P.S. I shall give you 'farther hints' when I come down, (which will be in
a few days;) and who my 'informants' were; but by 'these' you will
see, that I have been very assiduous (for the time) in the task you
set me upon.
The 'length' of my letter you will excuse: for I need not tell you, Sir,
what 'narrative,' 'complex,' and 'conversation' letters (such a one
as 'mine') require. Every one to his 'talent.' 'Letter-writing'
is mine. I will be bold to say; and that my 'correspondence' was
much coveted in the university, on that account, by 'tyros,' and
by 'sophs,' when I was hardly a 'soph' myself. But this I should
not have taken upon myself to mention, but only in defence of the
'length' of my letter; for nobody writeth 'shorter' or 'pithier,'
when the subject requireth 'common forms' only--but, in apologizing
for my 'prolixity,' I am 'adding' to the 'fault,' (if it were one,
which, however, I cannot think it to be, the 'subject' considered:
but this I have said before in other words:) so, Sir, if you will
excuse my 'post-script,' I am sure you will not find fault with my
'letter.'
One word more as to a matter of 'erudition,' which you greatly love to
hear me 'start' and 'dwell upon.' Dr. Lewen once, in 'your'
presence, (as you, 'my good patron,' cannot but remember,) in a
'smartish' kind of debate between 'him' and 'me,' took upon him to
censure the 'paranthetical' style, as I call it. He was a very
learned and judicious man, to be sure, and an ornament to 'our
function': but yet I must needs say, that it is a style which I
greatly like; and the good Doctor was then past his 'youth,' and
that time of life, of consequence, when a 'fertile imagination,'
and a 'rich fancy,' pour in ideas so fast upon a writer, that
parentheses are often wanted (and that for the sake of 'brevity,'
as well as 'perspicuity') to save the reader the trouble of reading
a passage 'more than once.' Every man to his talent, (as I said
before.) We are all so apt to set up our 'natural biasses' for
'general standards,' that I wondered 'the less' at the worthy
Doctor's 'stiffness' on this occasion. He 'smiled at me,' you may
remember, Sir--and, whether I was right or not, I am sure I 'smiled
at him.' And 'you,' my 'worthy patron,' (as I had the satisfaction
to observe,) seemed to be of 'my party.' But was it not strange,
that the 'old gentleman' and 'I' should so widely differ, when the
'end' with 'both' (that is to say, 'perspicuity' or 'clearness,')
was the same?--But what shall we say?--
'Errare est hominis, sed non persistere.'
I think I have nothing to add until I have the honour of attending you in
'person'; but I am, (as above,) &c. &c. &c.