CHAPTER XXXV.

The Liberal Literature of

England--Poetry--Southey--Coleridge--Wordsworth--Burns--Rogers--

Montgomery--Moore--Campbell--Herbert--Byron--Shelley--Keats--Hunt--

Pringle--Nicoll--Peter--Barton--Hood--Procter--Tennyson--Milnes--

Elliott--Horne--Mary Howitt--Eliza Cook--Mackay--Novels--Godwin--

Holcraft--The Drama--Bage--Scott--Miss Edgeworth--Mrs. Opie--Miss

Mitford--Mrs. Hall--Miss Martineau--Banim--Lever--Lover--Bulwer--

Dickens--Essays--Jeffrey--Smith--Brougham--Mackintosh--Macaulay--

Lamb--Hazlitt--Carlyle--Talfourd--Pamphlets--Holland House--French

Literature and Louis Philippe.

Further notice will now be taken of the liberal literature of England,

after the French revolution. We can enter only on the borders of this

large field. Since the modern "revival of letters," the _Poets_ of

England have furnished their quota of friends of Progress and Reform.

Among the strange theories concerning the regeneration of mankind, to

which the great French convulsion gave birth, was a day-dream of

Southey, Coleridge, and Lloyd, three young geniuses, then sojourning at

Bristol. Having vainly endeavored to make England a republic, by writing

a drama on the fall of Robespierre, delivering a course of lectures on

the French revolution, and publishing two or three seditious pamphlets,

they proposed to leave the kingdom in disgust, bury themselves in the

aboriginal forests on the banks of the Susquehanna, and there erect a

"Pantisocracy," in which property should be held in common, every man be

a legislator, and a model democracy be wrought out, that should

consummate the happiness of its founders, while its reflex influence

cured all the ills of European institutions. Unfortunately for the human

race, the three poets happened just then to fall in with and fall in

love with three tempting young Eves of Bristol, the Misses Fricker, one

an actress, one a mantua-maker, and one a school-teacher; and giving up

their scheme of regenerating the world, they wisely concluded, with

Benedick, that it was better to people it, and so all got married. Thus

ended _their_ "Much Ado about Nothing."

Lloyd sunk into obscurity, Southey atoned for his Susquehanna sins by

spending a long life in hostility to civil and religious freedom, and

Coleridge lived and died a moderate friend of liberty and reform.

Wordsworth early became acquainted with Coleridge and Southey,

participated in their French enthusiasm, and, like them, his first

poetic dreams were of freedom. In one of his earliest productions he

proposes to invoke the restorative aid of the Royal Humane Society in

behalf of crowned heads, as follows:

"Oh give, great God! to Freedom's waves to ride

Sublime o'er conquest, avarice, and pride;

And grant that every sceptered child of clay

Who cries, presumptuous, 'Here their tides shall stay,'

Swept in their anger from the affrighted shore,

With all his creatures sink to rise no more"

Through his long career, the productions of the greatest of the "Lake

Poets" have exerted a calm but steady influence in favor of humanity.

About this time Burns appeared, "whistling at his plouw," and teaching

the world that

"The rank is but the guinea's stamp,

The man's the gowd for a' that."

He, too, caught some of his inspiration from France. By force of his

genius, the Scotch yeoman opened his way to the highest rank of

cotemporary poets, carrying with him the sympathies of the class from

which he sprung. No writer is oftener quoted to round a period in a

Reform speech. I have seen a meeting of Scotch Chartists go wild with

enthusiasm under the inspiration of one of his songs. The same year that

Burns became an author, Rogers sent his first volume of poems to press,

of whom Lord Brougham, in his Sketch of Grattan, says: "He is one of the

greatest poets whom this country has produced, as well as one of its

finest prose-writers; who to this unstable fame adds the more

imperishable renown of being also one of the most uncompromising friends

of civil and religious liberty who have appeared in any age."

