Page images
PDF
EPUB

to die, or live, juft as it might happen. This was about ten o'clock in the morning. Some time after this, the dog was feen endeavouring to crofs over the Street at the top of Ludgate-hill, but his weaknefs was fo great, that, unfupported by a wall, he could not accomplish his purpofe. The miferable appearance and fituation of the dog again excited the compaffion of a boy; who, inftead of abufing a poor creature already weighed down with misfortune, readily lifted it over to the pavement on the other fide of the ftreet. It was able then, by the affiftance of the houses, to get down to Fleet-market,

and furmount two or three narrow croflings,

till it reached Holborn bridge. Here once more, by a peculiar deftiny, for which I feel a momentary veneration for my fpecies, humanity ftepped in a third time to its aid. This was fufficient;—and about eight o'clock in the evening it reached its mafter's houfe, in Red-lion-ftreet, Holborn, and laid itself down on the fteps; having been ten hours on its journey to that place from St. Paul's. It was fo much altered in appearance, that the mafter could not recognize his old, faithful companion. The eyes were funk into its head, and fcarcely could be difcerned. When it left its master, it was fuppofed to weigh twenty pounds; when it returned, curiofity led the matter to examine what weight it had loft, and it was found to be fixteen pounds two ounces; for the dog, or rather skeleton of the dog, then weighed only three pounds fourteen ounces. The first indication it gave of knowing its mafter, was wagging its tail on the mention of its name, Phillis. For a long time it was unable to eat or drink; and the miftrefs of the houfe, being very humane, used to feed it with a tea-fpoon, till poor Phil at length recovered. What however falls, famine, and a thousand accidents could not do, was effected a fhort time after, by the wheels of a coach, which unfortunately went over her, and ended her mortal days.

It will be afked, how did this animal live near nine weeks without food ?This was not the cafe. When he met with her fall, he was with young, and near the time of littering. This circunftance certainly took place when he was in the dome of St. Paul's; but at the time of her deliverance, no veftige of any off Spring remained; the must confequently have eaten them. The remains of another dog were faid to be found near her this is fuppofed to be one leis fortuDate than herfelf, who was killed by the MONTHLY MAG. No. XLIX.

fall which Phil had furvived: fhe therefore converted him to the most urgent of all natural purpofes. When this treat was gone, the fhoe fucceeded; which was almoft half devoured. Singular efcapes of men, Mr. Editor, are often related, and read with pleasure; and perhaps, to fome of your readers, the efcape even of a poor dog may not be altogether uninterefting. I am, Sir, August 8, 1799. A. B.

To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine.'

SIR,

HE liberty of criticifm, no less than

TH the liberty of the prefs in general, fhould be afferted by every ingenuous writer, as being effential to the interests of literature. Nothing in this letter, therefore, must be construed into a contempt of that facred claim, and none of your readers, I hope, will refufe that liberty to others in which they indulge themfelves. In full reliance on this candour, I lay before them a few morfels of criticifm or rather obfervations on fome criticism, that have appeared in your mifcellany; my object being to point out infances, in which fome writers have, I apprehend, fcarcely kept the proper bounds of criticifin.

The first was, when, from fome acknowledged inaccuracies of an excellent and useful writer, a fweeping conclufion was drawn against his writings in general As a writer of history and essays, Hume has obtained confiderable, and, I think, juft celebrity. In his ftyle of writing there are unquestionably many improprieties, and in his Hiftory of England fome miftaken politics. His frequent departure from the English idiom has been noticed by Dr. Prieftley in his English Grammar. Bishop Hurd in his Dialogues on the Englith Conftitution, and Dr. Towers in his Tracts, have attacked his politics.

Several criticisms on the ftyle of Hume have appeared in your Magazine; many of which, as might have been expected from the acumen of the writer, were certainly accurate; but feveral, I recollect, appeared to me at the time inaccurate: and when Mr. Wakefield aflerted, there are not two well-written periods in all Hume's works, and when, invoking INSIPIDITY and VULGARITY, he spoke fo contemptuously of all the volumes of Hume, historical and metaphyfical, I ferupled not to fay, he leap'd the hounds of criticifm.

