صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

Here end our extracts from Dr. Polyglott: and now follow the two versions which we proposed to add to them. For the first, we are indebted to our learned friend, Mr. Reynolds*, whose classical taste and finished acquirements are the subject of general commendation. It is the work of a Kerry Latinist.

[blocks in formation]

⚫ Since this paragraph was penned, this accomplished gentleman has paid the debt of nature. His loss to the rising generation will be sorely felt, as he was and had long been the principal classical teacher in the Richmond academy.

[blocks in formation]

V.

Litteris operam das;

Lucido fulges oculo;

Dotes insuper quas

Nummi sunt in loculo. Novi quod apta sis

Ad procreandam sobolem ! Possides (nesciat quis?)

Linguam satis mobilem.
Semel tantum dic

Eris nostra Lalage;
Ne recuses sic,
Dulcis Julia Calage.
VI.

Conjux utinam tu

Fieres, lepidum cor, mi!
Halitum perdimus, heu,
Te sopor urget. Dormi!
Ingruit imber trux-

Jam sub tecto pellitur
Is quem crastina lux
Referet huc fideliter.
Semel tantum dic

Eris nostra Lalage;

Ne recuses sic,

Dulcis Julia Calage.

We conclude with the following translation of "The Poet's Sigh." It is the work of a tyro,

and we are not critics enough to pronounce upon its merits.

THE POET'S SIGH.

BY T. MOORE.

Drink to her who long
Hath waked the poet's sigh;
The girl who gave to song
A heart that none could buy.

Oh woman's heart was made
For minstrels' hands alone;
By other fingers played,
It yields not half the tone.

At Beauty's door of glass,

Where Wit and Wealth once stood,

They asked her which might pass: She answered, "He who could."

Wealth tried a golden key,
But found it would not do;
While Wit a diamond brought,
And cut his bright way through.

The love which seeks a home,
Where wealth or grandeur shines,
Is like the gloomy gnome,
Who dwells in dark gold mines.

But oh! the poet's love!
It boasts a brighter sphere;
Its native home's above,
Though woman keeps it here.

Then here's to her who long, &c. &c.

LATIN VERSION.

BY

Puellæ poto caræ,
Cui poeta suspiravit,
Et auro, quæ, inemptum
Cor, carmini donavit.

Oh! fidicinis pro manu,
Cor fœminæ creatum,
Enervem edit sonum
Ab alio modulatum.

Dives, ad fores vitreas,
Juvenisque solers, stantes,
Formosa Aphrodites,
Et cupide pulsantes,

Rogârunt vehementer,
Cui liceat introire,
“Illi,” dixit subridens,
"Qui potest aperire."

Tunc aureo, seram, clave,
Divite frustra tentante,
Persecuit cito Juvenis,
Fulgenti adamante.

Amor, qui petit domum,
Auro, gemmis micantem,
Emulatur tristem larvam,
Fodinam habitantem.

At sedes effulgentes,
Habet amor poetarum,
Hic, fœminâ moratus,
Sed Indigena stellarum.

Puellæ tunc bibemus, &c. &c.

TO THE MOUNTAIN VIOLET.

Yes! ye are beautiful; and on your clear
Blue tablets I can trace the smile of Heaven;
And ye are lovelier for the love I bear

Him by whose gentle hand and kind ye were given;
But oh! ye are not the violets of mine own,
My 'sunny south,' whose fragrant breath steals o'er
Our hearts'-heart, like an unforgotten tone

From lips whose music we shall hear no more! Painfully sweet, but shedding in its flight

The soothing balm of hope upon the soulChasing away the gloom of sorrow's night,

And bidding the dark clouds of grief all backward roll!

But thou'rt as fair as they, and yet I gaze

Upon thy beauty with an unmoved heart

For ye are scentless, and no fragrance strays
From your bright leaves, its sweetness to impart.
Alas! ye are too like the hopes they fain

Would kindle in me of returning health-
Of energies renewed-disease and pain

'Whelmed in the ocean of life's hoarded wealth! I listen to their tales of love and hope,

And life and joy, and all things fair and bright, Even as I gaze upon the sunny slope,

Where ye, fair violets, repose in light;

My eye drinks in your beauty, but there breathes
No fragrance o'er me from your purple wreaths.