In 1794, James Montgomery, a name honorably associated with the cause of

humanity, published in the _Sheffield Iris_, a newspaper edited by him,

a ballad on the overthrow of the Bastile, which the Pitt Government saw

fit to regard as a seditious libel. He was prosecuted, convicted,

amerced in a fine, and imprisoned three months in York Castle. The next

year the Government again prosecuted the amiable poet for an analogous

offense, upon which he was again fined and shut up six months at York.

These persecutions did not quench his zeal for human freedom; and

despite a most offensive critique in the Edinburgh Review of his first

volume of poems, he published another in 1807, celebrating the abolition

of the slave trade, which was distinguished for vigor of expression and

richness of coloring. These, and subsequent publications of kindred

character, have given Montgomery an enduring place in the affections of

Christian philanthropists.

At a later period, two poets appeared, who have exerted a wide sway over

the mind, not of Britain only, but of every land where the English

language is spoken--Moore and Campbell. The political tendency of their

writings (and it has been considerable) is on the side of freedom.

Moore's father was of the proscribed sect of Irish Catholics, who, in

the language of the son, "hailed the first dazzling outbreak of the

French revolution as a signal to the slave, wherever suffering, that

the day of his deliverance was near at hand." When Moore was a boy of

twelve, he sat on the chairman's knee at a celebration in honor of the

revolution, when this toast was drank, with three times three: "May the

breezes of France fan our Irish oak into verdure!" The poet has lived to

see the foliage of the oak grow more sere and yellow, though another

breeze from France has swept its branches. But, in all seasons, and when

mixing in the brilliant revelries of London society, the idol of a

devoted band of worshipers, he never ceased to love his native island.

His "Irish Melodies" have inspired a strange sympathy in many climes for

his blighted country, while they have taught Irishmen, in whatever

corner of the earth they wander, to say--

"Wert thou all that I wish thee--great, glorious, and free--

First flower of the earth and first gem of the sea

I might hail thee with prouder, with happier brow,

But, oh! could I love thee more deeply than now?"

Campbell's poetic offerings to the cause of Polish liberty are in the

school-books of two continents, and have fired the indignation of two

generations of youthful orators at that great European felony, the

partition of Poland, when

"Sarmatia fell, unwept, without a crime."

The heroic struggle for Grecian independence animated the classic soul

of Campbell, and he took an active part in rousing European sentiment in

her behalf. And down to the last moment of his life he was proud to give

his cordial support to the cause of liberty and humanity in every part

of the world.

William Herbert, a scion of the ancient houses of Pembroke and Percy, is

still more illustrious as a scholar of rare attainments, and as the

author of "Attila," which the Edinburgh Review has declared the most

Miltonic poem since Paradise Lost. Some of his poetic effusions were

offered at the shrine of freedom; and while a member of Parliament, he

cooperated with Wilberforce in the abolition of the slave trade; and

after withdrawing from politics, and taking holy orders, and reaching

stations of dignity in the Established Church, he gave his influence to

liberal measures, advocating Catholic emancipation and the Reform bill.

The wayward genius of Byron, though it uttered much that good morals

condemn, recorded nothing hostile to political liberty, but, on the

contrary, something in its favor. On the few occasions that he addressed

the House of Lords, he advocated the liberal cause, once vindicating in

manly tones the character and life of Major Cartwright, the father of

Parliamentary Reform. The conflict for Grecian independence, in which

Byron's last days were spent, throws a broad ray of sunshine across the

dark horizon of his career.

But we must dismiss a galaxy of bright names more summarily--some

without mentioning them, others by the briefest allusions. Shelley, the

unfortunate, calumniated, generous, and supereminent son of

genius--Keats, an evanescent being, whose transparent soul was clad too

thin for this prosaic world--Leigh Hunt, the founder of the London

"Examiner," which ought to live forever, and the Italian "Liberal,"

which ought never to have lived at all, a true son of the Nine, whom

Gifford could not kill, though Blackwood Wilson helped him try--Pringle,

who died at the desk of the Anti-Slavery Society, and whose "Afar in the

Desert" Coleridge ranked among the two or three most perfect lyrics in

the language--Robert Nicoll, a Scotch plowman, an ardent and sincere

radical, who, dying at twenty-three, lived long enough to write "The Ha'

