whom he had undertaken to pursue and confute throughout their whole system. But part of them no doubt must be attributed to the age in which he lived.

It would be highly interesting, did our space permit, to draw parallels between St. Thomas and some cotemporary philosophers, and especially Kant and Hegel. Let it suffice for this time, to observe that the language of these two German philosophers is so different from common language, or that they attach such uncommon meanings to the terms they use, that during their lifetime, and after their death, there was and has been the greatest contention in regard to their meaning, and that there are no two of their disciples who understand them in the same manner. It is the same confusion of words and ideas there was at Babel, but with different instincts. At Babel the object was to build up, here it was to pull down, to subvert-to subvert all truths, all institutions, divine as well as human-to put in their place nobody knows what. Far be it from us to judge of their intentions; we speak of the evident tendency of their systems.

How different is the case with the Neapolitan Doctor. The terms he uses are always in their common acceptation; he has no verbiage, no pompous expressions or phrases, and upon every subject he treats, he sheds new and important light, often, indeed, unexpected and astonishing, but always clear and convincing. And as to the tendency of his doctrine, or, if you will, his philosophy, it manifestly is not to deny or weaken, but, on the contrary, to assert and uphold every truth, no matter whether it is one that is divinely revealed, or one that pertains simply to the natural order.

ART. VI.-1. Histoire de la Caricature Antique; par CHAMPFLEURY. Deuxième Edition, très-augmentée. Paris: E. Dentu, 1867.

2. Histoire de la Caricature Moderne; par CHAMPFLEURY. Paris: E. Dentu, 1867.

3. The Man in the Moon. Edited by ALBERT SMITH and ANGUS B. REACH. London: Clarke, 1847-1848

3. Punch; or, The London Charivari. Vols I.-LIII. London,

1841-1868.

WHEN Fadladeen was called upon to give Lalla Rookh his critical opinion upon "The Veiled Prophet of Khorassan," he began by saying that in order to con

vey with clearness his opinion of the story which Feramorz had related, "it would be necessary to take a review of all the stories that had ever-" but he was called to order, and requested to speak only of the poem he had just heard. In like manner, were we to commence an article upon satirical literature, we should have to go back through the evanished ages, and this whole number would be filled with even the merest preliminary summary of the subject. If, added to this, we should treat satire illustrated by art, no reader would have perseverance to go through the record, or patience to wait until we came down to the present era. Therefore, content with endeavouring to convey some correct idea of satirical composition, pointed by caricature, we shall say little of the past. But we may mention that the ancients struck boldly, "with trenchant blade," as Spenser says, at the vices and follies of the time, and that Aristophanes and Lucian, Horace and Juvenal, have not been even approached, in after days, by any imitators. The satire of the present time, however lively and piquant, does not possess that strength which is the main element of vitality, and, as compared with the productions of the old writers, whose words were weapons, remind us only of the little arrows discharged by the gallant soldiers of Lilliput at the face of Lemuel Gulliver, which pricked him "like so many needles," but inflicted not the slightest permanent personal injury. The satire of the present age owes its point chiefly to the art of design. The text, separated from the comic illustrations, is usually tame and dull. The great humorists of antiquity, still read and relished for their wit and truth, were not given to the world with "choice engravings from designs by the most eminent comic artists."

Caricature, which implies exaggeration, can boast of great antiquity. Examples of it, from Assyria and Egypt, have been discovered in abundance. Pliny mentioned a Greek statue of a drunken woman, extremely like one of the old Egyptian drawings copied by Sir Gardner Wilkinson, and Lepsius published, in his great work on Egypt, a plate in which he reproduced some satirical drawings upon papyrus-now in the British Museum and in the Museum of Turin. The drawings in Turin, M. Thésdule Devéna states, remain on the débris of a roll of papyrus, and their style closely resembles that of Grandville, the modern French caricaturist, who sketched human beings as animals, precisely as had been done in Egypt two thousand years

ago. Copies of these pictorial satires, from the plates of Lepsius, are given in the volume whose title heads our list, and are spirited and artistical. In the Old World, generally, satirical drawings of great antiquity remain.

The Greeks, not content with caricaturing Socrates, who bore it patiently, and the extremely ugly poet Hipponax, who retorted in cutting verse, did not spare royalty itself, and even drew burlesque sketches of Jupiter and Bacchus. There is a fresco in the Casa Carolina, at Pompeii, which represents a painter at work on a portrait in his atelier; it has seven figures, very small, but veritable caricatures, and the easel is shaped exactly like that now used by all painters. A fresco, of the story of Æneas and Anchises, in which the future founder of the Latin nation, bearing his father on his shoulders, and dragging his son after him by the hand, is represented-all three made to resemble animals--was discovered at Gragnano in 1760, and, curiously enough, is an undoubted burlesque of a marble group now in the Museum of Florence. But we need go no further with this part of our subject. Of course, no archæologian or connoisseur will acknowledge as genuine the extremely apocryphal fresco, pretended to have been found in Greece, some forty years ago, entitled, ́Exàs naî Kaλé, which represents an author following Fame, who, as she runs away, with a laurel wreath in one hand, holds the other up to her face, the thumb of its extended palm saucily applied to her nose, in the fashion familiarly entitled, taking a sight."

