« FöregåendeFortsätt »
proach. Cast your eye over his productions; consider tues of others, why complain so grievously that others their extent, and contemplate their variety:-pastoral, bave a better memory for his own faults? They are but passion, mock-heroic, translation, satire, ethics,-all the faults of an author; while the virtues he omitted from excellent, and often perfect. If bis great charm be his catalogue are essential to the justice due to a man. his melody, how comes it that foreigners adore him, | Mr. Bowles appears, indeed, to be susceptible beeven in their diluted translations? But I have made yond the privilege of authorship. There is a plaintive this letter too long.–Give my compliments to Mr. dedication to Mr. Gifford, in which he is made reBowles.
sponsible for all the articles of the Quarterly. Mr. Yours ever, very truly,
Southey, it seems," the most able and eloquent writer
in that Review," approves of Mr. Bowles's publication. BYRON.
Now it seems to me the more impartial, that potwithTo John Murray, Esq.
standing that "the great writer of the Quarterly" Post Scriptum.—Long as this letter has grown, I
entertains opinions opposite to the able article on find it necessary to append a postscript; if possible,
Spence, nevertheless that essay was permitted to appear. a short one. Mr. Bowles denies that he has accused
Is a review to be devoted to the opinions of any one Pope of "a sordid money-getting passion;" but, he
man? Must it not vary, according to circumstances, adds, “if I had ever done so, I should be glad to find
and according to the subjects to be criticised? I fear any testimony that might show he was not so." This
that writers must take the sweets and bitters of the testimony he may find, to his heart's content, in Spence
public journals as they occur, and an author of so and elsewhere. First, there is Martha Blount, who,
long a standing as Mr. Bowles might have become Mr. Bowles charitably says, “probably thought he did
accustomed to such incidents; he might be angry, but not save enough for her, as legatee.” Whatever she
not astonished. I have been reviewed in the Quarthought upon this point, her words are in Pope's fa
terly almost as often as Mr. Bowles, and have had as
pleasant things said, and some as unpleasant, as could vour. Then there is Alderman Barber; see Spence's | Anecdotes. There is Pope's cold answer to Halifax
well be pronounced. In the review of The Fall of when he proposed a pension: his behaviour to Craggs
Jerusalem, it is stated that I have devoted “my powand to Addison upon like occasions, and his own two
ers, etc. to the worst parts of Manicheism;" which, lies-
being interpreted, means that I worship the devil.
Now, I have neither written a reply, nor complained " And, thanks to Homer, since I live and thrive,
to Gifford. I believe that I observed, in a letter to Indebted to po prince or peer alive;"
you, that I thought that the critic might have praised written when princes would have been proud to pen- Milman without finding it necessary to abuse me;" sion, and peers to promote him, and when the whole but did I not add, at the same time or soon after, army of dunces were in array against him, and would | (apropos of the note in the book of Travels), that I have been but too happy to deprive him of this boast would not, if it were even in my power, have a single of independence. But there is something a little more line cancelled on my account in that nor in any other serious in Mr. Bowles's declaration, that he would publication? Of course, I reserve to myself the prihave spoken" of his “noble generosity to the outcast vilege of response when necessary. Mr. Bowles seems Richard Savage," and other instances of a compas in a wbimsical state about the author of the article on sionate and generous heart, “had they occurred to his Spence. You know very well that I am not in your recollection when he wrote.” What! is it come to confidence, nor in that of the conductor of the journal. this? Does Mr. Bowles sit down to write a minute The moment I saw that article, I was morally certain and laboured life and edition of a great poet? Does that I knew the author “by his style. You will tell he anatomise his character, moral and poetical? Does me that I do not know him: that is all as it should he present us with his faults and with his foibles ? | be; keep the secret, so shall I, though no one has ever Does he sneer at his feelings, and doubt of his sin- | intrusted