Hume, it must be acknowledged, is fometimes bald, and fometimes clumfy; he is alfo frequently inaccurate: and where 4 L

many

many excellencies are confpicuous, it will be useful to point out his blemishes. But, admitting all that has been faid on the choice and arrangement of words, the ftructure of fentences and periods, the ornaments of language, and the like; yet, as all men have not exactly the fame tafte, fo neither are they all affected exactly alike by the fame way of turning a period. There is still room left for the exercife of fome variety of judgment: and this is even allowed by Dionyfius of Halicarnaffus, who has written fo admirably on the ftructure of language.

But writers alfo take a colour, as it were, from their own tempers and characters, and ftill more from the fubjects which they difcufs. Criticism, in determining the merits of authors, should confult thefe circumftances, as well as the rules by which they are accustomed to meafure words and fyllables. Ariftotle has written a treatise on the Art of Poetry: the ftyle is clofe, cautious, and fometimes obfcure: unless we confult the nature of the fubject and the character of Ariftotle, we might pronounce the author to be tame and fpiritlefs. But Ariftotle was a philofophical critic. Plutarch adopts a different tyle and we difcover the temper of the man in the character of his writings. He had travelled much; was a great collector of anecdotes; conftantly carried with him his common-place book, and was for fome time a fchoolmatter at Rome. His MORAL TREATISES therefore, among which are two or three on poetry, favouring ftrongly of his character and profeffion, excite reflection, and convey much information; but, at the fame time, they glitter with fimilies, are overcharged with ftories, and redundant with quotations; and though a moft amufing writer, Plutarch is lefs pure and chafte in his ftyle than many other Greek writers. As to Plato, when a boy, he ftudied poetry, and always poffelled a lively imagination; and though he was afterwards for banishing the poet from republics, he was, after all, as much a poet as a philofopher himself.

Let the writings of Hume be examined with the fame allowances. Hume has obtained many admirers in England, and will, probably, continue to be adinired by men of taste and learning. But the temper, the character, the purfuits, and even the country of Hume fhould be confdered. He was a clofe metaphyfical thinker, as well as a writer; an inquirer into principles; a fceptic as well as an hiftorian. And if it is ufual, when eftimating the character of Livy, the Roman hiftorian, to take into the account his

Patavinity, it will be but reafonable, in examining Hume as a writer, to recollect, he was born and ftudied on the other fide of the Tweed.

Laiffons à l'Italie De tous ces faux brillants l'eclatante folie, fays Boileau; and he elfewhere fays, the gold of Virgil was preferable to all the tinfel of Taffo: Addifon too adopted this fentiment. Something fimilar to this Mr. Wakefield fays of Hume, when compared with Milton. Voltaire did not admire the tinfel of Taffo; but he knew that Taffo had alfo gold; and therefore, notwith tanding his faults, and the criticisms of Boileau, he fcrupled not to give him a place near Homer and Virgil. Hume likewife, I apprehend, though faulty in feveral respects, will still continue to hold in this country a very refpectable place, both as a moralift and a writer.

Writers of the most acknowledged excellence afford examples of feveral inaccuracies. Addifon, who first pointed out the beauties of Paradife Loft, fcrupled not to notice its many blemishes :-and fhould Milton's profe works be rigidly criticifed, they would be found far, very far, from faultlefs.

The next inftance in which a writer kept not the proper bounds of criticism was, when he attacked the reputation of another writer from motives of intereft.

Claude, the celebrated French protestant, wrote an Effay on the Compofition of a Sermon, which was tranflated into English by the late very ingenious Mr. Robert Robinfon. The tranflation is accompanied with notes, which have been much admired for their originality, varicty, and learning, and not more by dif fenters than churchmen. To each volume (the work confifts of two volumes) is prefixed a very interefting preface; the former contains the life of Monfieur Claude; the latter a brief differtation on Public Preaching. Whether Robinson was a Churchman or a Diffenter, an Arminian or a Calvinist, an Unitarian or Trinitarian, matters not; the work poffeffes great merit; and, independently of the inftruction which a young divine may receive, abounds with humourous and learned notes, pertinent reflections, and, it must be acknowledged, bold fatire: for Robinson uses great freedom of language, and appears with the zeal of a reformer.

