of taste will not have lost so much, but that he will have a clear idea of the general merit of his poetry. Comedy, I apprehend, loses more than satire by time, since it represents more minutely and exactly the manners of a particular period; but even that preserves an interest to the latest ages.

The verse here referred to, seems the general one to which recourse is had for all poetry which has not a different measure particularly assigned to it. The Eloisa to Abelard may cause a doubt, whether all those shorter poems that are marked with fancy, sublimity, and pathos, can be written in the measures of the English ode and elegy: but I am by no means sure of the contrary; and probably, not only the soothing tenderness of Tibullus, and the sublime solemnity of Gray, can be expressed in the elegiac stanza, but also, if necessary, the abrupt empassioned style that characterizes parts of this poem. The measure of elegy being adapted to lamentation, that of Milton's Lycidas might perhaps be appropriated to the monody, considered rather as pastoral, than as elegiac. The irregularity both of its rhymes and verses may

be suited to artless sentiment. I have mentioned, in another place, my conviction of the propriety of translating Italian poets in their own stanza, or verse: might not their stanza, or that of Spenser, agreeably to this idea, be adopted in allegorical poems of an old Italian or Provençal cast? The association of ideas may likewise direct to the choice of metre in other instances.

P. 62. 1. 4.—I must own, I approve of the Bishop of Worcester's observation, of ACTION being the object of Tragedy, and MANNERS of Comedy. It is not but that manners are sometimes more difficult to paint in tragedy than in comedy, and discover the greatest talents; their fitness for it, indeed, being acknowledged. I did not, on the other hand, recollect any similar observation, when I remarked in a former work, that comedy was compensated by the power of admitting an equal proportion of action, without making it its direct object.

It will be useful to consider manners in three lights: and FIRST, when they appear alone, and constitute the essence of comedy. Action may then be

compared to the animal spirits, when, however great, they do not tend to interrupt attention to ordinary objects, but rather fix it, by preserving and continuing the same tone of mind. For either the pleasure derived from cheerful society is the result, or another social pleasure arises from gratifying curiosity in a sober and contemplative mood, by observing such passions and distresses of men, as serve but to unfold their characters. In both cases, the objects of attention are superficial, and our eye still remains fixed upon manners; though by means of a more rapid and enlivening succession of ideas, than when either joy or grief is monotonous in those characters. A display of manners is here the object.

SECONDLY, they may appear subordinate, and assistant to action. Mr. Pye justly notices Aristotle's happy illustrative remark, comparing them to the colouring of a picture. Colouring is one of the most difficult parts of painting; and a picture of Titian approaches in value to one of Raphael. I shall adhere to my own comparison, in order fully to explain

myself. We will suppose this vivacity and animation which I have been describing, and which I compare to action, where the possessor is afflicted by accumulated misfortune extending to all around him, and consequently expresses his feelings in a manner proportionate to his sensibility. Here we have no longer leisure to gratify sympathetic curiosity by his distress, nor to make minute remarks upon his conduct; we are absorbed in reflection on his singular fate, and overwhelmed with pity. This effect is heightened by a rapid and striking succession of ideas, as well as the former. The only difference is, that the vivacity, which resembles dramatic action, calls the attention here to itself; instead of assisting it to dwell amusively on indifferent appearances, such as

manners.

On this subject, Mr. Twining agrees with the Bishop; but Dr. Warton asks, are not the strokes of manners in Othello and Macbeth, as admirable as anywhere; and must not there be manners in tragedy? To both questions I answer, yes; but they are there pressed into the office of the passions, and

are admirable as their representatives. Indeed, common sense discovers of how little comparative importance manners are, where ideas of self preservation are excited. I observe too another circumstance. There is a distinction in Burke's Essay between "sensible objects and the passions, on the one hand; " and the characters, actions, and designs of men, "their relations, &c." on the other, the latter of which is separated by him from the former, in the "province of the judgment." Therefore, when the Bishop was urging, that tragic poets should have no other object in view but that of affecting the mind, and raising the passions, it seems a fortunate thought to recommend action as the means; and thus intimate, that the understanding has some part in composition; as if foreseeing the tendency of criticism to produce the vain, wild, and improbable pathos of the German school. A truth of manners, therefore, is the object of tragedy, with regard to them; but, as such, I will so far agree with the learned and ingenious critic I dissent from, that a display of the is often necessary.