[ocr errors]

Gifford himself. Now, I have much sibly set about reviewing it. But then respect for the talents of each of these he would speak such utter nonsense two gentlemen, but from which of about it, that Mr Gifford would not them is it, that either I or any sensible hear of its being inserted. They would man would care much to hear an opie laugh over it for a day or two,--parnion upon two-thirds of the matters ticularly if it were written in hexathat do, or should fall to be discussed in meters, or contained any bulletin of

a journal of the general literature of the state of Mr Southey's family, male, England? Sappose, for a moment, and then the article would either be

such a book as Pope's Dunciad were to put in the fire, or inclosed under a be published to-morrow, Mr Southey, blank cover to “ the British,” in the even though he did not find himself view of helping my poor grandmother's mentioned in it, would infallibly toss pot to boil for a day or two longer, or,

up bis nose and pronounce it the work perhaps, of extinguishing the old bopod of a man of no imagination—no ori- dy's life altogether in the smoke.

ginality--no poetry. Mr Gifford would This is, however, a very unfair way Tot in his heart like it, because he of putting the thing: for few things would feel, after reading two full pages,

are less likely than the appearance of that all was over with his Bæviad and a Dunciad in an age when there is so Meviad. How would this work be re- little besides duucery. There is no viewed in the Quarterly?

need of imagining or supposing any It would not be reviewed by any thing. Just look at what is, and you a hearty fellow, because he would know will be satisfied. Look, for example,

that he could not express his true opic at Mr Milinan, writing three or four nion of it without offending Southey articles every year in the Quarterly, and Gifford in the first place, and and, for his pains, having one article without saying things that could not in the year written in praise of himfail to appear quite absurd, and out of self by some friend of his own. Look place in the Quarterly Review, in the at Mr Mitchell writing two dissertasecond. How could a sharp witty sa- tions on Aristophanes in the Quartirist be praised with any honesty or terly Review: and then turn to the effect in a journal, the prime supporter next number of the Quarterly, and of which is the author of “the Vision see Mr Mitchell praised through thirty of Judgment,"—in a journal where you pages, (no matter how justly

and de find Milman extolled as a first-rate servedly), for a translation of Aristo poet the one number, and Shelley run phanes, to which these very dissertadown as no poet at all the next-in a tions of his have been prefixed. See journal where you find Waverley and Reginald Heber writing regularly in Guy Mannering treated as works of the Review, and his poetry,-Regivery slender merit (the second of them nald Heber's pretty college-prize-poeindeed as little better than a piece of try,-quoted-absolutely quoted, --in silliness )--and Ivanhoe lauded to the the Quarterly Review.---Look at Rethird heavens,-in a journal where ginald Heber puffing Robert Southey, William Hazlitt is talked of as a mere

and Robert Southey puffing Regiprattling ninny, and Signor Ugo Fudg- nald Heber. Look at authors dedicaiolo as one of the greatest geniuses in ting their books to Mr Gifford, and

Mir Gifford reviewing their books eiIt would not be reviewed by Wrther by himself or by his true legitiGifford, because Dir Gifford, though mate vassals—his nameless knot-headnot at all delighted with the book, ed templars and curates ! -It all goes could not for his life be blind to its the same way in the Edinburgh ; merits; and although he might also yes, and in the inferior journals, inhave many private reasons for not ferior animals trudge defiled still more wishing to speak the truth, I do the damnably, the same vile path on which splenetic Mr Gifford the justice to say, they canter. Behold Sir James Macthat I do not believe he is capable of intosh filling a hundred pages of the sitting down gravely to write in his Edinburgh Review, with his insipid, own person what he feels to be un- fifty-times-distilled nonsense about re

form; and then remember, if you can, Mr Southey would receive the book the multitude of notes and parentheat Keswick by his next mail-coach ses, in which the Edinburgh Review parcel, and I think he might very pos- insinuates that Sir James is destined

[ocr errors]