But, behold! a maker of SKELETONS * makes his appearance. He takes Robinfon's tranflation, preferves a few of the notes, leaves out Robinfon's two prefaces,

* Skeletons are the leading parts of a fermon, the divifions, and fub-divifions, &c.

prefixes

prefixes a fcanty one of his own, juft enough to puff his own work; and fubjoins his fkeletons, expreffing his hopes that the effay, being now fent forth in its native drefs (forgetting, as it fhould feem, that the work was a tranflation, and another man's tranflation) it will become an object of more general regard: and then, to lift his flimfy work into confequence, he makes, fome obfervations on Robinfon's notes, charging them as incumbrances to the effay. What the followers of this skeletonmaker may think of the performance, I know not! But methinks, in a perfon qualified to "preach before the University. of Cambridge" it would have looked more creditable to have tranflated the effay himfelf. But to take another man's tranflation, and, then, I have too much refpect for your Magazine, than to proportion the feverity of my language to the meannefs of this gentleman's conduct.

I fhould not have troubled you, Sir, with obfervations on this fubject, had there not appeared in your Magazine a letter degrading Robinson's notes † (written, no doubt, by the writer of the skeletons himfelf, or fome friend, profeffor of the art of puffing) in order to make the fkeletons an object of more general regard. But fuch writers fhould be informed, that they reflect no honour on their own caufe, and that it requires but little penetration to. fee they had other ends in view than the credit of your Mifcellany and fo much for this maker of skeletons.

:

Another inftance of ill-timed criticifm appeared, in applying to one fpecies of writing obfervations which rather belonged to another.

I do not recollect, that the writers who have criticifed tranflations lately, diftinguifhed fufficiently between translations and foreign plays adapted to the English ftage. Mr. S. Cottle has lately made the readers of English poetry a valuable prefent, by tranflating the Icelandic poetry, or the Edda of Sæmund, into English verfe; as Dr. Sayers had done before by fome dramatic fketches of northern poetry: as the performances differ in their charac. ter, it is evident, though both works are meant to illuftrate the Icelandic poetry, that their pretenfions fhould be examined by different rules.

Shakespeare wrote the tragedy of Julius

Robinfon is the author of the two moft elaborate pieces of church hiftory in the English language, entitled the Hiftory of Baptifm, and Ecclefiaftical Researches.

The ftrictures in this letter are fuch as 'I thought it incumbent on me to make, as the biographer of Robinson.

Cæfar; Voltaire did not translate Shake. fpeare's, but wrote, on the English tafte, another Julius Cæfar. Merope, alfo, the ftory of which had been dramatized by numerous writers, more particularly by an Italian, the Marquis Scipio Maffei, Voltaire adapted to the French stage: many of our English plays, feveral even of Shakefpeare's, both for fable and incident are indebted to other nations, and none, if I recollect, are mere tranflations.

Now, Sir, independently of the difficulties arifing from the different idioms of two languages, and, commonly, from the for malities of literal translations, other difficulties lie in the way of prefenting mere tranflations to an English audience, arifing from the different ways of dividing a play, in different nations; the different ways of expreffing the paffions; the different modes of reprefentation; the winding-up of the plot, and particularly the length of the drama. An effential part of the Greek drama was the chorus; it has been thought inconfiftent with the character of the English stage. The public endured it twice, once in Caractacus, and again in Elfrida. But though fchylus, Sophocles, and Euripides, have been fince tranflated, not one of them is admitted on the English ftage. The French drama has a freedom of gallantry which would not be endured in an English play; and to fit out the whole length of Don Carlos, or Pizarro, John Bull fhould bring his night-cap in his pocket, and take a nap between the acts. I do but just drop an hint; fufficient, however, to fhew the difference between a tranflation, and adapting a foreign play to the English theatre. I speak not with contempt of any translation, and I leave others to fettle their merits. As to Mrs. Inchbald's Lovers' Vows, and Mr. Sheridan's Pizarro, I inquire not into their respective merits; but the critiques in your Magazine did not, as I recollect, obferve this diftinction.