I listen to them calmly, for I know

They fain would keep me with them yet awhileBut when the flower is crushed, what hand below Can heal its bruised leaves-restore its smile? In vain, in vain, the healing balm is pouredIn vain affection's tears bedew its bedE'en tho' its bloom a moment be restored,

'Tis like a pall empurpled o'er the dead;

And though my cheek bright as that shroud may glow, The worm is at the heart, and all is dark below!

BRIG'R GEN. MORGAN--Goode's Bridge.

Malvan Hill, 24th July, 1781.

Dr. Sir,--I am very sensible of the peculiar circumstances of the gentlemen from Maryland, and how much they sacrifice by remaining with the army. I possible; and for this purpose, I am making up a said to you that I wished to dismiss them as soon as and will send it to you, when they will be able to go corps, which I expect to have complete in a few days, home. I beg you to present my compliments to them, and am,

Dr. sir, your ob. servt.

Brig. Gen. Morgan.

FORGET ME!

[ocr errors][merged small]

Forget me? No! when pleasure fills
Her goblet to the brim,

And mirth and song, like sparkling rill,
No breath of care may dim,
Then withered joys, and love betrayed,
And many a fond word spoken,
And many a hope all lowly laid,

And many a bright charm broken, Like spectres from the buried past,

Shall mem'ry summon up, And from his fevered lip shall cast

The yet untasted cup!

Forget me? When the tempest's might Dissolves itself in rain,

And human power shall reunite

Those scattered drops again. Forget me? No! in life's dark bowl There's no oblivious wave,

No Lethe for the guilty soul,

Save that within the grave: And oh! how oft the weary breast Would seek from mem'ry's gloom,

A refuge in the dreamless rest That dwells within the tomb!

LETTER OF LAFAYETTE.

TO MR. T. W. WHITE.

Washington, Jan. 18, 1838. Sir,--I send you a copy of a letter, addressed during the Revolutionary war by General Lafayette to General Morgan, which I made in July last, from the original in the National Museum of the city of Mexico. How this letter found its way to Mexico, I could not learn; but I was induced to suppose that it may have been carried thither by General Wilkinson, who died in that city about ten or twelve years ago.

The letter contains nothing of manifest importance; yet as it was written just after the retreat of Cornwallis to Portsmouth, and just before his occupation of Yorktown, it may perhaps serve to throw some additional light on the proceedings of that most interesting period of our history.

I am, sir, your obed't serv❜nt,

R. G.

[blocks in formation]

VOL. IV.

T. W. WHITE, Editor and Proprietor.

RICHMOND, APRIL, 1838.

MR. JEFFERSON.

We feel it to be our duty to publish the following Review of an article in "The New York Review and Quarterly Church Journal," of March, 1837. The person to whom it relates has filled a large space in the eyes of his countrymen. The New York Review is conducted with no little ability, and makes a great figure in the Republic of Literature; and the Reviewer, who has taken up arms, in defence of Mr. Jefferson, against the attacks of the New York Review, appears to be a champion of no ordinary power. All together, the article comes commended to us in a manner, which does not permit us to deny the use of our columnsand it will probably attract a large share of the attention of our readers. We admit it to be somewhat spicy in its composition; but if the New York Reviewer should feel himself under any obligation to make a reply, we will cheerfully extend to him the hospitality of our house. Our columns are open to him; and they are at his service. The Editor of a Periodical like this is not at liberty to consult his own feelings, in what he excludes or admits: but having admitted such an article as the following, it is his duty to render justice by admitting a reply.

No. IV.

FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM.

