houses and the household establishment and equipage being in common to both, if any part, as the carriage for example, is previously employed by the one, the other has to wait till it is disengaged. Of this there is no doubt, that if a quarrel ensues between an English husband and wife, the wife has to leave the house, and seek her dinner either at her father's, or a friend's; whereas in Asia, it is the husband that has to go out; for frequently the utensils of cookery are not kept in the male apartments.

Fourth, "The freedom, by custom, of the Asiatic women from assisting in the business of the husband, or service of his guests;" whereas this is generally the duty of European wives, whe. ther their husbands be of a genteel business, such as jewellery, mercery, or perfumery, or the more servile ones: I have seen many rise from their dinner, to answer the demands of a purchaser: and although all these duties are not required of the ladies, yet some, especially the entertaining the guests, carving and helping the dishes at table, and making the tea and coffee, are generally performed by them. Now the Asiatic ladies have no such duties at all, but live in the manner before described.

Fifth, "The greater deference the Asiatic ladies find paid to their humours, and a prescriptive right of teazing their husbands by every pretext,' which is considered as constituting an essential quality of beauty; for if a wife does not put these in practice, but is submissive to her husband's will in every thing, her charms very soon lose

their brilliancy in his eyes. Thus, when a wife goes to visit her father, she will not return to her husband till he has come himself several times to fetch her, and been as often vexed by her breaking her promise; and every day when dinner is served, by pretending to be engaged at the time, she keeps her husband waiting, and does not come till the meat has grown cold; and in the same manner at bed-time;-for returning quickly from their father's house is considered as a sign of fondness for the husband, which, in their opinion, looks very ill; and coming soon to dinner they think betrays the disposition of a hungry beggar. In these, and such like, the husband has nothing for it but patience; nay, it ever pleases him. I have known of many beautiful women, constant in their affection, and obedient to their husbands night and day, whom, for not having these qualities, the husbands have quickly tired of, and unjustly deserted, for the sake of plain women who possessed them.

Sixth, "The greater reliance placed by the Asiatic husbands on their wives' virtue, both from law and custom." For as to the European ladies, although they can go out of doors, and discourse with strangers, yet this is not allowed unless they have a trusty person along with them, either of the husband's or the father's; and sleeping out all night is absolutely denied them,-contrary to the way of the Asiatic ladies, who, when they go to the house of a lady of their acquaintance, though their husbands be entire strangers, are not attended by any person

of the husband's or father's, and they spend not only one or two nights in that house, but even a whole week; and in such a house, although the master is prohibited entering the apartments where they are, yet the young men of fifteen, belonging to the family or relations, under the name of children, have free access, and eat with, and enter into the amusements of their guests.

Seventh, "Their share in the children, by law." For if a divorce happens, the sons go to the father, and the daughters to the mother; contrary to the custom here, where, if a divorce takes place, the mother, who for twenty years may have toiled and consumed herself in bringing up her children, has to abandon all to the father, and, full of grief and affliction, leave his house.

Eighth, "The ease, both by law and custom, with which the wife may separate herself from her husband, when there may be a quarrel between them, without producing a divorce." Thus the wife, in an hour's time after the dispute, sets off with the children and her property to the house of her father or relations, and, until the husband makes her satisfaction, she does not return: and this she can always do without a moment's delay.

1

Besides these eight, as above noticed, of the superior advantages the Asiatic women enjoy over the European, there are many others, here omitted for brevity's sake. What has been said, is enough for people of discernment. Farewell.

Character of the Lounger.

[From Dr. Drake's Essays on the Rambler.]

The papers which compose this work may be considered as a continuation of the Mirror; they are written, with the exception of only three or four essays, by the members and correspondents of the Mirror Club, and they partake of the character and merits of their prototype. The first number of the Lounger appeared on Saturday, February the 5th, 1785; and it was published weekly on that day for nearly two years, the last essay, No. 101, being dated January the 6th, 1787.