I cannot forbear adding, that I have felected the cafe of the maker of skeletons, not merely for the fake of doing justice to Robinson's talents. I wifhed alfo to hint in a general way the impropriety of making fo powerful a machine as the Monthly Magazine an inftrument of injuftice, and, of warning fuch writers against that usual refort of vulgar minds, availing themfelves of the literary labours of men of genius, and then injuring their reputation; against forcing themfelves into fituations, where fome people, even from motives of delicacy, will be unwilling to follow them. With refpect to Mr. Hume and Mr. Wakefield, proper refpe&t is due to them 4 L 2

as

as men of talents; but no implicit defer. ence to either; fuum cuique. The flight hints about tranflations are meant as general reflections: I enter not into the merit of any particular performance; and Mrs. Inchbald and Mr. Sheridan have obtained fo juft a reputation by their original writings, as to require no apology for their further endeavours to please the public, by affording them an opportunity of hearing fo excellent a drania as Pizarro on the English stage.

I remain, Sir, refpectfully your's,
G. DYER.

To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine.

A

SIR,

LTHOUGH I am a fubfcriber to your Magazine, it frequently happens that I have not an opportunity of perufing it until fome months after its publication. This has been the cafe refpect. ing that of February laft, which has very lately fallen into my hands. In this Number, I find a letter from Mr. Buby, wherein he feems to charge the lovers of what is called ancient mulic, with acting under the influence of prejudice. If the following remarks, fuggefted by the perufal of that letter, will merit a place in your ufeful Magazine, their infertion will gratify more than one of your readers.

In the letter above alluded to, Mr. Bufby cenfures" certain mufical amateurs" for their partiality to the works of Purcel, Handel, Corelli, &c.; and complains that the names of thofe great musicians are hung up in terrorem over the heads of living compofers."-But furely Mr. B. does not mean to apply this charge to all the admirers of Corelli's or Purcel's mufic; nor can he be to uncharitable as to luppole, that all "the partifans of the old school," as he is pleafed to term them, are partial to the ancient mufic, merely be caule it is old. Indeed it is neither impoffible nor improbable but there may be fome perlons of this deicription, who affect to call themfelves amateurs of the fcience; and if there really be any fuch, who judge of a compofition only by its date, they richly deferve the fevereft cenfure that Mr. B. can poffibly pafs upon them.

It will doubtlefs be allowed, and Mr. B. will hardly undertake to deny, that there are perfons, in the prefent day, capable of appreciating the real merit of a mufical compofition, and it is by a comparifon of the best of the ancient mufic with the generality of the modern, that fuch perfons are induced to give a preference to the former. Perhaps there are fome admirers of the old mulic, who do not duly

confider, that the age of Corelli and Purcel did not produce all musicians of equal genius; many compofitions of that day are fcarcely remembered; and a ftill greater number are totally forgotten. On the other hand, it is probable that fome few of the modern compofitions may live in fucceeding ages, when the greater part of them will be buried in oblivion, never to obtain a resurrection.

It is likewife to be understood, that the admirers of Corelli's, Purcel's or Handel's mufic, at leaft fuch of them as are best able to judge cf thofe productions, do not confider them as perfect models. Abfolute perfection is unattainable by the greatest genius, and those who have approximated the nearest to it, fill afford us ground to pronounce them not infallible. Various infances might be adduced in proof of this, from the works of the abovementioned great maiters.--Even Corelli has indulged himfelt in fome fantastical conceits, for an example of which fee his, Follia, op. 5.-Purcel too has been guilty of many abfurd imitations. And Handel is chargeable with numerous improprieties. The incongruities which appear in bis management of the accents, can fcarcely be enumerated; thefe, however, are very excufable in a perfon who did not write in his native language. But we also find, in his works, other defects, among which may be noticed his want of difcrimination between the very different ftyles of facred and fecular mufic; or, at least, a want of attention in their application. An inftance of this, on the one hand, we find in the beginning of the chorus, "Wretched lovers" (in Acis and Galatea), which is quite in the church ftyle.. And, on the other hand, we have an inftance of the fecular ftyle in the chorus, "All we like theep" (in Meffiah). The conduct of this chorus is really reprehenfible,-inftead of thole plaintive and penitential` ftrains which, from the words, one is naturally led to expect, we find an eccentric compofition, calculated to excite no other idea than that of a flock of fheep, juft releafed from the fold, fkipping and exulting in the liberty they have regained.

But notwithstanding thefe defects, the merits of thofe compofers will always predominate, and their works will remain as monuments of their exalted genius to the latelt ages.

