authors have endeavoured to prove, that man is not naturally an associating animal; the absurdity of which doctrine must appear sufficiently evident, if we recollect that society exists. Other moralists have argued, that society owes its existence to a sense of property; but are not many animals gregarious or associating, that can have no sense of property? One class of theorists tell us, man is wholly a selfish animal, and deny the existence of a benevolent principle; yet it does not require any extent of observation to ascertain, that virtue predominates in the world, and, therefore, that man must have a benevolent principle. Another class go to the contrary extreme, and not only assure us that an universal benevolence is a characteristic of human nature, but that it is our duty to exert that benevolence equally among the whole human race, without making any distinction as to situation, religion, or laws. These are the principles of the cosmopolite, and as their tendency is diametrically opposite to patriotism, they fall naturally under our examination; but, in the first place, let us inquire whether affection for our native country, is a distinct inherent quality in the human character.

Lord Kaimes, an author who certainly must hold a high rank on the list of our speculative moralists, has delivered it as his opinion, that a general benevolence, in the usual sense of that expression, is not a feature in the human character. He says, that when we consider a single man, abstracted from all circumstances, and all connections, we are not conscious of any benevolence to him; we feel nothing within us that prompts us to advance his happiness. This is not giving such a good opinion of human nature, as evidence would at least admit. Such a perfect indifference between man and man cannot exist; nor can we view a man, abstracted from all circumstances and connections. There is a connection, which it is impossible for a mind, not peculiarly vitiated, to remove. The formation of society is to be attributed to something more than a mere prudential mo tive; to something more than an interested wish by union to supply those wants, which were found to belong to man when alone and unsupported. The existence of society is to be attributed to a social, benevolent instinct; to an adhesive principle in man; which could only be gratified by seeking the company of fellow men, and sharing with them the blessings and afflictions of life. Other animals, as was before observed, have this asso

C-VOL. V.

:

ciating principle, we call it a gregarious instinct, and look no farther; why, therefore, should we ransack our imaginations, to find another cause for an effect in man, when we agree on a cause for a similar effect in other animals? The analogy between man and other animals is not so distant, that we need hesitate one moment in its adoption. The existence of society is sufficient evidence of a benevolence between man and man, just as the existence of language is a proof of speech being a natural faculty and it is singular, that Lord Kaimes, whose theory of morals is in general favourable to the human character, should have expressed himself as in the words just quoted. His Lordship, however, afterwards allows a species of general benevolence to belong to man. He says it is by giving power to an abstract term, such as our country, our religion, our government, or even mankind, that we are enabled to raise general benevolence or public spirit in the mind. This part of his theory is extremely ingenious, and, in some degree, it may likewise be admitted as true. In this sense a man, without question, may embrace in his affections his country, and all mankind; but the patriotism and general philanthropy with which he will be actuated, is still merely a modification of the benevolence, which exists between the individuals of the human species.

Mankind we suppose endued by nature with a principle of benevolence, which is increased or exerted through life, by the necessary or casual connections he may form. One magnet increasing its magnetic virtue by the contact of another, may be compared to man exerting his innate benevolence, and acquiring additional social virtues, by the society and intercourse of fellow men. All the virtues may be denominated modifications of benevolence; and to describe every virtue as a distinct inherent quality, is certainly supposing our moral constitutions more complex than evidence can substantiate. In his infancy this inherent benevo. lence is drawn into action by the friends and relatives immediately around him. His mental faculties extending with his years, he finds himself connected with his countrymen as the members of one society, and feels a desire to promote its interests. Extending his view a little wider, he perceives himself connected with the whole human species, and, therefore, feels it his duty to support the general interests of humanity. Thus are gradually developed all the social virtues, among which patriotism must be classed.

Are we, then, to regulate our affections, merely according to geographical proximity? The principles just advanced lead to no such absurdity. Affection is not to be proportioned to the distance of situation, but to the nature of our connection, and the closeness of our intercourse. We have endeavoured to prove, that the modification of benevolence, which we call patriotism, or the desire of benefiting our native country, is natural to man; but his degrees of affection for other countries may vary. As he will form friendship with those individuals with whom he has the most intercourse, and whose habits of life are congenial to his own, so he will, doubtless, prefer that country which has connection with his own, either by trade or alliance, which is distinguished by similar pursuits, or characterized by similar virtues. This is most probable to be the case with those nations situated near him, and so far, it may be said, his affections are in some degree likely to be in proportion to the proximity of situation. J. N. H. E.