To the experienced pen of Mr. Mackenzie this series of essays is even still more indebted than was the former; fifty-four entire numbers of the Lounger are the composition of this gentleman, and he assisted in the construction of eight more. The entire papers are, Nos. 1, 2, 4, 6, 15, 17, 20, 22, 27, 28, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 38, 40, 41, 45, 48, 50, 51, 54, 56, 58, 61, 62, 64, 65, 66, 67, 69, 72, 75, 76, 78, 80, 82, 83, 84, 87, 89, 90, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, and 101; those in which he assisted, Nos. 8, 25, 42, 44, 53, 55, 74, and 85.

68,

In humour, pathos, and delineation of character, the essays of Mr. Mackenzie in the Lounger, are not inferior to those which he contributed to the Mirror. No. 15, descriptive of the Phusalophagos, or Toad-eater; Nos. 17, 36, 56, and 62, depicting the family of the Mushrooms; No. 45, containing the narrative of Jeremiah Dy-soon; No. 78, on the restless activity of Mr. Bustle; No. 98,

the Visit of John Homespun to Lodge; and No. 99, on Animal Magnetism, exhibit some well-conceived and successful attempts in the walks of ridicule, irony, and broad humour.

To these papers, which, to excel in their peculiar department, must display a large portion of strongmarked character, we have to add, that the portrait of colonel Caustic, in Nos. 4, 6, 31, 32, 33, and 40, is powerfully coloured and sustained. It is to be wished, however, that the delineation had been given upon a larger scale, and had involved more minutiæ; for, beyond the fortieth paper, we meet with little relative to a personage with whom we had already become so familiarized and engaged, as to hope and expect that he would accompany us through the work. Superior to this, however, or to any other portrait, even in the Mirror, is the picture of a Country Dowager, in No. 87 of the Lounger, which, with respect to costume, accuracy, and high finishing, to pleasing and picturesque effect, is almost unparalJeled.

In the province of pathetic narration, the Lounger has not been enriched with so many specimens from our author's pen as are found in the Mirror; the story, however, of Albert Bane, in No. 61, and especially the history of Father Nicholas in Nos. 82, 83, and 84, excite a lively and impressive interest, and instil that tender melancholy so friendly to the cause of piety and moral rectitude. The didactic papers, too, which blend a fascinating pathos with ethic instruction, a combination very frequent in the essays of Mr. Mac

kenzie, will be thought not inferior to those which emanated from the same mind in the Mirror: as instances of this happy union, I would refer to No. 48, on the sentiment and the moral of Time; and in No. 93, on the tender indulgence of melancholy in the season of Autumn.

The pages devoted to criticism in the Lounger are much more numerous than those which were allotted to the same province in the Mirror; and to those Mr. Mackenzie has contributed a large portion. Besides incidental observations occasionally annexed to the critical strictures of his correspondents, he has, in No. 20, presented us with a dissertation on Novel Writing. In Nos. 27 and 28, with an examination of the moral effects of Tragedy; in No. 50, with observations on the moral effect of Comedy; in Nos. 68 and 69, with critical remarks on the character of Falstaff; and, in No. 97, with an essay on the genius and writings of Robert Burns. These all display considerable knowledge of the human heart, and of the business of the world, acute feelings, and good taste.

Among the other members of this literary club, Mr. Craig stands foremost as a contributor; he has written fifteen essays; namely, Nos. 9, 18, 21, 26, 35, 37, 43, 49, 52, 57, 71, 77, 86, 88, and 91. Many just observations on life and manners, and some useful lessons, are scattered through these papers; and the author has shown his critical powers to advantage in an essay on the introduction of ancient Mythology in Modern Poetry, in No. 37; by observations on Comedy, in No. 49; and

by a history of the different species of misanthropy, as illustrated from the characters of Hamlet, Jaques, and Timon of Athens.

Nine papers in the Lounger, Nos. 3, 10, 14, 23, 30, 47, 74, 81, and 92, owe their existence to Mr. Abercromby. Of these, No. 14 adds some strokes to the picture of colonel Caustic, which had been commenced by Mr. Mackenzie; and No. 30, is a letter from a member of the Mirrorclub, relating some particulars of that society. This epistle, of which one object was, to induce the public to suppose that the Mirror and the Lounger were unconnected, and that the authors of the two works were not the same, relates some curious particulars relative to the Mirror, and to the reception of this species of periodical composition in Scotland. Addressing the supposed author of the Lounger, as one on whom the whole labour of the work, single and alone, rest ed; he observes, "You, sir, started with many advantages which we did not possess. public are now taught to know, that it is possible to carry on a periodical work of this kind in Edinburgh; and that if tolerably executed, it will be read, and will hold its place with other works of the same kind. But when we boldly gave the Mirror to the world, a very different notion prevailed. It was supposed that no such work could be conducted with any propriety on this side of the Tweed. Accordingly, the Mirror was received with the most perfect indifference in our own country; and during the publication, it was indebted for

