Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

‣ us as the most excellent, are his comparison between the sciences and the fine arts, p. 86-his parallel between Chaucer, Spenser, Shakspeare, and Milton-and his characters of Butler, Thompson, and Crabbe. We shall extract what he says of the latter:

Crabbe is, if not the most natural, the most literal of our descriptive poets. He exhibits the smallest circumstances of the smallest things. He gives the very costume of meanness; the non-essentials of every trifling incident. He is his own landscape painter and engraver too. His pastoral scenes seem pricked on paper in little dotted lines. He describes the interior of a cottage like a person sent there to distrain for rent. He has an eye to the number of arms in an old worm-eaten chair, and takes care to inform himself and the reader whether a joint-stool stands upon three legs or upon four. If a settle by the fireside stands awry, it gives him as much disturbance as a tottering world; and he records the rent in a ragged counterpane as an event in history. He is equally curious in his back-grounds and in his figures. You know the christian and surnames of every one of his heroes,-the dates of their achievements, whether on a Sunday or a Monday, their places of birth and burial, the colour of their clothes, and of their hair, and whether they squinted or not. He takes an inventory of the human heart exactly in the same manner as of the furniture of a sick room: his sentiments have very much the air of fixtures; he gives you the petrifaction of a sigh, and carves a tear, to the life, in stone. Almost al his characters are tired of their lives, and you heartily wish them dead. They remind one of anatomical preservations; or may be said to bear the same relation to actual life that a stuffed cat in a glass-case does to the real one purring on the hearth: the skin is the same, but the life and the sense of heat is gone. Crabbe's poetry is like a museum, or curiosity-shop: every thing has the same posthumous appearance, the same inanimateness and identity of character.'

We should not think it necessary to remark the hostility of these writers to Dr. Johnson, if the uniformity with which his name is persecuted, did not form a characteristic of the School. We are not so imprudent as to undertake a defence of this great critic; but it may be worth while to show, how little these writers are entitled to abuse him. Mr. Hazlitt knew, that Johnson bestowed considerable labour upon composition, and that, while he admired the beauties of Shakspeare, he was not so much dazzled as to be incapable of perceiving his faults. These two characteristics were sufficient to provoke Mr. Hazlitt's reprobation; and he has bestowed it, on every convenient occasion, with a disregard of modesty, which is only equalled by his ignorance of the truth. Thus he says, that Dr. Johnson admitted Milton among the poets 'with a reluctant and churlish welcome.' Now, in the first place, it is well known, that Johnson had nothing to do with the selection of the authors, contained in the edition, for which he wrote his Lives; and, in the next place, he concludes the biography of Milton with the noble remark, that Paradise Lost is not the greatest of heroic poems, only because it is not the first.' Again, speaking of Johnson and Pope's preference of rhyme, our author tells us, they would have converted Milton's vaulting Pegasus

VOL. XII.

[ocr errors]

28

into a rocking-horse.' Can Mr. Hazlitt be ignorant, that Johnson wrote a treatise upon the harmony of Milton's versification; and that he says, in his Life, I cannot prevail on myself to wish Milton had been a rhymer?' In another place, we are told, that Dr. Johnson never got at a conclusion by a short cut;' when our readers all know, that if there be any one quality peculiar to his writings, it is the brevity and dogmatism of his logic. Dr. Johnson had observed, by way of giving distinguished praise to Shakspeare, that, while, in other writers, a character is commonly an individual, in Shakspeare, it is always a species.' This is, in fact, the secret of Shakspeare's celebrity. All mankind can sympathise with his characters; for they are such as all mankind have witnessed in real life. Ben Jonson is little read; and the reason is, that his characters are exact copies of certain eccentric individuals, which may have existed once, but will never exist again. They create no sympathy in the reader. Yet, with these obvious considerations before him, Mr. Hazlitt strenuously contends, that Shakspeare's characters, instead of representing a species, are each a solitary individual. Dr. Johnson says, that according to the strict meaning of the term, Shakspeare knew nothing of what is called the catastrophe of a play. Mr. Hazlitt denies the assertion; and, after mentioning four or five, out of all his works, in which the denouement is crowded with important events,' he thinks it has been sufficiently disproved. Now, it was the very objection of Dr. Johnson, that instead of being confined to one great event, simplex et unum, the catastrophes of Shakspeare were distracted and confused with many different events.

