NO. V.

It may be objected that _Mr. Punch's_ fifth example does not strictly

conform to the canons laid down by him in his prefatory remarks to No.

I. _Mr. Punch_ neither admits nor denies the charge. He is convinced,

however, that those who do him the honour to read these Studies, might

justly complain if he failed to include in them an example of the

work of a Poet who has shown our generation how rusticity and rhymes,

cattle and Conservative convictions, peasants and patriotism, may be

combined in verse. It is scarcely necessary to add that the author of

the following magnificent piece is Mr. A-FR-D A-ST-N. Like others who

might be named, he has not the honour to be an agricultural labourer;

but no living man has sung at greater length of rural life, and its

simple joys. Many of his admirers have asserted that Britain ought to

have more than one Laureate, and that Mr. A-FR-D A-ST-N ought to be

among the number. Others are not prepared to go quite so far. They

have been heard to complain that cows and trees, and woodmen and

farms, and sheep and wains, and hay and turnips, do not necessarily

suggest the highest happiness, and that it is not always dignified for

an aspiring Poet to be led about helpless through the byeways of sense

by those wilful, wanton playfellows, his rhymes. The two factions may

be left to fight out their quarrel over the present example, which,

by the way, is _not_ taken from the collected edition of the Poet's

works.

Punch, or the London Charivari, Volume 103, September 10, 1892 · 第 17 / 27 题