The Greek legend was supposed to have been Fame's taunting exclamation. Some believers in the antiquity of this design were found, but it was a French quiz, probably suggested by a passage in Rabelais.

Our introduction is growing so long that we must check all desire to show what modern caricature has done in Continental Europe, in conjunction with written satire. Germany has several illustrated satirical journals. Italy has the Fischietto; and Figaro, the Charivari, and the Journal pour Rire have long flourished in France. Under the first Empire caricature was not safely exercised. One of the best hits was at Prince Borghese, who had married Napoleon's sister, Pauline. The prince was quiet and contented, obese and good-natured, but remarkably dull. The satirist placed him in the centre of a group of jackasses whom he regarded with peculiar self-complacency, exclaiming: "Où peut-on être mieux qu'au sein de sa famille?" (where can one be happier

than in the bosom of his own family?) which was the burden of a French song, very popular at the time.

The modern French caricaturists may be said to have first shown themselves during the reign of Louis Philippe. The principal, most of whom have contributed to the satirical journals, are Honoré Daumier, who first exhibited Louis Philippe as Robert Macaire; Charles Joseph Traviès de Villiers, who invented the type of Mayeux, corresponding with the Oriental Karagueuz and the Italian Polichinello; Henry Monnier, who created the types of Madame Gibou and Joseph Prudhomme, and Messieurs Charles Philipon, Pigal, Grandville, and Gavarni the actual patronymic of the last of these was Sulpice-Paul Chevalier, just as Amadeus de Noe was better known during the last twenty years of his life as Cham, than by his true surname.

Caricature, or comic sarcastic art, cannot be regarded as having flourished in England until the time of George the Second. The first master in that line was William Hogarth. His "Marriage-à-la-Mode," now in the National Gallery of England, was a striking and satirical series, directed against the loose morals and bad manners of the time. The comedy of "The Clandestine Marriage," by the elder Colman and David Garrick, was professedly founded upon Hogarth's paintings: we use the names of Colman and Garrick in conjunction, because the dramatist and the actor united to produce that play. The part of Lord Ogleby, the most original part in the play, has generally been attributed to Garrick, though he refused to perform it. The younger Colman acknowledged, on his father's authority, that Garrick's share was a revision of the comedy, and the invention of the incidents in the last act where the various characters are brought forward from their beds to produce an explanation and the catastrophe. "The Rake's Progress, another well-known series by. Hogarth, and his "Industry and Idleness" (the pictorial history of a good and a bad apprentice), were dramatized in our own time, with effect and success. The last-named series, though it has many comic points, is, indeed, a highly tragic history.

These performances, however, do not strictly belong to what is called caricature. Neither does "The Harlot's Progress." His illustrations to "Hudibras" first indicated Hogarth's decidedly satiric spirit, and are worthy of Butler's poetry, graphic as that is, and full of images of fun and humour. The March to Finchley" might

have done duty as a scene in which our own militia of the last century were quizzed. Hogarth aimed at an eminent mark when, in "Burlington Gate," he ridiculed Pope, the poet, and Kent, the architect. "The Sleeping Congregation," and "The Distrest Poet," were bold hits at the social life of the time, and "The Enraged Musician," though designed to illustrate a passing event, is as racy as ever after more than a century. The most amusing of Hogarth's works is "The Strolling Actresses," full of life and fun. His portrait of Churchill, the satirist, as a bear, won the town to laugh with him, and his well-known likeness of John Wilkes, the result of an attack on Hogarth, in "The North Briton," though somewhat exaggerated, holds its ground as the best likeness of the great demagogue ever made. Hogarth added a few touches to a portrait of Wilkes which impressed the man's vices on the canvas, bringing out the sensuality of his character. It is said that, when finished, the painter, remembering his former friendship for Wilkes, threw it in the fire, from which his wife snatched it. In later years, so thorough was the actual likeness, that Wilkes, who could jest at his own expense, wrote in a letter to a friend, "I am growing every day more and more like my portrait by Hogarth.'

Between the death of Hogarth in 1764, and the reign of Bunbury and Gilray, a long interval occurred. Henry William Bunbury, born in 1750, died in 1811, was second son of the Rev. William Bunbury. The baronetcy, conferred by Charles II. in 1681, is now held by the caricaturist's grandson. It was Bunbury's double misfortune to be above the necessity of working for his bread, and to use the pencil without being able to draw well. He was a genuine and would have been a great caricaturist, if his hand had been able to respond to the demands of his imagination. He drew faces with spirit and truth, and was at least tolerable when dealing with the human figure, so long as it was arrayed in shapeless breeches, broad-skirted and loosely-hanging coats, capacious vests, grizzly perukes, and surrounded with an atmosphere of tobacco smoke. He drew men and women with as much sameness as if he were stereotyping them. A want of individuality is the great drawback on most of Bunbury's performances, and his accessories-cattle, furniture, and landscape-were sketchy, as well as generally incorrect. He was a great amateur, now and then showing unexpected ability. One of his pieces is the "Propagation of