Bible," "We are brethren a'," and other poems, not unworthy of that

other Scotch Robert who has canonized plowmen-bards--William Peter, now

British consul for Pennsylvania, a graceful poet, but better known as a

political pupil of the Fox school, a commoner advocating liberal

measures, and the biographer of Romilly--Bernard Barton, the friend and

correspondent of Lamb, a "Quaker poet," whose effusions show calm

reflection and refined feeling, but have none of the strangely pleasing

blending of the war song of the knight templar with the pastoral ballad

of the mountain shepherd, of Peter the Hermit's crusade-preaching with

Virgil the heathen's classic singing, which give life and beauty to the

lays of _our_ Quaker poet--Hood, the prince of punsters, whose "Song of

the Shirt," sung in all climes, and imitated on all themes, dignified

sympathy with seamstresses, who toil twenty-four hours for twelve

pence--Procter, the Harrow chum of Byron, whose "Rising of the North,"

"The Open Sea," and "Touch us Gently, Time," show that Barry Cornwall's

harp can sound at will the highest and deepest, the wildest and the

tenderest notes, and while giving volumes of "morocco and gilt" to the

nobility and gentry, sends "poetry for the people" through Howitt's

Journal--Tennyson, an inspired singer, whose "Princess" is a

reformer--Milnes, who, though a Tory in the House of Commons, always

appeared as a liberal when he entered the Temple of the Muses--Elliott,

whose Corn-Law Rhymes roused a nation to arms against landlord monopoly,

by kindling sympathy with the poor man's lot, and firing indignation

against taxes on his bread--R. H. Horne, a true poet and sterling

reformer, the author of "Orion," the editor of the "New Spirit of the

Age," and a contributor to the People's and Howitt's Journals--Mary

Howitt, whose sex never was permitted to prevent her doing valiant

service for the right in the battles of freedom with tyranny--Eliza

Cook, not unworthy, as a poetess and a reformer, to be associated with

Mary Howitt--Mackay, whose prophecy of the "good time coming" has been

applauded to the echo by voices that would have smothered in hisses the

same sentiments if uttered in prose:--these, and a glorious company

besides, have laid some of the richest gifts, where all genuine poetry

is welcomed, on Freedom's altar.

In this summary, only here and there a star has been pointed out in the

brilliant constellation which has shone in the firmament of freedom,

during the period we are now glancing over. The catalogue of slavery's

poets is not yet published. It must be rather meager. If the poetry of

liberty is inspired by airs from heaven, the poetry of despotism must

rage in blasts from hell. Dante and Milton have given glowing

descriptions of Pandemonium, and put splendid diction into the mouths of

devils; but neither the descriptions nor the diction have won admirers

for the domicil or its denizens, among the inhabitants of high

latitudes.

Some of the _Novelists_ of this period have contributed not a little to

the cause of political reform.

William Godwin, one of the remarkable men of the times, is known not

only as the writer of that extraordinary tale, "Caleb Williams," but of

the "Inquiry concerning Political Justice," a production whose style is

as vigorous as its doctrines are radical, displaying rare originality

and boldness of conception, and breathing the loftiest aspirations for

the well-being of man. "Caleb Williams," which appeared soon after the

"Inquiry," was intended to give wider currency to the author's views of

social and political reform, by clothing them in the attractive colors

of romance. Had Godwin been an ambitious politician, he might have

placed himself at the head of a school of reformers. He chose to be a

philosophical recluse; and in the storm of the French revolution, he

sent out from his retreat breathing thoughts and burning words, that

gave increased life and vigor to the heaving mass of mind around him.

The friend and counselor of Tooke and Holcroft, he was obnoxious to the

Government, but his retired habits saved him from the prosecutions that

periled the lives of his more active associates. His numerous writings,

like those of Jeremy Bentham, whom he in some respects strongly

resembled, while in others no two men could be more dissimilar, have

left abiding impressions on many of the noblest minds of England.

Holcroft imbibed liberal principles during the time of the French

convulsions. He was the writer of several successful plays, among which

was the highly popular "Road to Ruin." He published various novels,

which, on account of their political sentiments, attracted much notice.

