philosophy (with which our author seems here to have puzzled himself), to speak of any sense "giv❝ing us a notion of ideas;" our senses give us the ideas themselves. The meaning would have been much more clear, if the author had expressed himself thus: "The sense of feeling can, indeed, give "us the idea of extension, figure, and all the other "properties of matter which are perceived by the દ eye, except colours."

THE latter part of the sentence is still more embarrassed. For what meaning can we make of the sense of feeling being "confined in its operations, to "the number, bulk, and distance of its particular

66

objects?" Surely, every sense is confined, as much as the sense of feeling, to the number, bulk, and distance of its own objects. Sight and feeling are, in this respect, perfectly on a level; neither of them can extend beyond its own objects. The turn of expression is so inaccurate here, that one would be apt to suspect two words to have been omitted in the printing, which were originally in Mr. Addison's manuscript; because the insertion of them would render the sense much more intelligible and clear. These two words are, with regard. "It is very much straitened, and confined, in its

66

operations, with regard to the number, bulk, and "distance of its particular objects." The meaning then would be, that feeling is more limited than sight in this respects that it is confined to a nar rower circle, to a smaller number of objects.

THE epithet particular, applied to objects, in the conclusion of the sentence, is redundant, and conveys no meaning whatever. Mr. Addison seems to have used it in place of peculiar, as indeed he does often in other passages of his writings. But particular and peculiar, though they are too often confounded, are words of different import from each other. Particular stands opposed to general; peculiar stands opposed to what is possessed in common with others. Particular expresses what, in the logical style, is called species; peculiar what is called differentia. "Its peculiar objects" would have signified in this place, the objects of the sense of feeling, as distinguished from the objects of any other sense; and would have had more meaning than "its particular objects." Though, in truth, neither the one nor the other epithet was requisite. It was sufficient to have said simply, "its objects."

86

"Our sight seems designed to supply all these defects, and may be considered as a more delicate "and diffusive kind of touch, that spreads itself over an infinite multitude of bodies, comprehends the largest figures, and brings into our reach some of the most remote parts of the universe."

66

66

HERE again the author's style returns upon us in all its beauty. This is a sentence distinct, graceful, well arranged, and highly musical. In the latter part of it, it is constructed with three members, which are formed much in the same manner

with those of the second sentence, on which I bestowed so much praise. The construction is so similar, that if it had followed immediately after it, we should have been sensible of a faulty monotony. But the interposition of another sentence between them prevents this effect.

66

"It is this sense which furnishes the imagina❝tion with its ideas; so that by the pleasures of "the imagination or fancy (which I shall use promiscuously), I here mean such as arise from vi"sible objects, either when we have them actually " in our view; or when we call up their ideas into our minds by painting, statues, descriptions, or any the like occasion."

46

In place of, "It is this sense which furnishes," the author might have said more shortly, "This "sense furnishes." But the mode of expression which he has used, is here more proper. This sort of full and ample assertion, “it is this which," is fit to be used when a proposition of importance is laid down, to which we seek to call the reader's attention. It is like pointing with the hand at the object of which we speak. The parenthesis in the middle of the sentence, "which I shall use promis

cuously," is not clear. He ought to have said, "terms which I shall use promiscuously;" as the verb use relates, not to the pleasures of the imagination, but to the terms of fancy and imagination, which he was to employ as synonymous.

"Any

"the like occasion ;" to call a painting or a statue "an occasion," is not a happy expression, nor is it very proper to speak of "calling up ideas by "occasions." The common phrase," any such means," would have been more natural.

66

"We cannot indeed have a single image in the fancy, that did not make its first entrance through the sight; but we have the power of retaining, altering, and compounding those images which "we have once received, into all the varieties of "picture and vision that are most agreeable to the imagination; for, by this faculty, a man in a dungeon is capable of entertaining himself with scenes and landscapes more beautiful than any that can "be found in the whole compass of nature."

86

66

It may be of use to remark, that in one member of this sentence there is an inaccuracy in syntax. It is very proper to say, "altering and compounding "those images which we have once received into all "the varieties of picture and vision." But we can with no propriety say, "retaining them into all the "varieties ;" and yet, according to the manner in which the words are ranged, this construction is unavoidable. For, retaining, altering, and compounding, are participles, each of which equally refers to, and governs the subsequent noun, those images; and that noun again is necessarily connected with the following preposition, into. This instance shews the importance of carefully attending

to the rules of grammar and syntax; when so pure a writer as Mr. Addison could, through inadvertence, be guilty of such an error. The construction might easily have been rectified, by disjoining the participle retaining from the other two participles, in this way: "We have the power of retaining those images which we have once received; and of altering and compounding them into all the vari"eties of picture and vision;" or better, perhaps, thus: "We have the power of retaining, altering, "and compounding those images which we have once received, and of forming them into all the varieties of picture and vision." The latter part of the sentence is clear and elegant.

66

"There are few words in the English lanC6 guage, which are employed in a more loose and " uncircumscribed sense than those of the fancy "and the imagination."

“THERE are few words, which are employed." It had been better, if our author here had said more simply, "Few words in the English language are

66

employed." Mr. Addison, whose style is of the free and full, rather than the nervous kind, deals, on all occasions, in this extended sort of phraseology. But it is proper only when some assertion of consequence is advanced, and which can bear an emphasis such as that in the first sentence of the former paragraph. On other occasions, these little words, it is, and there are, ought to be avoided as