it to me. He is not the person whom Mr. cerity? Does he unfold his vanity and duplicity? and Bowles denounces. Mr. Bowles's extreme sensibility then omit the good qualities which might, in part, reminds me of a circumstance which occurred on board have covered this multitude of sins?" and then of a frigate, in which I was a passenger and guest of plead that “ they did not occur to his recollection?" the captain's for a considerable time. The surgeon on Is this the frame of mind and of memory with which board, a very gentlemanly young man, and remarkably the illustrious dead are to be approached? If Mr. able in his profession, wore a wig. Upon this ornaBowles, who must have had access to all the means ment he was extremely tenacious. As naval jests are of refreshing his memory, did not recollect these facts, sometimes a little rough, his brother officers made oche is unfit for his task ; but if he did recollect, and casional allusions to this delicate appendage to the omit them, I know not what he is fit for, but I know doctor's person. One day a young lieutenant, in the what would be fit for him. Is the plea of “not re course of a facetious discussion, said, “Suppose now, collecting" such prominent facts to be admitted ? Mr. doctor, I should take off your hat.”—“Sir," replieu Bowles has been at a public school, and as I have been the doctor, “I shall talk no longer with you; you publicly educated also, I can sympathise with his pre grow scurrilous." He would not even admit so near dilection. When we were in the third form even, had an approach as to the hat which protected it. In we pleaded, on the Monday morning, that we had not like manner, if any body approaches Mr. Bowles's laubrought up the Saturday's exercise, because “ we had rels, even in his outside capacity of an editor, “they forgotten it,” what would have been the reply? And is grow scurrilous." You say that you are about to prean excuse, which would not be pardoned to a school pare an edition of Pope; you cannot do better for your boy, to pass current in a matter which so nearly con own credit as a publisher, nor for the redemption of cerns the fame of the first poet of his age, if not of Pope from Mr. Bowles, and of the public taste from his country? If Mr. Bowles so readily forgets the vir- | rapid degeneracy.
a particular examination of the pamphlet," which by
a misnomer is called Gilchrist's Answer to Borcla, OBSERVATIONS UPON «OBSERVATIONS."
when it should have been called Gilchrist's Abuse el - A SECOND LETTER TO JOHN MURRAY, ESQ. Bowles. On this error in the baptism of Mr. G ON THE REV. W. L. BOWLES'S STRICTURES christ's pamphlet, it may be observed, that an answer ON THE LIFE AND WRITINGS OF POPE.
may be abusive and yet no less an answer, though is disputably a temperate one might be the better of the
two: but if abuse is to cancel all pretensions to reply, Now first published.
what becomes of Mr. Bowles's answers to Mr. G
christ? Ravenna, March 25, 1821.
Mr. Bowles continues :-—But as Mr. Gilchrist DEAR SIR,
derides my peculiar sensitiveness to criticism, before In the further “ Observations of Mr. Bowles, in I show how destitute of truth is this representation, rejoinder to the charges brought against his edition of | I will here explicitly declare the only grounds, etc. Pope, it is to be regretted that he has lost his temper. I etc. etc.--Mr. Bowles's sensibility. in denying his Whatever the language of his antagonists may have sensitiveness to criticism," proves, perhaps, too much. been, I fear that his replies have afforded more pleasure But if he has been so charged, and truly—what then! to them than to the public. That Mr. Bowles should
There is no moral turpitude in such acuteness of feci! not be pleased is natural, whether right or wrong; ing: it has been, and may be, combined with many but a temperate defence would have answered his
good and great qualities. Is Mr. Bowles a poct, or purpose in the former case—and, in the latter, no de is he not? If he be, he must, from his very essence, fence, however violent, can tend to any thing but his be sensitive to criticism; and even if he be not, be! discomfiture. I have read over this third pamphlet, need not be ashamed of the common repugnance to which you have been so obliging as to send me, and being attacked. All that is to be wished is, that is shall venture a few observations, in addition to those had considered how disagreeable a thing it is, bedar apon the previous controversy.