[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

cal wondering ho super beten permitt

te which he says table and elo warterly Review

[ocr errors]

some genius about him. I do think Brougham, or Sir James Macintosh, by tells Wir Bo kept dabbling with his fingers in the whole, or in the main, their own opithe Quarterly,

i etery ha

to be the true Livy, Sallust, and Ta- whole literary treasures of the world,
citus, (all in one of Great Britain. and pronounces of them accordingly,
Look at Mr Brougham, who has lived, that it expresses, concerning every
in a great measure, for twenty years thing, the judgment of the same spirit
of his life, by writing in the Edin. or spirits, judging of every thing on
burgh Review, and see with what face the same principles, and by the same
he can bear to hear the Edinburgh standards. No English journal has
Review puffing him as the “ immor- ever exhibited any thing like what I had nutriment.
tal statesman and legislator" of the would wish to describe; but they have
age. See the railical Examiner prai- all exhibited its contraries, -- (even
sing the borough-mongering Edin- Blackwood has done so,) and so you
burgh Review, and the Pope-wor- may form somne notion of what I would fatis complaintes
shipping Edinburgh Review praising say. Without unity of principle and
the little painted crockery-pots of Mr purpose, nothing honest can be ac
Leigh Hunt. See Hazlitt writing in complished ; and pray, what unity,
the Edinburgh Review, and Hazlitt either of literary principle, or of lie
praised in the Edinburgh Review. See terary purpose, can any one suppose testin of his or
Wordsworth quizzed in the Edin- to exist in a work, in which it is the
burgh Review, and Keates and Corn- toss-up of a halfpenny, whether a new
wali patted on the back in it.-[Poor poem shall be reviewed by MrSouthey,
Keates! I cannot pass his name with, or Mr Milman, or Mr Gifford, or dir
out saying that I really think he had Croker, -or by Mr Jeffrey, or Mr
he had something that might have ri- or Mr Hazlitt. It is utter nonsense
pened into fruit, had he not made to talk about Editors, and to say that
such a mumbling work of the buds- they, as things go, can model what
something that might have been wine, passes through their hands, so as to
and tasted like wine, if he had not make every thing express, upon the

pouring it out calling so it such lustily for quaffers, before the grounds Editors as I have been speaking of, had time to be settled, or the spirit to it would be no great matter ; but it is be concentrated, or the flavour to be not so, and it never can be so, unless formed. Still poorer Barry! The Edin, “ all old things pass away," and the burgh Review compares you to Lord Edinburgh and Quarterly becoine as Byron. Upon my honour you ought much forgotten as two'" withered not to swallow such utter' humbug. scrolls.” Who supposes that the ediYou are very far from being, or even tor of a Review can afford to give sem for promising to be even a Keates; rious disgust to a regular, clever, and for there is more merit in thrumming effectual writer in his book ?—that on the craziest spinnet in the world, Mr Gifford would afford to damn an however miserably, thau in making author, patronized really and du bon the prettiest barrel-organ in the world cæur by Mr Southeyor to refuse “ discourse excellent music.”] praising such an author, if Mr Southey

Now, these things are all very bad, chose to make a point of it? There but they are merely the bad things of may, for ought I know, be not one, detail. The system out of which they nor three, but three dozen literary proceed is the real evil, and, unless the men, in regard not only to one and system be guarded against, there is no all of whom, but to one and all of more use in pointing out the subordi- whose friends, Mr Gifford feels himnate absurdities, than there is in crop, self as effectually fettered as if he were ping off the head of a toadstool, and tied with all the cords that Sampson leaving the vile root in the ground. broke, and that nobody but Sampson The whole system of your modern could have dreamed of breaking. It journal is a piece of utter dishonesty must be just the same with Mr Jeffrey; from the foundation. The only sup- indeed he himself, in one of his late position upon which any man of senise Reviews, had the candour to say, ale would put any faith in such a work, is most in so many words, that it is so. the supposition that it speaks to the To please one person, an editor must particulars of literature from the ge- puff this man; and, if he have to do nerals of literature--that it considers with men of a certain sort of temper, individual works in relation to the there is perhaps no way of pleasing

