THE MONTHLY ANTHOLOGY.

ΙΟΙ

The

It is the mind, which conftitutes the dignity of man. powers of the mind are vaft and enlarging. It is capable of clear conceptions and elevated fentiments. It can propose high ends and comprehend mighty schemes. To fee this lofty mind dwindling to the dimenfions of a wardrobe, deliberating with anxious folemnity on the colour of a waistcoat, the relations of a cape, or the fitness of a shoe; this is humbling indeed ;—I blush for the name of man.-The mind derives its complexion from the subjects of attention and meditation. The narrow fouls of coxcombs are therefore incapable of any thing excellent or glorious. To fhine with their butterfly robes in the eyes of the fair is all their ambition. To find admittance by tender affiduities to hearts as narrow as their own is all their care. Were they capable of thought I would advise them to think, that the richest robe cannot cover poverty of mind, nor fplendid apparel hide a groveling foul.

This paffion for drefs has been called a trifling weakness. What! Is it nothing to caft away reafon, to degrade the foul? Is it nothing to facrifice moral powers and feelings, to blaft the hope and promife of our nature? If man is endowed with mind and a capacity of perceiving excellence, then this love of drefs is worse than fuicide, and bears fad teftimony to the de bafement of his heart.

What improvement might we anticipate, if the time, which is now wafted in contriving and preparing articles of drefs, were applied to the cultivation of the heart and the understanding? Ye vain, would you indeed be adorned? Seek the ornaments of truth, of purity, of benevolence. Thefe will clothe you in unfading glory. These will be in fashion through eternity. Do you defire to acquire and feel importance, when you mingle with the world? Believe me, there is a consciousness of honeft undefigning goodness, that infpires a confidence, and an ease, which the gaudiness of foppery can never attain.

ance.

I do not wish to exclude all ornament from drefs. It is a du. ty we owe fociety, to prefent a decent and agreeable appearEvery power of pleasing is a talent, which increases our influence, and the good will improve with care this mean of ufefulness. But ornament fhould be fparingly used. Where there is beauty, we more frequently conceal, than heighten it

by the decorations of art. Where there is deformity, we only make it more difgufting by attempting to convert it into beauA Corinthian pillar rearty. Utility is the basis of ornament. ed to fupport a fhed would excite difguft. Nothing should be introduced into drefs for the mere fake of ornament. the taste of favages.

This is

The ends of dress are comfort and decency. When these are facrificed to ornament, we prove the corruption of our taste. Drefs, like the countenance, is an expreffion of the foul. Simplicity of drefs befpeaks fimplicity of character. Chafte ornament marks the delicacy and purity of the mind.

The prefent age has improved in many refpects on the cuf toms of our fathers. We have shaken off many of the fhackles of fashion. But while we affert the liberty of drefs, let us beware, left we become advocates of licentioufnefs. Have we not reafon to lament, that while we have dropped the stiffness and precision of our ancestors, we have thrown off much of their decency? It is time to mourn, when men are called to blush for women, who forget to blufh for themselves. We pretend that we have escaped the infection of French principles; but we are deceived. We have imported the worst of French corruptions, the want of female delicacy. The fair and the innocent have borrowed from the lewd the arts of feduction. They have expofed the chafte bofom to the gaze of wantonnefs, and have spread fnares in the steps of unwary youth.

We naturally look to the female fex as the guardians of purity. We look to women, to chaften our minds, to polish our roughnefs, to mould us into delicacy. They have an interest in supporting the awful majesty of virtue, in repreffing the licentioufnefs of thought, as well as of action. They are by nature weak and defenceless. They are ftrong only in their modest charms and chalte deportment. They have a common caufe to maintain; and on purity of manners all their influence is founded. I repeat it, women have no fhield but unfullied purity. If they wish to maintain their ground, they must take the whole armour of spotlefs innocence and undefigning modesty.

A woman, who seeks to influence the paffions, is loft to the delicacy of her nature. She has ftripped herself of the rights and glory of her fex. What then mult we fay of fome, whom

L

we daily obferve, whofe dress is ftudiously defigned to display the female form? Why do they tear off the veil of virgin modefty? Why folicit our gaze? I will not charge them with the bare defign of kindling a lawless flame. They will fhudder at the fuggeftion. But I warn them of the neceffary confequence of the prevailing modes of drefs. I folemnly call upon them, not to render focial intercourse contaminating. I admonish them not to truft to the purity of men. I affure them, that on the female fex the hopes of the virtuous, and the beauty and dignity of fociety depend.