he assailed the greatest moral poet of any age, or in Mr. Bowles sets out with repeating his “confirmed any language. conviction,” that “what he said of the moral part of | Pope himself "sleeps well,”-nothing can touch Pope's character was, generally speaking, true; and him further; but those who love the honour of their that the principles of poetical criticism which he has country, the perfection of her literature, the glory of laid down are invariable and invulnerable," etc.; and her language-are not to be expected to permit a that he is the more persuaded of this by the “ exag- atom of his dust to be stirred in his tomb, or a leaf gerations of his opponents." This is all very well, to be stripped from the laurel which grows over it and highly natural and sincere. Nobody ever expected Mr. Bowles assigns several reasons why and we that either Mr. Bowles, or any other author, would be « an author is justified in appealing to every upra convinced of human fallibility in their own persons. and honourable mind in the kingdom." If But it is nothing to the purpose—for it is not what Bowles limits the perusal of his defence to the "apret Mr. Bowles thinks, but what is to be thought of Pope, and honourable » only, I greatly fear that it will of that is the question. It is what he has asserted or be extensively circulated. I should rather hope that insinuated against a name which is the patrimony of some of the downright and dishonest will read and posterity, that is to be tried; and Mr. Bowles, as a
and Mr. Bowles, as a | be converted, or convicted. But the whole of L party, can be no judge. The more he is persuaded, reasoning is bere superfluous— an author is justits the better for himself, if it give him any pleasure; but in appealing," etc. when and why he pleases. A he can only persuade others by the proofs brought out him make out a tolerable case, and few of his readers in his defence.
will quarrel with his motives. After these prefatory remarks of conviction," etc. | Mr. Bowles “ will now plainly set before the literary Mr. Bowles proceeds to Mr. Gilchrist; whom he public all the circumstances which have led to his name charges with "slang” and “slander," besides a small and Mr. Gilchrist's being brought together, et subsidiary indictment of "abuse, ignorance, malice," Courtesy requires, in speaking of others and ourselves and so forth. Mr. Gilchrist has, indeed, shown some that we should place the name of the former firstanger; but it is an honest indignation, which rises up | and not “Ego et Rex meus." Mr. Bowles should in defence of the illustrious dead. It is a generous | have written“ Mr. Gilchrist's name and his. rage which interposes between our ashes and their
s pelween our ashes and their This point he wishes “particularly to address is disturbers. There appears also to have been some those most respectable characters who have the slight personal provocation. Mr. Gilchrist, with a rection and management of the periodical critic chivalrous disdain of the fury of an incensed poet, put press.” That the press may be, in sorne instante, his name to a letter avowing the production of a for- conducted by respectable characters is probati mer essay in defence of Pope, and consequently of an enough; but if they are so, there is no occasion, attack upon Mr. Bowles. Mr. Bowles appears to be l tell them of it; and if they are not, it is a base adwae angry with Mr. Gilchrist for four reasons:---firstly, tion. In either case, it looks like a kind of flatter because he wrote an article in The London Magazine; by which those gentry are not very likely to secondly, because he afterwards avowed it; thirdly, softened; since it would be difficult to find two piece because he was the author of a still more extended sages in fifteen pages more at variance, than article in The Quarterly Review; and, fourtbly, be- | Bowles's prose at the beginning of this pampar cause he was nor the author of the said Quarterly / and his verse at the end of it. In page 4, he speed article, and had the audacity to disown it-for no of those
se most respectable characters who have the earthly reason but because he had not written it. direction, etc. of the periodical press," and m paze
Mr. Bowles declares, that he will not enter into we find
“Ye dark inquisitors, a monk-like band,
gentleman. The allusion to “ Christian criticism” is Who o'er some shrinking victim author stand, not particularly happy, especially where Mr. Gilchrist A solemn, secret, and vindictive brood,
is accused of having set the first example of this Only terrific in your cowl and hood."