was

He supposes, that Dr. Johnson had no admiration of Shakspeare; or, rather, he undertakes to prove, from what he is pleased to make the constitution of his mind, that he was not at all fitted to realize the finer beauties of the tragic bard. We are told, that he without any particular fineness of organic sensibility;' and that he would be for setting up a foreign jurisdiction over poetry, and making criticism a kind of Procrustes' bed of genius, where he might cut down imagination to matter of fact, regulate the passions according to reason, and translate the whole into logical diagrams and rhetorical declamation.' Mr. Hazlitt had probably heard of geometrical diagrams and logical syllogisms; but, as diagram and syllogism have some distant resemblance of sound, he has mistaken the former for the latter, and presented us with a curiosity in science-a logical diagram! He calls the doctora lazy learned man, who liked to think and talk, better than to read or write:' but, as it is our author's vocation to contradict himself, he says, in the next sentence, that his long compound Latin phrases required less thought, and took up more room than others.'

Mr. Hazlitt is much attached to his geometrical logic. He (Shakspeare) would know this (that the love of power is natural to man) as well or better than if it had been demonstrated to him by a logical diagram, merely from seeing children paddle in the dirt, or kill flies for sport.' Char. p. 54. The phrase paddle in the dirt

is merely introduced for the sake of its vulgarity; for how we show a love of power by paddling in the dirt, it would be difficult to imagine.

If the tenor of our remarks should lead the reader to think, that we look upon Mr. Hazlitt as a contemptible author, we would beg leave, before we conclude, to correct such an opinion. As the repre sentative of a sect, whose tenets are well calculated to make proselytes, and whose members are daily increasing, he is a character that must excite considerable solicitude among the lovers of good composition. His coadjutors are not despicable, because they are few. Zeal, cooperation, and industry, are always an overmatch for numbers; and, though this is a lesson, which the world has been slow to learn, we think the events of our own time have rendered it sufficiently notorious. Mr. Hazlitt belongs to a set of writers, who think, that learning may be acquired without study; and that books may be written without preparation or care.* They have observed, that the compositions, which we most admire, have no appearance of labour; and, supposing that, what seems to be easy, must have been produced without effort, they would teach mankind both by precept and example, that we are born good writers and good reasoners. What can appear more careless than the sentences of Addison? Surely, say these apostles of indolence, there can be no difficulty in doing what seems so devoid of labour, when done; and if men of letters would only be persuaded to write the first thing, which enters their head, in the first words and phrases, which present themselves, we should hear no more about stiff composition and elaborate styles. This is a doctrine, which will find ready listeners in this country; and, if we cannot expect, that our distant efforts will check its progress in England, we may hope that they will help to prevent its diffusion among our own countrymen. It is in vain to tell us, that excellence is not the result of labour; and we will not condescend to reason against an opinion, which all his tory refutes. We only warn our youth to beware of such guides. They are already so well known among us as to have received a distinctive appellation; and, though Mr. Hazlitt's countrymen have denied us the right of coining words to suit our necessities, he may depend on being called a slang whanger, on this side of the Atlantic.

* It is among the absurdities of their creed, that, while they would be thought to know all the sciences, they cannot bear to pay attention to any. In this play (the Taming of the Shrew) there is, says Mr. Hazlitt, a little too much about music-masters and philosophy. They were things of greater rarity in those days than they are now. Nothing, however, can be better than the advice which Tranio gives his master for the prosecution of his studies:'-and nothing, let us add, could be better calculated to make him pursue no study at all:

Tran. The mathematics and the metaphysics,

Fall to them as you find your stomach serves you:
No profit grows, where is no pleasure ta'en:

In brief, sir, study what you most affect.

When did a man's stomach ever serve him to study mathematics? And what, ind ed, would become of all learning, if the pursuits of scholars were regulated by their pleasure?

ART. III.-A Treatise on the Law of Principal and Agent, and of Sales by Auction. By Samuel Livermore, Counsellor at Law. 2 vols. 8vo. Baltimore. 1818.

