughter and sole heiress. The issue of that marriage is our present Sir Martin; and Sir Martin’s Lady is the daughter of that same Sir John Turner, between whom and Sir William Browne there was such inveterate and sworn enmity. After the Church was rebuilt in 1747, great complaints were made of the unfair disposal of pews, &c. so as to exclude in a great measure the common people from the privilege of sitting within hearing of the minister. Sir William was one of those who set their faces against this grievance. How far he and his coadjutors succeeded in obtaining redress does not appear. But whether they succeeded or not, the part they then acted was proper and praise-worthy. Our worthy knight, no doubt, performed many other deeds that were equally commendable, and others, it seems, that were not so. Among the leading traits of his character have been reckoned undaunted assurance and consummate vanity. {1037} He died at his house in Queen Square, whence his grandson, Sir Martin, had his remains brought down to Hillington, and there buried in the family vault belonging to that gentleman’s ancestors.