mode in Europe." What Pagan criticism may have And so on-to "bloody law” and “red scourges," i been, we know but little; the names of Zoilus and with other similar phrases, which may not be alto- Aristarchus survive, and the works of Aristotle, gether agreeable to the above-mentioned “most re- Longinus, and Quintilian: but of “ Christian criespectable characters." Mr. Bowles goes on: “I con- ticism” we have already had some specimens in the ncluded my observations on the last pamphleteer with works of Philelphus, Poggius, Scaliger, Milton, Salfeelings not unkind towards Mr. Gilchrist, or” [it masius, the Cruscanti (versus Tasso), the French should be nor] “to the author of the review of Academy (against the Cid), and the antagonists of Spence, be he whom he might."-"I was in hopes, Voltaire and of Pope to say nothing of some articles as I have always been ready to admit any errors i in most of the reviews, since their earliest institution might have been led into, or prejudice I might have in the person of their respectable and still prolific entertained, that even Mr. Gilchrist might be disposed parent, The Monthly. Why, then, is Mr. Gilchrist to a more amicable mode of discussing what I had to be singled out “as having set the first example ?" advanced in regard to Pope's moral character.” As A sole page of Milton or Salmasius contains more Major Sturgeon observes, “There never was a set | abuse-rank, rancorous, unleavened abuse--than all of more amicable officers—with the exception of that can be raked forth from the whole works of - boxing-bout between Captain Shears and the many recent critics. There are some, indeed, who Colonel.”
still keep up the good old custom; but fewer English A page and a half-nay, only a page before-Mr. than foreign. It is a pity that Mr. Bowles cannot Bowles re-affirms his conviction, that “what be has witness some of the Italian controversies, or become said of Pope's moral character is (generally speaking) the subject of one. He would then look upon Mr. Frue, and that his “ poetical principles are invariable Gilchrist as a panegyrist. and invulnerable." He has also published three pam In the long sentence quoted from the article in The phlets—ay, four, of the same tenor,-and yet, with London Magazine, there is one coarse image, the this declaration and these declamations staring him justice of whose application I shall not pretend to mad his adversaries in the face, he speaks of his determine:-“The pruriency with which his nose is "readiness to admit errors or to abandon prejudices !!!" laid to the ground” is an expression which, whether His use of the word “amicable” reminds me of the founded or not, might have been omitted. But the Irish institution (which I have somewhere heard or anatomical minuteness" appears to me justified even mead of) called the “ Friendly Society," where the by Mr. Bowles's own subsequent quotation. To the resident always carried pistols in bis pocket, so that point:-“ Manr facts tend to prove the peculiar vhen one amicable gentleman knocked down another, susceptibility of his passions; nor can we implicitly he difference might be adjusted on the spot, at the believe that the connexion between him and Martha armonious distance of twelve paces.
Blount was of a nature so pure and innocent as his But Mr. Bowles “ has since read a publication by panegyrist Ruffhead would have us believe,” etc.im (Mr. Gilchrist) containing such vulgar slander, “At no time could she have regarded Pope personally ffecting private life and character," etc, etc.; and Mr. with attachment,” etc.—“But the most extraordinary Silchrist has also had the advantage of reading a pub circumstance, in regard to his connection with female cation by Mr. Bowles sufficiently imbued with per society, was the strange mixture of indecent and even anality; for one of the first and principal topics of profane levity which his conduct and language often proach is that he is a grocer, that he has a “ pipe in exhibited. The cause of this particularity may be is mouth, ledger-book, green canisters, dingy shop sought, perhaps, in his consciousness of physical defect, oy, half a hogshead of brown treacle," etc. Nay, which made him affect a character uncongenial, and a le same delicate raillery is upon the very title-page. language opposite to the truth.” If this is not“ miVhen controversy has once commenced upon this nute moral anatomy,” I should be glad to know what oting, as Dr. Johnson said to Dr. Percy, “Sir, is ! It is dissection, in all its branches. I shall, iere is an end of politeness—we are to be as rude | however, hazard a remark or two upon this quoi we please—Sir, you said that I was short-sighted." tation. s a man's profession is generally no more in his To me it appears of no very great consequence whevn power than his person—both having been made ther Martha Blount was or was not Pope's mistress, it for bim-it is hard that he should be reproached though I could have wished him a better. She appears ith either, and still more that an honest calling | to have been a cold-hearted, interested, ignorant, disould be made a reproach. If there is any thing agreeable woman, upon whom the tenderness of Pope's pre honourable to Mr. Gilchrist than another it is, heart, in the desolation of his latter days, was cast at being engaged in commerce he has had the taste, away; not knowing whither to turn, as he drew tod found the leisure, to become so able a proficient wards his premature old age, childless and lonely,the