If we defcend to the prefent day, and take a view of the voluminous mais of modern mufic with which the public is burthened, we fhall find little to commend, and much to reprobate. If we compare the mufic of the prefent day with that of

the

the preceding age, the former will appear exceedingly deficient. This, however, cannot be entirely owing to a real defect of genius; but rather to a wrong bias, communicated by the degeneracy of the times. There is no criterion which more strongly marks the character or manners of any age or people than the general ftyle of their mufic; and the frivolity, effeminacy, and diffipation of the prefent day may be diftin&tly read in the greatest part of our modern musical compolitions. It is much to be lamented, that, while real genius is neglected, the greater encouragement is given to the most contemptible 'trash; and parties are employed to applaud or condemn a compofition, juft as it happens to coincide with, or is oppofed to, the present depraved tafte.-And ftill more is it to be regretted, that musicians can be found who will facrifice their better judg-. ment to the vanity or caprice of an igno-. rant patron. But "they have their reward." A musician who can condefcend to demean himself, and degrade the science by writing for those puerile toys, the triangle, and the tambourine, ought to expect nothing more than the honorary prize of a fool's cap and bells.

From the encouragement given to this fpecies of mufic, if it may be fo called, an ingenious compofer has much more to fear than from any predilection in favour of the ancient mufic which may be difcovered either in individuals or focieties. If Mr. B. attempts to recommend his works by complying with the depraved tafte of the prefent day, he will, doubtless, be treated with a certain degree of contempt, by all

who are able to difcriminate between real

and apparent merit. On the other hand,

if he thakes off the fetters of fashion, and exhibits a compofition founded on the folid bafis of reafon and fcience, he will fcarcely fail of proper encouragement and applaufe. But it is in mufic, as in morals, whoever wishes to promote virtue, and to ftem the torrent of vice, muft dare to be fingular

" in the midst of a perverfe generation;" and a musician who dares to oppose the depravity of the reigning taste, will doubtdefs meet with oppofition; but, fooner or later, will find an adequate reward. If, for the prefent, he does not obtain that pecuniary encouragement which his merit entitles him to expect, he will, at least, have the approbation of the difcerning few; and the fatisfaction of tranfinitting to fucceeding ages works of which the prefent are not worthy.

From fome hints which Mr. B. has

dropt, we are led to expect that the ftyle of his compofitions will be much fuperior to that of modern mufic in general; that it will have a tendency to reform the prefent tafte; and therefore we with him complete fuccefs.

July 23, 1799.

W. X.

To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine.

SIR,

[ocr errors]

R. JOHNSON fays, in his Life of poached, for prey among obfcure authors;" and in fupport of this charge, adduces a Latin epigram of Georgius Sabinus, which Thief and the Cordelier. As we have no he fuppofes afforded the fubject of the Sabinus epigram, I am rather inclined to certain proof of Prior's acquaintance with think that we are indebted to the following paffage in his favourite Montaigne, for this excellent ballad. One that they were leading to the gallows, anfwered his confeffor, who promifed him he thould that day up with our Lord:-Do you go then, faid he, in my room; for I, for my part, keep faft to day." Vol. i. p. 403. Lond.

1700.

It was probably the fame amufing eflayift that furnished the fubject of the little piece beginning

"Democritus, dear droll, revifit earth, &c."
See the Effay entitled Democritus and
Heraclitus.
H. R. R.

Dublin, June 18, 1799.

TO OUR READERS AND CORRESPONDENTS.

BY an overfight of the Corrector of the Prefs a moft execrable error disfigured Mr. WAKEFIELD'S Letter, relative to the Slave Trade, in our laft Number. In the extract from Paul's first Lpifle to Timothy, the unmeaning word Bow is inferted and repeated instead of LAW. As the error renders the paffage ridiculous, the Reader is particularly requested to correct it with the pen.

A Correfpondent wijbes us to flate, that Claude le Jeune was the author of the Hundredth Pfalm Tune in the time of Queen Elizabeth.

W. H. thanks Rufticus for his hints relative to Prefident Bradshaw, and he shall direct his inquiries in the way fuggefted.

Mr. Batchelor's laft Letter is returned to the Poft Office for the expence of the postage. The favours of Correspondents, if admiffible, are never neglected.

Once more we repeat our request, that our friends will favour us with Biographical Memoirs of Perfons recently deceased, and with communications relative to any other interefling matters of fact within the sphere of their obfervation.

« PreviousContinue »