As mere romances they belong not to the first rank, the plots and

characters being mere frame-work to hold aristocratic doctrines up to

ridicule, and democratic principles to admiration. The dialogue is often

lively and piquant, and many of the portraits are skillfully drawn. And

in this connection, it may be said that the dramatists of this period

poured some of their rills of philosophy, wit and satire into the

popular channels. Even Rolla's fustian address to the Peruvians, which

sounds like Sheridan's speeches against Napoleon, always stimulated the

galleries to a higher pitch of hatred to tyranny. Colman's comedies made

upstart noblemen and pedantic doctors of laws shade their faces, while

the pit shook its sides with laughter. William Tell launched his arrow

not in vain at Gesler, for George IV came near being shot in the royal

box on an occasion when it was played; and Talfourd and Bulwer, in Ion

and the Lady of Lyons, having disguised democracy in classic robes,

introduced it to the admiration and applause of the dress circle. To

return to novelists. Coeval with Holcroft, Robert Bage, a Tamworth

Quaker, not having the fear of George Fox nor the Attorney General

before his eyes, published some good political novels. He, like the

dramatist, had caught some of the fire of liberty at the general

conflagration of the old order of things in Europe, and he bore his

"testimony" against the bigotry of Guelph and the arrogance of Pitt, in

the form of romances, which, though they fell below Holcroft's, received

the imprimatur of Walter Scott, when he included them in his "Novelist's

Library."

The works of the Godwin, Holcroft and Bage school not only introduced a

new era in novel writing, by making fiction the medium of communicating

radical opinions, but they aided in evaporating the rose-water style of

romance, which had so diluted the public taste that "novel" and

"insipidity" had come to be synonymous terms. By and by, the public

appetite was prepared for a more racy and invigorating regimen. Then

appeared the gorgeous but manly and natural historical novels of Scott,

too prone to flatter "blood," wealth, and noble lineage, but wearing an

air of the most genial _bonhommie_, and looking with a brotherly eye

upon humanity in its humblest forms. About the time that Scott was

beginning his Waverley, came the piquant and beautiful stories of Miss

Edgeworth and Mrs. Opie, to be followed by those of Miss Mitford and

Mrs. Hall, who, whether painting life and manners in the cottages of the

lowly or the drawing-rooms of the great, place virtue and philanthropy

in the foreground of the picture. At a later period, the philosophic and

benevolent Miss Martineau, despite the maledictions of the London

Quarterly, admirably succeeded in the till then doubtful experiment of

conveying the principles of politico-economical science to the masses

through the medium of tales and sketches. The English Miss Sedgwick

deserves the thanks of humanity for putting Benthamism into clean purple

and fine linen. Ireland has been prolific in delineators of her

suffering and crimes, jocularities and bulls, both in poetry and prose.

Banim, the author of the _O'Hara Tales_, and other stories, is the

greatest of his class. He paints the times of Ninety-Eight in colors so

vivid that the tragedy leaps living from the canvas. In the

_Nonconformist_ he depicts the evils and cruelties of the Catholic penal

code in figures so graphic and truthful that the veriest bigot can

hardly restrain his indignation at the Protestant oppressors. Lever

places in a strong light the blarney and blunders of the Irish, and his

stories generally begin in farce and end in caricature. Lover puts you

at once into good humor; and, whether you read him, or hear him tell his

stories or sing his songs, he makes you love the genuine Irish

character, and you alternately cry and laugh at its miseries and

drolleries to the end of the volume or ballad. Bulwer's world-read

novels, attractive to the scholastic mind by their acute analysis of

character, and to the poetic temperament by their deep coloring,

though, like Byron's poems, they enunciate a good deal of doubtful

ethics, drawing no very broad line between the morals of plowmen and

highwaymen, yet their political tendencies are decidedly towards

liberalism. But the writer of fiction who has done the most in our day

for his race, is Charles Dickens. He is not merely a novelist, but a

philanthropist, whose overflowing humanity surpasses even his abounding

humor. No right-hearted man ever rose from the perusal of Dickens

without feeling a deeper affection for human nature, a more cordial

contempt for cant and hypocrisy, and a holier hatred of cruelty and

meanness. His Nicholas Nickleby and Oliver Twist have done more to drown

in ridicule and smother in abhorrence the absurd private schools and the

diabolical parish work-houses of England, than the "works" of all the

didactic authors of the kingdom.