higher literature of his own and other countries. | like the needle which, approaching within a certain r. Bowles, who will be proud to own Glover, Chat distance of the pole, becomes helpless and useless, rton, Burns, and Bloomfield, for his peers, should and, ceasing to tremble, rusts. She seems to have rdly have quarrelled with Mr. Gilchrist for his critic. been so totally unworthy of tenderness, that it is an r. Gilchrist's station, however, which might con additional proof of the kindness of Pope's heart to ct him to the highest civic honours, and to bound have been able to love such a being. But we must is wealth, has nothing to require apology; but even love something. I agree with Mr. B. that she “ could it had, such a reproach was not very gracious on at no time bave regarded Pope personally with atpart of a clergy man, nor graceful on that of a tachment,” because she was incapable of attachment; but I deny that Pope could not be regarded with per-| when neither young, nor handsome, nor rich, por even sonal attachment by a worthier woman. It is not amiable, inspired the two most extraordinary passica probable, indeed, that a woman would have fallen in upon record, Vanessa's and Stella's: love with him as he walked along the Mall, or in a
*Vanessa, aged scarce a score, box at the opera, nor from a balcony, nor in a ball
Sighs for a gown of forty-four." room; but in society he seems to have been as amiable as unassuming, and, with the greatest disad- He requited them bitterly; for he seems to have vantages of figure, his head and face were remarkably broken the heart of the one, and worn out that of the handsome, especially his eyes. He was adored by other; and he had his reward, for he died a solitary his friends friends of the most opposite dispositions, idiot in the hands of servants. ages, and talents-by the old and wayward Wycher For my own part, I am of the opinion of Pausanias, ley, by the cynical Swift, the rough Atterbury, the that success in love depends upon Fortune :—They gentle Spence, the stern attorney-bishop Warburton, particularly renounce Celestial Venus, into whose the virtuous Berkeley, and the “cankered Boling temple, etc. etc. etc. I remember, too, to have seen broke." Bolingbroke wept over him like a child; a building in Ægina in which there is a statue of and Spence's description of his last moments is at Fortune, holding a horn of Amalthea; and Dear ber least as edifying as the more ostentatious account of there is a winged Love. The meaning of this is, that the death-bed of Addison. The soldier Peterborough the success of men in love affairs depends more on and the poet Gay, the witty Congreve and the laugh- the assistance of Fortune than the charms of beauty, ing Rowe, the eccentric Cromwell and the steady I am persuaded, too, with Pindar (to whose oiBathurst, were all his intimates. The man who could nion I submit in other particulars), that Fortune is conciliate so many men of the most opposite descrip one of the Fates, and that in a certain respect ship is tion, not one of whom but was a remarkable or a more powerful than her sisters."-See Pansamas, ; celebrated character, might well have pretended to Achaics, bouk vii. chap. 26. page 246. Taylor's Tresse all the attachment which a reasonable man would de lation. sire of an amiable woman.
Grimm has a remark, of the same kind, on the diPope, in fact, wherever he got it, appears to have ferent destinies of the younger Crébillon and Roesunderstood the sex well. Bolingbroke, “ a judge of seau. The former writes a licentious novel, and a young the subject,” says Warton, thought his Epistle on English girl of some fortune and family (a Miss Strafthe Characters of Women his masterpiece." And ford) runs away, and crosses the sea to marry hin: even with respect to the grosser passion, which takes while Rousseau, the most tender and passionate d occasionally the name of “ romantic,” accordingly as lovers, is obliged to espouse his chambermaid. F1 the degree of sentiment elevates it above the definition recollect rightly, this remark was also repeated in the of love by Buffon, it may be remarked, that it does Edinburgh Review of Grimm's Correspondence, sera not always depend upon personal appearance, even in or eight years ago. a woman. Madame Cottin was a plain woman, and In regard to the strange mixture of indecent und might have been virtuous, it may be presumed, with sometimes profane levity, which his conduct and lisout much interruption. Virtuous she was; and the guage often exhibited," and which so much shacks consequences of this inveterate virtue were, that two Mr. Bowles, I object to the indefinite word "olas;" different admirers (one an elderly gentleman) killed and in extenuation of the occasional occurrence of such themselves in despair (see Lady Morgan's France) | language it is to be recollected, that it was less the I would not, however, recommend this rigour to | tone of Pope, than the tone of the time. With plain women in general, in the hope of securing the | exception of the correspondence of Pope and 33 glory of two suicides apiece. I believe that there are friends, not many private letters of the period have few men who, in the course of their observations on come down to us; but those, such as they are life, may not have perceived that it is not the great scattered scraps from Farquhar and others—are mare est female beauty who forms the longest and the strong | indecent and coarse than any thing in Pope's letters est passions.