[ocr errors]


Tapproved of

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Es, concerning

ng of every thing bles, and by the se

scribe ; but there

otion of what /ru Enity of princip: 0

honest can be prar,

what principle, ard! an any other su s, in which it is

poses that the But if he had been to make any com- English nation were to perish to-morafford to get plaint upon this paltry occasion, he row, I have no doubt each of those

reasures af the man

but by DAMNING that man, and ainsi as clear as possible. There is homo of them aconix

var le monde. Not Creevy himself bug on every hand, and I know not:

could compute the extent to which the where there is most of it. There is pent of the sun ramifications of this vile system may much humbug in the article in the

extend -nor calculate from how many Quarterly Review, although Lord Bye

scores of dirty puddles the same trim ron calls it“ able;" for there is more English journals

ly-foliaged poison-tree may be sucking sense in three lines of Lord Byron's any thing like the its continual nutriment.

own pamphlet, than in the whole of My Lord Byron, in that prime its smartness. There is much hums contraries - Ir specimen of humbug, his Letter to bug' again in any pretence, (either one so, handset Bowles, gives that gentleman a casti- from the Quarterly or Lord Byron):

gation for his complaint to Mr Gifford, that Pope stands in need of being dea on the subject of an article in the fended for nobody abuses Pope exer Quarterly Review on Spence's Anec- cept Wordsworth and Southey, whom dotes. Mr Bowles wrote a letter to every body pities for conceit and preMr Gifford, lamenting over some cuts judice, and Barry Cornwall, and the at a publication of his own in that ar- fike, whom every one despises for ute ticle, and wondering how such cuts ter incapacity. There is some hums:

could have been permitted against a bug in Mr Bowles's pathetic address wel by Mirei publication which he says Mr Southey, to Mr Gifford; and there is also very

* the most able and eloquent writer exquisite humbug in Lord Byron's in the Quarterly Review, approved." method of commenting on that perLord Byron tells Mr Bowles, that it forinance.

was a very foolish thing of him to I say there is exquisite humbug; ors , and to su imagine that the Quarterly Review and Lord Byron knows it is; and I

either does

, or pretends to express the confess this is one piece of his Lordopinions of one man, and lauds, in a ship’s humbug, to discover the motive certain sort, the impartiality of the of which I am excessively puzzled. elitor of the Quarterly, who allowed. Perhaps it was only to try what peo

Mr Bowles to be cut up, even though ple would swallow-but people have Den spalis Mr Southey approved of Mr Bowles. not swallowed, and never will swallow,

Mr Bowles is, indeed, somewhat too an assertion from Lord Byron, that he sensitive, and he never shewed that (Lord Byron) thinks, if the English more clearly, than by making any nation were to perish, Milton and complaint to any body at all about Shakespeare would perish along such a matter as a cut in a Review. with it, and Pope survive.” If the

enny, whether as

TMr Gifford, and Vr Jeffrer

, i ! r James Mate It is ulter not

50, can maled ring eir bands

, $ 53 express, upes vain, their one so in regard es

at matter, but I es can be so,

[ocr errors]

cgular, ckrep

his book is fford to dora

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Tifford fik by cred as if here

should evidently have addressed it, three poets would survive, because the not to Mr Gifford, but to Mr Southey; French and Italians would take care of for nothing could ever make Southey Pope, and the Germans and other biband Gifford think in the same way of bers of Rhenish would take exceeding Pope ; but every body knows, that good care of the rest. But if Lord if Mr Southey had chosen to put him- Byron had really. looked

back on the self to any trouble, there would have history of other literatures, I don't say been no such thing as any cuts at Mr he would not have formed, but he Bowles in the Quarterly Review. would not have ventured to feign such There is Mr Wordsworth now, who an opinion as this about the probable has blasphemed all his life against fate of English literature in a very Pope ; why was no notice taken

of the improbable situation. If he had ask blasphemy of such a sturdy heretic as ed himself, for example, who they are this