AN elementary treatise, on a very important branch of the legal

science, claims our most favourable consideration. To such digests we are obliged to have recourse, in the pursuit of that simplified and condensed knowledge of the principles of our municipal law, as they are altered or ascertained by recent adjudications, which it would be a task of almost infinite difficulty to seek through the mighty maze' of published and manuscript reports, so rapidly multiplied by the labours of our various courts of justice. The particular subject which Mr. Livermore has selected for elucidation, is manifestly of the first importance to the commercial part of the community; and yet it is one which the elementary writers of Great Britain have remarkably neglected; it gives us great pleasure, therefore, to bear our testimony to the ability with which he has supplied the deficiency.

A familiar acquaintance with the relative duties, rights, and remedies, recognized by the laws, and existing between an agent and his principal, among a busy and enterprising people, such as ours, where every merchant is daily acting towards some one or other of his correspondents in one or both of these characters, assuming responsibility as an agent, or as a principal devolving it upon another, is evidently a most desirable object of attainment. To every man engaged in commerce, and disposed to know his rights, and how to secure them-to be aware of his duties, and how he may legally discharge himself of them, we do not hesitate to recommend a perusal and a purchase of the work of Mr. Livermore.

In the words of the author, merchants, more than any other class of men, are interested in works of this nature; and, perhaps, the questions considered in this treatise are of more frequent occurrence in the course of their business than any others in the law. Scarcely a day passes that a merchant does not contract the obligations of a principal, or of an agent: that he does not acquire a lien upon property, or a right to stop goods in transitu. With but little labour he may gain a competent knowledge to enable him to act with prudence and circumspection in these transactions. By these means he may avoid litigation and expense; he may know what are his rights, that he may insist upon them before it is too late; and he may learn how to save himself from unnecessary difficulties, disputes, and losses.' Preface, p. 5.

To professional men also this book will be a valuable acquisition: it is well-timed, because Mr. Powell's Treatise on Powers being mostly confined to the rules that govern the transfer of real property, under letters of attorney, is of very circumscribed utility; and Mr. Selwyn's short chapter on Factors, is extremely meagre and unsatisfactory. And it has all the merit in its execution which can well be attributed to an abridged compilation; the style is pure, plain, and perspicuous, and the arrangement lucid and judicious. In recommending it, however, to the gentlemen of the

bar, particularly to the younger members of that profession, we are restrained by the fear of saying aught that may seem to encourage the too prevalent substitution of treatise and index reading for the old fashioned study of statutes and reports, which we never omit an opportunity to declare, is the best and only course to be pursued by a student who aims at any thing more than superficial knowledge and ephemeral reputation.

But again, we will use the candid language of the author himself. Works of this nature, in which the scattered principles of the law relative to the rights and duties of men in particular situations, are collected and arranged, are more peculiarly adapted for general use than for the use of the profession. No man was ever made a lawyer by the study of treatises. They are useful to professional men only as books of reference, to which they may have recourse in the hurry of a trial, or which may serve as a guide to direct them in their researches. But to those persons who are not professional men, but who consider some knowledge of their rights and duties, as regulated by law, in the various situations in which they may stand, to be an essential part of the liberal education of a gentleman, these works are more peculiarly appropriate.' Preface, p. 4.

Mr. Livermore has collected into a small space a vast deal of useful learning; has arranged it so clearly, that no reader can have any difficulty in finding the particular subject of his inquiry; and has abridged it as much as would be consistent with perspicuity. At the same time, while we accord him these praises, as justly due to his exertions, we cannot but acknowledge, that, as Pennsylvanians, we look upon his book with the less complacency, when we observe how much the decisions of our courts are overlooked or disregarded. Not that a single position taken by Mr. L. is in opposition to the principles established by our tribunals, but to many of them we should be disposed to give still more unqualified credit and confidence, if even a marginal note condescended to inform us that the highest judicial authority in our state had sanctioned the rule, and placed it above all chance of doubt or change in Pennsylvania.

Thus the important cases of Summeril vs. Elder, Passmore vs. Mott, Morgan vs. Stell, Meyer vs. Barker, French vs. Read, and Schwartz vs. the Insurance Company of North America, all decided in our supreme court, and reported in the different volumes of Mr. Binney's Reports, are no where cited, nor noticed; although they settled for us, a variety of important questions, in the doctrines applicable to the relation of principal and agent.

In the second edition, whenever that shall be printed, and we hope there may be found encouragement for it, this fault may easily be corrected, by additional references to all American cases.

« ÎnapoiContinuă »