Aristotle, seems to have had his eye on the foregoing rule, in the following verses :

Et tragicus plerumque dolet sermone pedestri :

Telephus et Peleus, &c. Nothing can be more awkward than the parenthesis which is here introduced. The last period would perhaps be rendered more correct by substituting in composing the following verses, instead of in the following

verses.

Among our modern English poets, there is none who was better turned for tragedy than Lee, if instead of favouring the impetuosity of bis genius, he had restrained it, and kept it within its proper bounds.

a

The whole sentence discovers a confusion of ideas. We are first told that Lee actually possessed a genius equal to that of any of our modern tragic poets ; though it is afterwards insinuated that he only would have possessed it, provided he had restrained it within due bounds. If a poet is naturally turned for tragedy, he certainly must possess that turn, whether he subject his genius to the control of judgment, or allow it to produce such instances of extravagance as are to be found in the works of Lee.

His thoughts are wonderfully suited to tragedy, but frequently lost in such a cloud of words, that it is hard to see the beauty of tbem : there is an infinite fire in his works, but so involved in smoke, that it does not appear in half its lustre. He frequently succeeds in the passionate parts of the tragedy, but more particularly where he slackens his efforts, and eases the style of those epithets and metaphors, in wbich he so much abounds. What can be more natural, more soft, or more passionate, than that line in Statira's speech, where she describes the charms of Alexander's conversation ?

Then he would talk-Good gods ! how he would talk ! The author has here expressed his sentiments with fe

licity. The language is correct and polished ; and though abounding in metaphor, it is free from affectation or impropriety.

That unexpected break in the line, and turning the description of his manner of talking, into an admiration of it, is inexpressibly beautiful, and wonderfully suited to the fond character of the person that speaks it.

As the words wonderfully suited occur in a sentence not far distant from this, they ought not to have been so soon repeated. The period might have closed thus : “ and finely adapted to the fond character of the person by whom it is spoken.” This arrangement would remove the intrusive pronoun it from the station which it occupies.

There is a simplicity in the words, that outshines the utmost pride of expression.

This sentence possesses considerable beauty.

Otway has followed nature in the language of his tragedy, and therefore shines in the passionate parts, more than any of our Eng

lish poets.

The verb shines is placed too near its compound outshines.

As there is something familiar and domestic in the fable of his tragedy, more than in those of any other poet, he has little pomp, but great force in his expressions. For which reason, though he has admirably succeeded in the tender and melting part of his tragedies, he sometimes falls into too great a familiarity of phrase in those parts, which, by Aristotle's rule, ought to have been raised and supported by the dignity of expression.

Of the four sentences last quoted, three conclude with the substantive expression either in its singular or its plural form.

It has been observed by others, that this poet has founded his tragedy of Venice Preserved on so wrong a plot, that the greatest characters in it are those of rebels and traitors.

The word character, when applied in this manner, denotes some person together with the assemblage of his qualities. It is improper to say “ the greatest persons are the persons of rebels and traitors ;" an expression to which that contained in the conclusion of the above passage is equivalent. The words those of should have been omitted.

:

Had the hero of his play discovered the same good qualities in the defence of his country, that he shewed for its ruin and subversion, the audience could not enough pity and admire bim: but as he is now represented, we can only say of him, what the Roman historian says of Catiline, that his fall would have been glorious (si pro patria sic concidisset) had he so fallen in the service of his country. * This, though an agreeable sentence, is not free from faults. The author speaks of the good qualities which the hero of Venice Preserved shews for the ruin of his country; but this is certainly an attempt in which good qualities were never exhibited. In this passage the words ruin and subversion are both used, though they do not serve to mark any different shades in the ideas.

CHAP. XXVII.

CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF A PASSAGE IN

THE WRITINGS OF SWIFT.

;

The players having now almost done with the comedy called the Beggar's Opera for the season ; it may be no unpleasant speculation, to reflect a little upon this dramatic piece, so singular in the subject and manner, so much an original, and which hath frequently given so very agreeable an entertainment. This introductory sentence is not entitled to much commendation. The players having now almost done with the comedy, is a phrase not altogether free from vulgarity.

Although an evil taste be very apt to prevail, both here and in London, yet there is a point which whoever can rightly touch, will never fail of pleasing a very great majority; so great, that the dislikers, out of dulness or affectation, will be silent, and forced to fall in with the herd: the point I mean, is what we call humour ; which, in its perfection, is allowed to be much preferable to wit; if it be not rather the most useful and agreeable species of it. This sentence, though sufficiently perspicuous, is certainly devoid of elegance. There is a point which whoever can rightly touch, is uncouth phraseology.

I agree with Sir William Temple, that the word is peculiar to our English tongue; but I differ from him in opinion, that the thing itself is peculiar to the English nation ; because the contrary may be found in many Spanish, Italian, and French productions, and particularly, whoever hath a taste for true humour, will find an hundred instances of it in those volumes printed in France, under the name of Le Theatre Italien ; to say nothing of Rabelais, Cervantes, and many others.

The word to which the author refers in the beginning of this sentence, is humour; though, as he had mentioned wit at the close of the last, a slight degree of ambiguity is introduced. It would be more perspicuous to say, “ the word humour is peculiar to our English tongue ;” and in this clause, the seems more proper than our.

This sentence is but unskilfully constructed. The member by which it is closed, follows with a very halting pace.

I shall venture to suggest a few alterations : “I agree with Sir William Temple, that the word humour is peculiar to the English tongue ; but I differ from him in the opinion, that the talent which it denotes is peculiar to the English nation. We discover abundant proofs of the contrary in many Spanish, Italian, and French productions ; and whoever hath a taste for true humour, will find an hundred instances of it in those volumes printed in France under the title of Le Theatre Italien."