THE COURT AND CITY MARTIAL.

TO THE EDITOR.

DEAR SIR,

As some compensation for the heaviness of my last, I have endeavoured, with the commencement of the new year, to send you a specimen of a new style of communications, which, if your more witty correspondents would take the hint, and follow up the plan with better spirit, would add greatly to the entertainment of your readers, and place your work as far beyond all hopes of rivalry, by other Monthly Writers, in satirical point, as it is in elegance of wit, and originality of humour.

No admirer of the ancients, no lover of light humour and easy versification, but must have been delighted with the frequent gaieties of your sportive friend, HORACE IN LONDON. The ease and aptness, with which he has imitated so many of the sprightly odes of a poet, the most elegant and best skilled in the knowledge of the human heart, perhaps, of any of the ancients, is a proof, not less of his own taste and genius, than it is of the natural excellence of the original, which he has copied; since it adds one

more to the many proofs that the ancients studied nature so well that their observations upon life are suited to every age and every country; at least to every country where the manners of the people are refined by the elegancies, and tainted by the corruptions of luxury. This is, indeed, not peculiar to Horace. Man has been and ever will be much the same, and the satires of the times of Augustus and the later Cæsars, apply not less to those of the age for which they were written, than to those of Boileau and of Pope, of Louis XIV. and the incomparable George*. As a proof of this, we have only to examine the best poets, French as well as English, and we shall trace many of their best thoughts to the ancients, whom they have either professedly, or without acknowledgment, imitated in all their best works.

Your friend Horace strikes so well the lyre of his namesake, the poet, who ran away at the battle of Philippi, relictâ non bene parmulâ, that one can hardly wish him to change even a string of that lyre, but I confess I feel some anxiety to know, whether he will be able to master with equal ease his sublimer strains, and where, in the present day, he will find a parallel for the justum ac tenacem propositi virum, the man who in the destruction of the world stands wreckless of the consequence, impavidum ferient ruina. Upon recollection, indeed, in a bad sense he will find no difficulty in giving this a satirical turn, since there are, and there always will be, many a sottish cit, many a worthless minister, and many a booby king or emperor, who cares not how the world wags, or what mischief is abroad, so that he is tenax propositi, or gains his own ends.

Should he soon exhaust Horace, as he must in time, I would recommend him to try some other poet; and, perhaps, since every thing wears a martial appearance, both at home and abroad, he will find none better adapted to the purpose of the present times than the Poet Martial himself.

To prove that the task of modernizing that agreeable writer is not of insuperable difficulty, I have even made the attempt myself, and send you rather a long epigram, fresh from the manufactory; or, as Dibdin the song-smith would say, hot from the anvil.

* See a late State Paper from Lisbon, (the Proclamation of the Bishop of Oporto) which gives us the most apt title for "his most sacred majesty" that ever was fitted to any prince. "O, incomparable George! How will thy name be remembered in history! Is there a king in Europe that does not owe his crown to thee?"

Before I conclude, let me repeat, that I could wish to see some of your correspondents employed in this way. Your steady friend, Mr. O'Nick, who has collected some excellent manuscripts from the storehouse of the immortal Swift, in the Deanery of St. Patrick, has proved already, in his verses to Petita, and other light or epigrammatic pieces, that he could give us some devilish good things in a martial strain; and as for the capacity of Horace I need add no more concerning him, except it be, that he must be up to every thing, for his old prototype says:

Descriptas servare vices, operumque colores,
Cur ego, si nequeo ignoroque, poëta salutor?

DIMOND and SKEFFY Sometimes wield the pen,
Yet chief with women would be charming men :
Ye witling authors, tell me what's his aim,
Who as a charming fellow seeks for fame?
Each well plac'd lock the charming fellow curls,
This way and that the gentle ringlet twirls,

Now strokes his cockscomb, now each temple trims *,
To forms that change with varying fashion's whims.
With huile-antique, esprit de rose besprent,

Or last new-fangled, newly nick-nam'd, scent,
The charming fellow from afar you tell,

As hounds hunt foxes by a filthier smell.

It is impossible to see a certain smart, harmless, young gentleman, in the stage ox at a new play, patting his hair down on each temple, without calling to mind this passage in the original:

Bellus homo est, flexos qui digerit ordine crines

None of your portraits in the Mirror, and you have some very exact resemblances; no reflection in a glass can be more faithful, than this portrait of the immortal author of an immortal dedication to the Duchess of York.