Another class of writers have, during the present century, secured a

firm footing within the pale of English literature--the _Essayists_.

Indeed, at one time, it looked as if the new comers would succeed in

excluding everybody from it but themselves. At the head of this class

stand the leading contributors of the Edinburgh Review, of whom Mr.

Whipple has aptly said, "they made reviewing more respectable than

authorship." Jeffrey, for twenty-six years its editor, shed over its

pages a strong, steady, and beautiful light, which tempered and

irradiated the whole. His papers are a rare compend of literary

criticism. Though sometimes more sophistical than philosophical, more

brilliant than profound, and betraying prejudices when he should

elucidate principles, he was, upon the whole, not unworthy to be called

"The Prince of Critics." For a quarter of a century his fiat was law in

far the larger portion of the republic of English letters. Since he left

the throne, many of his canons have been disputed, and some have been

totally annulled. His contributions to the Review, when published in a

separate form, appear more homogeneous, more like a "work," than those

of his brethren who have put theirs to press. Sydney Smith bore

undisputed sway in the realm of wit and sarcasm. Papists, prisoners,

poachers, paupers, school-boys, and chimney-sweepers, owe him a monument

each, for he was their very friend; and if the Pennsylvanians repudiate,

nonconformists might purchase a pension for his heirs with the lawn he

tore from the shoulders of "persecuting bishops." Brougham glared from

the pages of the Review a baleful meteor, striking terror into dunces in

Grub street and charlatans in Downing street, now scorching a poetaster

and then roasting a prime minister, nor quenching his fires till they

had penetrated and lit up the royal harem of Carlton House and Windsor

Castle. Mackintosh made the Edinburgh the medium for exhibiting to the

public eye some of those philosophical disquisitions, laden with the

lore of the school-men, and embellished with the graces of the poets,

which justified the assertion of Robert Hall, that if he had been less

indolent and discursive, he might have attained the first place amongst

modern metaphysicians. Macaulay has been one of the chief literary

attractions of the Review for the last eighteen years. His contributions

are no more _criticisms_ than are his descriptions of the state of

England in 1685, or his sketch of the death-bed of Charles II, in his

recent history. True, he places the title of a book at the head of a

page. But his papers have men for their subjects rather than books, are

essays rather than articles, panoramas of events instead of histories,

living portraits of individuals rather than biographies of the dead.

According to the old standards, they would have been more appropriate in

the history of England than in the Edinburgh Review. But the old

standards have decayed. They are read and imitated in two hemispheres.

The scholar admires their learning, the philosopher their penetration,

the rhetorician their art, the poet their imagery, the million their

politics.

And these five are the greatest of the "Edinburgh Reviewers." Freedom

in every part of the world owes them a heavy debt of gratitude.

Passing through a brilliant throng of essayists, each man of whom is

worthy of special note, and stopping barely long enough to say of Lamb

that he is one of the most quaint, humorous, witty, genial, and humane

writers in the language, and of Hazlitt, that he is a mine of diamonds,

all rich and disorderly, brilliant and cutting, but of the first water,

we approach with no little awe and diffidence the strange but not

stranger Thomas Carlyle, "a writer of books." He has done yoeman service

in the conflict with "shams," and has made the bankrupt institutions of

England echo their own hollowness, under the heavy blows of his German

truncheon. The obscurity of his style is often alleged against him. In

many passages, an interlined translation, or a glossary, would be

convenient. But, he is readily understood by those familiar with his

fanciful mode of backing up to a question, rather than going straight

forward to it. His defects seem to lie deeper than the obscurities of

his rhetoric. They pierce through words to things. A vein of profound

reflection pervades much of his writing. But no inconsiderable portion

of it is indebted to his style for its seeming profundity. Straighten

some of his crooked sentences, which, _prima facie_, seem to embrace in

their sinuosities some great idea too awful to be uttered in plain

Saxon, and thus, as it were, having thrown out the meaning, lo, the

matter turns out to be rather commonplace. This is not his worst fault;