These phrases are, "dissolve the political bands which have connected"-" absolve from all allegiance to the British crown"-"are, and of right ought to be""pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor."-We do not adopt Professor Tucker's theory, that the extant copy of the Mecklenburg Declaration is so far spurious, that the compiler of it borrowed from Mr. Jefferson's draft these parallel phrases and interpolated them into the Mecklenburg copy. We are willing to admit the present Mecklenburg copy to be as it was at first written, and we entirely dissent from Professor Tucker's account of the changes and interpolations which he has assigned to that copy. But is Mr. Jefferson, then, the plagiarist? Certainly not, of the three first phrases, and from the Mecklenburg copy.-Mr. Jefferson's copy was drawn out by the resolution of Mr. Richard Henry Lee, as quoted by our Reviewer. That resolution was founded on the resolution of the Virginia Convention of May 15, 1776, instructing their Delegates in General Congress "to propose to that respectable body, to declare the United Colonies, free and independent States." Richard Henry Lee, as one of their Delegates, moved the resolution, as quoted by our Reviewer. The Committee was then appointed by Congress to draft the Declaration; and it fell to Mr. Jefferson, as one of the Committee, to make the original draft, and report to the Committee. When reported, it underwent several alterations. It was then reported to Congress itself, and adopted by that body on the 4th July, 1776. Now, the following facts appear, from a comparison of these several docu

We mean not to play the Critic upon the two Reviewers. The attack and the defence are both before the public tribunal; and the reader must judge for himself. The reviews of Mr. Jefferson's moral principles and his intellectual character, will be reviewed in turn by the public. We mean not to decide between them.ments: 1st. That the phrase "absolved from all alleBut there is one circumstance alleged by the New York Reviewer in relation to Mr. Jefferson, upon which we would offer a few explanatory remarks, though our own Reviewer has nearly exhausted the subject. It is a curious literary problem, whether Mr. Jefferson in preparing his own Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776, did not commit a plagiarism upon the Declaration of Independence adopted at Mecklenburg, North Carolina, on the 20th May, 1775. It has already given rise to much discussion. Mr. Joseph Seawell Jones of North Carolina has made it the theme of some severe strictures on the Virginia politician. Mr. Tucker, in his "Life of Thomas Jefferson," has defended him against the charge of plagiarism. And the New York Reviewer, in reviewing Mr. Tucker's work, has attempted to refute the Biographer, and to bring back the charges, with other cases of plagiarism, home to Mr. Jefferson. Our own Reviewer has gallantly stept forward to defend the memory of Mr. Jefferson; and brought up for that purpose a contemporaneous piece of history, which had entirely escaped the researches, both of Mr. Tucker and his Reviewer. But our Reviewer himself has dropped two links in the chain of proofs, which we beg leave to supply.

The charge consists in Mr. Jefferson's borrowing from the Mecklenburg Declaration four phrases for his own. We believe this is the amount of the alleged plagiarism.

giance to the crown," is in the original resolution: 2nd. That this same phrase, as well as the phrase "are, and of right ought to be," are found in Mr. Lee's resolution: and, 3dly. That the other phrase, "dissolve the political bands which have connected," is also to be found in this form in Mr. Lee's resolution, "all political connexion, &c. &c. is and ought to be totally dissolved:" and, 4thly. That even these phrases were not adopted by Mr. Jefferson in his original draft, but that they were interpolated by the Committee itself, to whom he reported ;--for, they were introduced subsequently to the report, in the following form, the words thrown in by the Committee being in italics: "That these United Colonies are and of right ought to be, free and independent States; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connexion between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be totally dissolved."-As to the last of the four parallel phrases, we cannot trace them to any other document. In the Mecklenburg Declaration, the phrase stood, "to the maintenance of which independence we solemnly pledge to each other our mutual co-operation, our lives, our fortunes and our most sacred honor." In Mr. Jefferson's Declaration, it ran, "and for the support of this Declaration [with a firm reliance on Divine Providence,] we mutually pledge to each other, our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor." [The words in brackets were VOL. IV.-27

introduced by the Committee.] We have not been able to trace the origin of this phrase to any other source, than the Mecklenburg paper; but it may be, if we had the state or other papers of that remarkable age before us, our researches might trace Mr. Jefferson's phrase to some other intermediate channel, or to some common fountain.

It may be supposed, that we are wasting too much time upon this question. But when it is considered how much factitious consequence some things derive from the facts with which they are associated; and how much interest this literary problem has acquired from the curiosity it has produced, and the attention which has been bestowed upon it by the Historian of North Carolina, the Biographer of Mr. Jefferson, the New York Reviewer of the Biography, and our own Reviewer of the Review, we hope we may be excused for the labor we have spent upon it.