The

any little reputation it received in Scotland, to the notice that happened to be taken of it by some persons of rank and of taste in England. Nay, sir, strange as you may think it, it is certainly true, that, narrow as Edinburgh is, there were men who consider themselves as men of letters, who never read a number of it while it was going on.-The supercilious, who despised the paper because they did not know by whom it was written, talked of it as a catch-penny performance, carried on by a set of needy and obscure scribblers. Those who entertained a more favourable opinion of it were apt to fall into an opposite mistake; and to suppose that the Mirror was the production of all the men of letters in Scotland. This last opinion is not yet entirely exploded, and perhaps has rather gained ground from the favourable reception of the Mirror since its publication in volumes. The last time I was in London, I happened to step into Mr. Cadell's shop, and while I was amusing myself in turning over the prints in Cook's last voyage, lord B-came in, and taking up a volume of the Mirror, asked Mr. Cadell who were the authors of it. Cadell, who did not suspect that I knew any more of the matter than the Great Mogul, answered, That he could not really mention particular names; but he believed that all the literati of Scotland were concerned in it.' Lord B- walked off, satisfied that this was truly the case; and about a week after I heard him say at lord M's levee, that he was well assured the Mirror was the joint produc

tion of all the men of letters in Scotland.

"I will now, sir, tell you in confidence, that, one of our number excepted, whose writings have long been read with admiration and delight, and whose exquisite pencil every reader of taste and discernment must distinguish in the Mirror, there was not one of our club who ever published a single sentence, or in all likelihood ever would have done it, had it not been for the accidental publication of the Mirror."

To Mr. Cullen, the Lounger is under obligation for three papers; No. 5, on the composition of History; No. 12, a ludicrous paper on the possibility of ascertaining the characters of a company from the appearance of their Hats; and No. 73, on Sculpture. The first and third of these essays contains several just and well-expressed remarks, indicative of a mind attached to literary research, and attentive to the progress of art; while the second excites a smile at the idea of associating character with the form and cut of a hat; it is the vehicle, how ever, of some keen and well-directed satire.

With Mr. McLeod Bannatyn, who wrote Nos. 13 and 39, the contributions of the members close; and, turning to the list of correspondents, we find it less numerous and productive than in the Mirror, though including two names which had not appeared in that paper, viz. Dr. Henry, the historian, and Mr. Greenfield, professor of rhetoric and belles lettres in the university of Edinburgh. To the former are as cribed Nos. 11 and 60, two pa

pers of considerable humour; the first, relating to the life of sir Thomas Lounger; the second, including a proposal for a periodical paper exclusively devoted to the female sex. To the latter, it appears, we are indebted for No. 59, on the pains and penalties of Idleness; and for an ode to a Lady in No. 85.

Of the correspondents of the Mirror, the only one who has contributed materially to the structure of the Lounger, is Mr. Fraser Tytler, who has furnished Nos. 7, 19, 24, 44, 63, 70, and 79, papers which abound with traits of humour and of character. Mr. Tytler, author of the Vindication of Queen Mary, has added one essay, in No. 16, on the defects of Female Education; Mr. D. Hume, two letters in Nos. 25 and 55; and Professor Richardson, a pleasing critique, in No. 42, on the Poetry of Hamilton of Bangour.

The Lounger has been considered by some critics as inferior to its predecessor: this does not appear to me to be the case; it cannot, indeed, boast of a narrative so pathetic as that of La Roche, or Venoni, in the Mirror; but it does not yield in any other requisite, either of character, humour, moral instruction, or popular criticism. On the contrary, I think it may be easily proved, that a larger proportion of good papers is to be found in the pages of the Lounger. They have both, however, contributed very highly to the purposes of edification and amusement, to the best and noblest objects of the genuine periodical essay.