for no author is bound to be always saying original or profound things,

and he may be excused sometimes for wrapping up a common idea in

superfine clothing. As a writer on social and political evils--his

chosen field--Carlyle whelms the reader deeper and deeper in the abyss

of wide-weltering wrong--_and there leaves him_. He points out no way of

escape; suggests no remedies. Read his "Chartism," his "Past and

Present," his article in a recent Spectator on "Ireland and Sir Robert

Peel"--and what then? He gives you clearly to understand that the

governmental machine is sadly out of gear--that Poor-Laws are a "sham,"

and Emigration a delusion--that the "_sans-potato_ Irish" are rotting

under bad rule--but what then? Why, so far as Mr. Carlyle tells you,

_Nothing!_ Rot to all eternity, for aught he proposes by way of remedy.

His writings abound in hearty expressions of dissatisfaction with

existing things; in vivid pictures of human suffering, more graphic than

limner ever drew, more startling than poet ever painted; but, trusting

to him, you look in vain for any relief, either for your own excited

feelings, or for the pitiable objects in whose behalf he has aroused

your sympathies. He leads you into a foul morass, tells you it is a

"sham," and as you sink out of sight, surrounded by a mass of smothering

humanity, he cries, "God help you," mounts some transcendental crotchet,

and soars into the clouds. It is suspected that Carlyle has a theoretic

remedy for bad government, but dislikes to disclose it. He has no faith

in Toryism, Whigism, Liberalism, or Radicalism. To him, they are "shams

all." If he belongs to any school, it would seem to be the absolute. He

don't believe in the divine right of kings, though he holds that some

men are born to command. Nor would he give the governed the right of

selecting their commander. He recognizes a sort of intellectual and

moral "might," the possession of which confers the "right" to govern.

The abstract theory may be good; the difficulty is in reducing it to the

concrete. Who is to decide as to the possession of the "might?"

Jefferson would refer the decision to the governed; Nichols would leave

it to the accidents of royal procreation; Carlyle says it belongs

to----who knows what he says? He is a great "Hero"-worshiper, and a good

many of his "Heroes" have been splendid tyrants. He despises imbecility,

but idolizes power. His rather obscure chapter in "Chartism" on "Rights

and Mights" can, with little effort, be turned into a special plea for

absolutism. His eulogistic essay, in the Foreign Quarterly, on Dr.

Francia, "the Perpetual Dictator of the Republic of Paraguay," seems to

disclose the kind of government and governor he glories in. Francia was

a man of intellect and decision, and he was a despot. He erected a

"workman's gallows," to terrify and hang laborers who failed to do their

work well--a "not unbeneficial institution," says Carlyle. A poor

shoemaker made some belts for the Dictator's grenadiers. He did not like

the sample shown to him, though the shoemaker "had done his best."

Francia ordered a rope about the neck of the trembling wretch, calling

him "a most impertinent scoundrel," (a "very favorite word of the

Dictator's," says Carlyle,) and had him marched back and forth under the

gallows, in the momentary expectation of being hung. He was at length

released, half dead with terror. Carlyle remarks upon this, in plain

English, (his admiration for the scene is too intense for a crooked

sentence,) that the shoemaker worked with such alacrity all night, that

his belts on the morrow were without a parallel in South America. The

whole story, drawn out through a page, shows that Francia was a brute;

as, indeed, does the whole article in the Quarterly. Carlyle gloats over

him with wild enthusiasm. But, it is often neither just nor generous to

measure others by our own standards. Every man has his _forte_, his

mission. Carlyle's may be to point out existing evils, while leaving it

to time and plain men to suggest remedies. His gigantic soul sits

enshrouded, to common eyes, in clouds. To his own, it may bask in

sunshine. Honest, humane, mystic, magnificent, the world cannot spare

the great mind of the age, whose calling seems to be to set smaller

minds in motion. Long live this "Writer of Books."