We cannot throw down our pen, without laying before the reader the following beautiful and prophetic passage, which formed a part of Mr. Jefferson's draft, and which was stricken out by the committee, we do not exactly see for what good reason: "We must endeavor to forget our former love for them, and to hold them as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends. We might have been a free and a great people together; but a communication of grandeur and of freedom it seems is below their dignity. Be it so; since they will have it. The road to happiness and to glory is open to us too; we will climb it apart from them, and acquiesce in the necessity which denounces our eternal separation." What visions of glory rush upon the mind of the American, as he weighs these memorable words, traced by the pencil of Thomas Jefferson more than sixty years ago! How rapidly is the fulfilment confirming the prediction! No nation can boast of sixty years of equal prosperity and glory with those we have already witnessed. And if wisdom should guide our destinies, what new glories await us!

THE NEW YORK REVIEW'S REVIEW OF MR. JEFFERSON.

MARCH, 1837.

This is very extraordinary--a coarse political and personal article in a religious and literary journal. But besides the manner of it, the subject too, is strangely chosen; for the life of Mr. Jefferson furnishes little to illustrate religious literature-and therefore to form a fit subject for such a work. His life, or the active part of it, was spent in political affairs. It was as a statesman and politician that he appeared to the men of his own times; and it is only as such that other times should recur to his memory. But it is not in this character that the critics of the "New York Review and Quarterly Church Journal" choose to consider him. By them he is made into a drum-a drum ecclesiastic-to animate a battle of religion and politics. They declare in the outset, an intention to examine, not his public acts, but his private character; or as they phrase it, "to study, not the politician, but the man-and the qualities of his head and heart." And this is defended

at the end, by the declaration that the "characters of public men are public property."

The reviewer does not confine himself to the limits he had prescribed; but he canvasses Mr. Jefferson's religion, his morals, and his politics. Whatever may be said of the first, we hardly thought the last made a part of private character. He does not formally divide his subject in this way, but mixes the political disquisition with the moral and religious.

Intending to examine, with some detail, this attack on the illustrious patriot whose principles are the basis of a party, and whose memory is much revered by his country, we shall follow the Review, seriatim, in its own order of topics.

It opens by quoting from Professor Tucker's Life"It was the fate of Thomas Jefferson to be at once more loved and praised by his friends, and more hated and reviled by his adversaries, than any of his compatriots." And, on this, says, in the style of a certain desk for public teaching, “The inquiry naturally suggests itself, why Mr. Jefferson should have enjoyed the peculiar love, or felt the peculiar hate of those who knew him?" The question is meant to be put with some sarcastic point. It appears only for the sneer, for it is never answered; but introducing some refined reflections and obscure reasoning, conducts the critic, on his 7th page, to the discovery, that "If Mr. Jefferson is now less loved than some of his contemporaries, it is because we find less to love in him." He travels thus far in his inquiry, and misses the object of his search by the way. The answer to his question is obvious. Mr. Jefferson was a party-man, the framer of party, the leader of party, and the author of party political revolutions. He had pulled down a great party, though aided by Washington's name, (for they professed to have taken him into their political keeping, and his principles into their exclusive practice,) and he had built up another. Mr. Jefferson, moreover, was no neutral in any thing. He thought of neutrals as Burke has portrayed them in his fine declamation. He was an ardent and bold man, who pursued his ends always with zeal; and in this he was influenced as much by principle as by temper. Regarding party as an association for the establishment of public principle, he esteemed such political connexions highly useful to the state-and necessary to our system. See what he has said of the whig and tory divisions in English politics, All sagacious men practically acquainted with the machinery of popular government have thought with him. Burke has very profoundly developed the same opinions in his Reflections on the French Revolution, Essentially then, and in this sense a party-man, Mr. Jefferson was loved by the men whose political fortunes and opinions he had established, and hated by the opposite party which he had overthrown.

We presume this curious difficulty, which so perplexed the philosophical reviewer, was less embarrassing to the professor. Though he states it with too much solemnity, for so plain a matter.

Mr. Jefferson's religious opinions are next arrayed by his clerical examiner. That is declared the truest test of character, and Mr. Jefferson's "rejection of revelation" pronounced at the bottom of all his "defects." Without religion, the reviewer admits, but hesitatingly and reluctantly, that man may distinguish the right

[ocr errors]
« السابقةمتابعة »