The leading parts of Mungo Park's character must have been anticipated by the reader in the principal events and transactions of his life. Of his enterprising spirit, his indefatigable vigilance and activity, his calm fortitude and unshaken perseverance, he has left permanent memorials in the narrative of his former travels and in the Journal and Correspondence now published. In these respects few travellers have equalled, none certainly ever surpassed him. Nor were the qualities of his understanding less valuable or conspicuous. He was distinguished by a correctness of judgment, seldom found united with an ardent and adventurous turn of mind, and generally deemed incompatible with it. His talents certainly were not brilliant, but solid and useful, such as were peculiarly suited to a traveller and geographical discoverer. Hence, in his accounts of new and unknown countries, he is consistent and rational; he is betrayed into no exaggeration, nor does he exhibit any traces of credulity or enthusiasm. His attention was directed exclusively to facts; and except in his opinion relative to the termination of the Niger (which he supported by very plausible arguments) he rarely indulged in conjecture, much less in hypothesis or speculation. Among the characteristic qualities of Park which were so apparent in his former travels, none certainly were more valuable or contributed more to his success than his admirable prudence, calmness and temper; but it has been doubted whether these merits were equally conspicuous during his second expedition. The parts of his conduct which have given occasion to this remark, are, his setting out from the Gambia almost at the eve of the rainy season, and his voyage down the Niger under circumstances so apparently desperate. On the motives by which he may have been influenced as to the former of these measures, something has been said in the course of the foregoing narrative. [Footnote: See p. lxvi.] With regard to his determination in the latter instance, justice must allow that his situation was one of extreme difficulty, and admitted probably of no alternative. In both cases our knowledge of the facts is much too imperfect to enable us to form a correct opinion as to the propriety of his conduct, much less to justify us in condemning him _unheard_. In all the relations of private life, he appears to have been highly exemplary; and his conduct as a son, a husband, and a father merited every praise. To the more gentle and amiable parts of his character the most certain of all testimonies may be found in the warm attachment of his friends, and in the fond and affectionate recollections of every branch of his family.