To relieve the picture, let us glance at the anti-counterpart of

Carlyle--Thomas Noon Talfourd. He is one of the brightest and purest

specimens of the _literati_ of England. A lawyer, a poet, a dramatist,

an orator, a statesman, an essayist, he has succeeded in each of these

varied departments. The instances are not unfrequent in which persons

have attained a high place both in politics and literature. Instances

of marked success both in law and literature are extremely rare. The

most striking English examples of the attainment of eminence by the same

individual in the profession of law and the cultivation of literature,

are Jeffrey, Brougham, and Talfourd. The latter has achieved this by the

versatility and elasticity of his genius, unaided by the accidents of

birth, family, or wealth. There is a magnetic philosophy, a classical

witchery, an intoxicating enthusiasm, about his literary productions,

that make him one of the most attractive and delightful of authors. As a

lawyer, he is at home in the grave and studied discussions at _banc_,

and in the showy and extemporaneous contests at _nisi prius_. His

defense of Moxon, the poet bookseller, so foolishly and scandalously

prosecuted, a few years ago, for publishing the works of Shelley, was a

splendid vindication of the right of genius to conceive, and enterprise

to print, some of the rarest productions of the century. His rhetoric,

in the quiet retreat of letters, and his eloquence in the bustling road

of politics, have been employed to instruct, delight and elevate his

fellow-men.

There is a department of writing, not yet dignified with the title of

"Literature," which exerts an influence over popular sentiment, second

only to that of the weekly and daily press. It is peculiarly the

offspring of this age, and bears the strong lineaments of its parent. I

will call it the _Literature of Occasional Pamphlets_. In England, the

Catholic Controversy, Parliamentary Reform, Negro Slavery, Chartism, the

Corn Laws, Church and State, General Education, and all those questions

which have moved and do move the nation, have called out a mass of such

literature, which, in intrinsic ability and artistic excellence, will

bear comparison with any cotemporaneous branch of writing. In that

country, and more especially in this, he who does not stock his library

with volumes of selected pamphlets excludes from it some of the most

valuable literature of the nineteenth century.

I cannot close this imperfect view of the liberal literature of

England, without a brief allusion to the peculiar but powerful aid

rendered to it by the late Lord Holland. The nephew of Fox inherited

much of the eloquence, all the democracy, and more than all the love for

learning and the fine arts, of his illustrious uncle. For a third of a

century, which carried England forward a hundred years in the path of

improvement, "Holland House" was the center of attraction for liberal

statesmen, orators, poets, painters, wits, and scholars. Mingling in the

brilliant throngs that so often filled its gorgeous drawing-rooms,

elegant picture-galleries, and ample libraries, were to be seen

statesmen who guided Cabinets, and orators who swayed Senates; men of

letters who had reached the hights of human knowledge, and modest genius

just struggling into notice; poets reposing under the shadow of their

fame, and poets just plucking their first laurel-leaf; sculptors who had

engraven life in the marble, and painters who had impressed beauty on

the canvas; the writer of the first article in the last Edinburgh, and

the author of the best comedy then acting at Drury-Lane; here a Whig

Duke with a long title and a landed air, and there a Radical Editor

under indictment for a seditious libel on the Government; the Duchess of

Sutherland shedding grace around this circle, and Mrs. Opie diffusing

benevolence around that; Buxton, the brewer, discoursing on Prison

Discipline with Bentham, the philosopher; Brougham explaining to a

Polish refugee his plan for educating the people, while Moore delighted

a bevy of belles by singing his last Irish melody; Sydney Smith

enlivening this alcove with his humor, and Mackintosh enlightening that

with his learning--all these varied and diverse elements meeting on

terms of social equality, and impressing upon the literary mind of the

country the all-influential lesson, that, so far from losing caste by

embracing liberal political opinions, the man of letters, of science,

and of art, might find the profession of that faith a passport to

circles where fashion displayed its smiles and power dispensed its

favors.

Sketches of Reforms and Reformers, of Great Britain and Ireland · 第 35 / 36 章