, while such grievous notice was that have survived the national ruin of taken of Mr Bowles? Does not every the Greeks and Romans, what would body know that Wordsworth was he have found? Would he not have spared, because the Quarterly Review- found, that the authors, which are the ers know any attack upon the first greatest favourites with the world now, of Lakers would infallibly offend the are precisely those who stood to the second of the Lakers ? and that Mr people for whom they wrote most Bowles was sacrificed, because they nearly in the

same relations in which knew that Laker the second would Milton and Shakespeare do now stand not care one single hexameter for the to the English people? Is Shakespeare fate of Mr Bowles ? Patet ; this is all more decidedly an English author than

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

S, that it an editar as he hartza sort of tests ray of plasia


2 X

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

Homer or Aristophanes was a Greek pictures of manners and charseters ob-
author ? Is his spirit more decidedly served by his own keen eye, and pecu-
English than theirs Greek? 1s his liarly English-his letters--his satires
language more intensely English than-his Rape of the Lock-any thing ra-
theirs was Greek? Is Milton, either ther than his Essay on Man, or his
in thought or in style, more peculiar. Elegy on the Unfortunate Lady-the
ly an English author than Plato is a very two of his works that one could
Greek author ? Never was any species, the most easily. imagine to have been
of hum more entirely exploded, than written not by an Englishman; and
that old Frenchified species of abus. if the French and Italians be not of
sing authors for addressing themselves, the same way of thinking about Pope,
with all their pith and power, to the that is only one instance more that
peculiar nations of whose mother there is very little of just or tasteful
tongues” they make use. All authors criticism in France and Italy. Take
must do so, if they are to produce a any other author of the present day,
great effect while they are new, and, and apply the principle to him. Is
in spite of what Byron says, if they there any man now living, or will
are to sustain their character with pose there be any man living a hundred
terity. If I were a civilized African years hence, who would rather read
or American, living in the year of Campbell's verses against scepticism,
God four thousand and twenty-two, I than bis “ British Soldier's Dream?"
would feel more curiosity to read an Is there any body who wishes Sir
English author expressing fervidly the Walter Scott to publish three volumes
spirit, character, inanners, and habits of Sermous every three months ? Does
of the English people, as they existed any one prefer Lord Byrou's un-Eng-
in the year 1822, than I would to read lish verses on Talavera, to his English
any piece of didactic poetry, or didace verses upon Waterloo ? Who likes
tic prose, that ever has been, or ever Wordsworth, when he writes of
will be produced, either in England or' " man," and "fate," and " loyalty,"
in any other country under heaven. and “religion?"And who does not
Take even a didactic author, and ask like him when he describes a common
of yourself what is the part of his. Cumberland beggar, travelling his
works you feel most interest in read- rounds in a sequestered valley, carry-
ing. What do you read the oftenesting the news of one hamlet to another,
in Cicero ?-- not surely his disserta- and so forming a sort of bond between
tions about the utile and the pulchrum, the good English country people, who
but his speeches which lay before us give him their alms ? No-There is
the picture of a bigh-bred Roman's nothing for it but sticking to life and
mind, as affected by matters of Roman nature, and the people we live among
interest and bis letters, which shew By not doing so, Mr Southey has writ-
how a great man, of a nation extinct ten many heavy scores of dead and
for so many centuries, conducted him- dying books; and, by doing so, he
self in his private circle-how he ad. has written one that is life and health
dressed himself to his friend--bis son all over, and bids fair for immortality
his daughter. What is it you read his Life of Nelson.
with most interest in Pope himself?
Not certainly his exquisite versifica-
tions of Lord Bolingbroke's didactie