It has been afferted by fome philofophers, that the fentiments of delicacy are factitious, that nature needs no difguife, that we have only to bring up our children without raiment, and they will never blush at nakedness. All this may be true; but to us, who have affociated purity of character with the decencies of drefs, fuch reafoning is unavailing. It would be dangerous for, women to make the experiment. There is a charm thrown round a modeft female. Let her not diffolve it. There is a fentiment of tender respect, with which we view her. It is a fentiment too refined and delicate for the analyzing power of philofophy. But on this fubtle fentiment the happiness of the sex is fufpended.

CATO.

For the MONTHLY ANTHOLOGY.

On the Abfurdity of fome Popular Opinions in Harvard College.

MR. PER-SE,

THE fentiments of your late correfpondent over the fig

nature of Philo-mathefis, appeared to me both applicable and juft. Many judicious friends of our Univerfity have long lamented, that there should be popular among the students opinions on genius so contracted, and so opposed to the true fpirit of philofophy.

I well recollect, that the fame abfurd notions prevailed, when I was a member of that refpectable feminary. If a perfon could scribble his exercises with great rapidity, though with evi

er fo little reflection; if he could divide an idea into a Johnfonian couplet or triplet, especially if he could jingle in rhyme, though with equal difregard to found and to fenfe, he was generally and loudly extolled as an eminent genius. But the palm was the most readily affigned to him, who could best acquit himself before his inftructors with the leaft apparent study. Hence arofe various competitions to gain by popular arts the reputation of a genius.

Some would endeavour to convince their fellow-ftudents, that thofe exercifes, which obtained distinguished applaufe, were written under peculiar disadvantages; that they were interrupted by avocations, or compofed in fickness, or delayed to a period, which did not allow fufficient time for mature reflection.

With the fame end in view, it was ufual for others to aspire after an elegant ftyle. This was in their eftimation totally incompatible with fimplicity; nor did they commonly stop short of "profe run mad."

Others, to place their genius beyond dispute, would inceffantly court the muses. They would take particular pains for fecuring the double mark of the English Profeffor to their poetical compofitions. They would spout poetry in clubs. With borrowed fignatures they would fill the poet's corner in newspapers, and, at the fame time, use every poffible precaution not to remain unknown.

But the most ridiculous method to gain the applause of genius was to spend the day in diffipation, and a greater part of the night in hard ftudy. Several might be named, who cherifhed this truly contemptible affectation. To their fellow-ftudents they would wish to appear indolent; while with closed window-fhutters they trimmed the midnight lamp over their claffical authors. To affift the delufion, they would pretend the next morning to know nothing of their leffons; and thus aftonish the class by their facility in reciting what cost them no application.

It was also a common practice at the University, not many years fince, to neglect several important studies, left they should prove detrimental to politer acquifitions; or, in the language of Pope, left they should "petrify a genius to a dunce." Hence to be fond of the Hebrew language rendered one's genius

fufpected; to be pleased with metaphyfics was supposed incompatible with true taste; but to relish mathematics was a certain indication of a barren genius.

Against the strong current of opinion few had the fortitude to ftruggle. The abftrufe fciences were too generally neglected, and the lighter Atudies purfued. Every one's talents were depreciated, who excelled only in the former; while those, who made the greatest proficiency in the latter, obtained the highest praife. So fafhionable were fuch fentiments, that a poet was once loudly applauded for expofing to public contempt those,

"Who read a Milton as they read a Pike."

To a liberal mind what can be more disgusting than such mifapplied fatire? Admit that a perfon takes greater delight in mathematical studies, than in any productions of fancy; will it follow that he poffeffes inferior talents? Muft he for this reafon be contented to bear the imputation of dulnefs? May he not, on the other hand, poffefs uncommon penetration? May he not be calculated to excel in feveral important branches of science, though he perufe poetry rather for the good fenfe it contains, than for the brilliancy of its figures, or the harmony of its numbers? Suppofe that his imagination is not exuberant, nor his invention ready; if his genius do not, like the poplar, speedily grow to maturity, it may, like the majestic oak, flowly attain greater ftrength, durability, and usefulness.

The writer aforementioned reprefents the fentiments here oppofed as merely erroneous. He might as well have shown. them to be highly injurious in their confequences. For they naturally tend not only to discountenance fome of the most useful studies, but also to confer exalted merit on those, who least deferve it.

They discountenance fome of the most useful ftudies. All, especially youthful minds, are liable to be strongly influenced by public opinion. Ambitious to excel, and "tremblingly alive" to reproach, with what difficulty will they be induced to pursue thofe branches of science, which have from any cause become unpopular? It must require a degree of independence, unusual in the young, to profecute inquiries, which are esteemed by their affociates, as fit occupation only for the dull.

Vol. I. No. 3.