The comedies of Congreve, Vanbrugh, Farquha, But, apropos of Pope. — Voltaire tells us, that the | Cibber, etc., which naturally attempted to repres Maréchal Luxembourg (who had precisely Pope's the manners and conversation of private life, are d2€ figure) was not only somewhat too amatory for a sive upon this point; as are also some of Steeles por great man, but fortunate in his attachments. La Va pers, and even Addison's. We all know what the che lière, the passion of Louis XIV., had an unsightly versation of Sir R. Walpole, for seventeen years the defect. The Princess of Eboli, the mistress of Phi prime minister of the country, was at his own table, lip II. of Spain, and Maugiron, the minion of Henry III. and his excuse for his licentious language, vix, " that of France, had each of them lost an eye; and the famous every body understood that, but few could talk ratie. Latin epigram was written upon them, which has, I nally upon less common topics." The refinement of believe, been either translated or imitated by Gold- | latter days, which is perhaps the consequence of smith :
vice, which wishes to mask and soften itself, as met
as of virtuous civilisation,-had not yet made sufficient “Lumine Acon dextro, capta est Leonilla sinistro, Et potis est forma vincere uterque Deos;
progress. Even Johnson, in his London, has two f Blande puer, lumen quod babes concede sorori,
three passages which cannot be read aloud, and Abt Sic tu cæcus Amor, sic erit illa Venus."
son's Drummer some indelicate allusions,
The expression of Mr. Bowles, “his consciousness Wilkes, with his ugliness, used to say that " he l of physical defect," is not very clear. It may was but a quarter of an hour behind the handsomest deformity or debility. If it alludes to Pope's de man in England; " and this vaunt of his is said not mity, it has been attempted to be shown that this to have been disproved by circumstances. Swift, , no insuperable objection to his being beloved
alludes to debility, as a consequence of Pope's peculiar sonally, though slightly. Although several years my conformation, I believe that it is a physical and known senior, we had been school-fellows together at the fact that hump-backed persons are of strong and vi "grammar-schule” (or as the Aberdonians pronounce gorous passions. Several years ago, at Mr. Angelo's it,“ squeel") of New Aberdeen. He did not behave fencing-rooms, when I was a pupil of him and of to me quite handsomely in his capacity of editor a few Mr. Jackson, who had the use of his rooms in the Al years ago, but he was under no obligation to behave bany on alternate days, I recollect a gentleman named otherwise. The moment was too tempting for many B-11-gh-t, remarkable for his strength, and the friends and for all enemies. At a time when all my fineness of his figure. His skill was not inferior, for relations (save one) fell from me like leaves from the he could stand up to the great Captain Barclay him tree in autumn winds, and my few friends became still self, with the muffles on;—a task neither easy nor fewer,—when the whole periodical press (I mean the agreeable to a pugilistic aspirant. As the by-standers daily and weekly, not the literary press) was let loose were one day admiring his athletic proportions, he against me in every shape of reproach, with the two remarked to us, that he had five brothers as tall and strange exceptions (from their usual opposition) of The strong as himself, and that their father and mother Courier and The Examiner,--the paper of which were both crooked, and of very small stature;-I Scott had the direction was neither the last nor the think he said, neither of them five feet high. It would least vituperative. Two years ago I met him at Vo not be difficult to adduce similar instances; but I nice, when he was bowed in griefs by the loss of his abstain, because the subject is hardly refined enough son, and had known, by experience, the bitterness of for this immaculate period, this moral millennium of domestic privation. He was then earnest with me to expargated editions in books, manners, and royal trials return to England; and on my telling him, with a of divorce.