: prose, but his much more exquisite

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

ers and characters a keen eye

, ad pesu bis letters-bs zu Lock-up thik


ad Italians ke as

instance na 2

avera, to bude longing to the same land, then the ef- ing, will be no less pleased to be intro, unttyper gion familiar to us, and of which we in one obscure individual. He keeps Ni had perhaps supposed we already knew close to his subject, and feels his

It is not possible to take up a vo but they havenoother relation to them, ssay on Nas

, es lume that treats of Scottish character, than of time and place. Accordingly fortunate Ladies under the guise of fictitious narrative, the “ Annals of the Parish," is a book Forks that eat * without thinking of the genius and which will keep its station in our lite imagine to her be achievements of the great Unknown. A rature. Its claims are not high or obin Englishte ; 2. sort of unconscious comparison is made, trusive. But it is original, and true to

as we proceed in the perusal of any such nature, and therefore it must live. thinking about work, betweentherepresentations there Unless we are greatly mistaken, the

given, and those which have already very remarkable volume, entitled, le of just er 13 held us enthralled in delight and won. "Some Passages in the Lifeof MrAdam. sce and Italy

, y det. And we have no doubt, that such Blair," possesses this independent and of the precio comparison, if necessarily prolonged original character. Every page of it is

by similarity of subject, could not but Scottish yet there is not in it all one: prore fatal to the success of any new page that seems to have been suggestwriter, however powerful bis genius. ed by any picture or representation in

But, on the other hand, if it be imme the great Novels. In like manner, its against sering diately dismissed from the view, and principal character is a Scottish clergy, Soldier's Day the work which at first oceasioned it, man, and drawn with great power and

appear to be one original in its sub- truth, yet those who have rested with

ject and execution, and in no way in- calm satisfaction on the simple, innothree month terfering with, or trespassing upon the cent, and primitive character of Micah

provinces of the Magician, though be- Balwhidder, in the Manse of Dalmail.
fect produced on the reader by that duced to the impassioned, erring, and
unconscious comparison, is a genial interesting Adam Blair in that of the
que, and the new author enjoys the parish of Cross-Meikle.
benefit of it, in meeting with an ear

The author of this book seems to nest and an eager attention. We are be a man possessing very deep insight pleased to find that he is not an imi- into the passionate nature of the bus tor; and equally so, to find that he man soul; and has ventured to place, has opened up tousunsuspected sources the entire interest of his work, it of amusement or instruction, in a re may be said, on the display of passion

rinciple to his


un living a hero o would rather

[ocr errors]

dy who skla ublish that 2

ord Byron's cs-4

ben he mic ute," and "ba And wholes describes a no u, traveling dered sukt, banket ned pt of bereiten

[ocr errors]

the riches.

[ocr errors]


the extent, or at least the nature of all power over it. His picture is never

feebly drawn, though sometimes the Such was the case with us when we colours are laid on with a somewhat first read the “ Annals of the Parish." too dashing hand; and though there The author spoke of Scotland, and of are passages in this volume that will nothing else. Every thing was Scot- bear comparison with the most vivid tish

. Yet no one could have discover- and forcible delineations of human and that he had ever read the works of nature to be found in our literature, air great national novelist. The sce- yet the general impression left on the Dery-the characters--the incidents – reader's mind by the whole, is, that the reflections--the feelings-all were

the author is easily capable of better diferent

, as if they had belonged to and greater things, and cannot fail, if another people, and another land, yet he chooses to exert his noble powers to Were they all perfectly true to the same.

the utmost, to take his place in the " The Annals of the Parish,” were

first rank of modern genius. absurdly and ignorantly said, in the We are aware, that out of Scotland, Quarterly Review, to belong (we for

the incident on which the whole in met how) to what are called the Scotch terest of this narrative rests, may Novels. It is true that they were pub- scarcely seem suited or equal to prolished after about fifty of these volumes; duce that utter prostration of mind,

Some Passages in the Life of Mr Adam Blair. Post 8vo. Edinburgh: W. Black. *ood; and T. Cadell, London. 1822.

« 前へ次へ »