smile, that he was once of a different opinion, he reThis laudable delicacy—this crying-out elegance of plied to me, “ that he and others had been greatly the day-reminds me of a little circumstance which misled; and that some pains, and rather extraordinary occurred when I was about eighteen years of age. means, had been taken to excite them.” Scott is no There was then (and there may be still) a famous more, but there are more than one living who were French "entremetteuse," who assisted young gentle- present at this dialogue. He was a man of very conmen in their youthful pastimes. We had been ac- siderable talents, and of great acquirements. He had quainted for some time, when something occurred in made his way, as a literary character, with high sucher line of business more than ordinary, and the re cess, and in a few years. Poor fellow! I recollect fusal was offered to me (and doubtless to many others), bis joy at some appointment which he had obtained, probably because I was in cash at the moment, hav- or was to obtain, through Sir James Mackintosh, and ing taken up a decent sum from the Jews, and not which prevented the further extension (unless by a having spent much above half of it. The adventure rapid run to Rome) of his travels in Italy. I little on the tapis, it seems, required some caution and thought to what it would conduct him. Peace be with circumspection. Whether my venerable friend doubted him !--and may all such other faults as are inevitable my politeness, I cannot tell; but she sent me a letter to humanity be as readily forgiven him, as the little couched in such English as a short residence of six injury which he had done to one who respected his teen years in England had enabled her to acquire. talents, and regrets his loss. After several precepts and instructions, the letter closed. I pass over Mr. Bowles's page of explanation, upon But there was a postscript. It contained these words: the correspondence between him and Mr. S It -"Remember, Milor, that delicaci ensure everi suc is of little importance in regard to Pope, and contains cés." The delicacy of the day is exactly, in all its merely a re-contradiction of a contradiction of Mr. circumstances, like that of this respectable foreigner. Gilchrist's. We now come to a point whe
where Mr. Gil"It ensures every succès," and is not a whit more christ has, certainly, rather exaggerated matters; and,
oral than, and not half so honourable as, the coarser of course, Mr. Bowles makes the most of it. Capicandour of our less polished ancestors.
tal letters, like Kean's name, “large upon the bills,” To return to Mr. Bowles. "If what is here ex are made use of six or seven times to express his sense tracted can excite in the mind (I will not say of any of the outrage. The charge is, indeed, very boldly ‘layman,' of any Christian,' but) of any human being," made; but, like Ranald of the Mist's practical joke etc. etc. Is not Mr. Gilchrist a "human being ?" of putting the bread and cheese into a dead man's Mr. Bowles asks “ whether in attributing an article," | mouth, is, as Dugald Dalgetty says, “s
mouth, is, as Dugald Dalgetty says, “ somewhat too etc. etc. "to the critic, he had any reason for distin- wild and salvage, besides wasting the good victuals." guishing him with that courtesy," etc. etc. But Mr. Mr. Gilchrist charges Mr. Bowles with “suggest
Wles was wrong in "attributing the article" to Mr. ing” that Pope “attempted" to commit “a rape" Gilchrist at all, and would not have been right in upon Lady Mary Wortley Montague. There are two Calling him a dunce and a grocer, if he had written it. reasons why this could not be true. The first is,
Mr. Bowles is here "peremptorily called upon to that, like the chaste Letitia's prevention of the intended speak of a circumstance which gives him the greatest | ravishment by Fireblood (in Jonathan Wild), it might pain, -the mention of a letter he received from the have been impeded by a timely compliance. The se editor of The London Magazine.” Mr. Bowles seems cond is, that however this might be, Pope was pro
ave embroiled himself on all sides; whether by bably the less robust of the two; and (if the Lines on diting, or replying, or attributing, or quoting, -it Sappho were really intended for this lady) the asserted as been an awkward affair for him.
consequences of her acquiescence in his wishes would oor Scott is now no more. In the exercise of his have been a sufficient punishment. The passage which ation, he contrived at last to make himself the sub- Mr. Bowles quotes, however, insinuates nothing of the
of a coroner's inquest. But he died like a brave kind: it merely charges her with encouragement, and , and he lived an able one. I knew him per- him with wishing to profit by it,-a slight attempt at
to hav edit