Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

Lord North never procured Pigot a seat in Parliament,—he was, we believe, never in Parliament till 1806, fourteen years after Lord North's death, which occurred in 1792, and not in 1802 as here stated. It is unnecessary to add that neither could Pigot have distinguished himself as a senator on Hastings's trial, for he was not a senator till eleven years after the conclusion of that tedious process.

Of Sir Lancelot Shadwell, the editor states

that he is by no means so distinguished a Vice-Chancellor as many of his predecessors,'-vol. ii. 552.

being clearly ignorant that the office is of recent creation, and that Sir Lancelot has had but two predecessors.

The following blunder has the merit of being droll. In enumerating the literary publications of the late Right Hon. George Rose, the editor, very characteristically, includes in the list of Mr. Rose's works

thirty-seven volumes of the Journals of the House of Lords!'-vol. i. p. 350.

He who rests his own claims to literary merit on such a compilation as the Georgian Era, must look with admiration and envy on the AUTHOR of thirty-seven volumes of Journals of the House of Lords. One serious difference, however, there is between these works-Mr. Rose's thirty-seven volumes are models of accuracy, while we doubt whether there be one single important article in the Georgian Era which is not disfigured by some flagrant error.

We have, we fear, trespassed upon the patience of our readers; but there is one short topic more on which we think it necessary to say two or three words-the scholarship to which the editor occasionally makes no inconsiderable pretensions.

We have already said that we should not deal with errors which could by possibility be attributed solely to the printer; neither would we impeach our author's learning upon the mere misspelling of a Latin word; but when we find, in a work so neatly printed, so many Latin quotations miserably mangled, we must suspect such prominent and repeated errors to belong to the editor: for instance, Nunquam antia, i. 483-Fuge omnes medicos atque omnimoda Medicamenta, i. 500-omnimoda being clearly, in this writer's judgment, an adjective agreeing with medicamenta. He talks of Lye's edition of Junius Etymologicon,' i. 292; and of Archbishop Potter's Alexandra, i. 212,-meaning, as we guess, his edition of Clemens Alexandrinus; and amongst Dr. Dodd's voluminous publications he enumerates

[ocr errors]

Synopsis Compendaria; H. Grotii de Jure belli et pacis; S. Clarkii de Dei Existentiâ et Attributis; et J. Lockii de Intellectu Humano.'

-vol. i.

p.

247.

There

[ocr errors]

There is, however, one passage which we think conclusively proves that we might safely attribute these blunders to sheer ignorance. It is stated in the Biographical Dictionary, that Tindal the sceptic went to Oxford, as boys too often do, a rasa tabulathat is, with his mind a blank, and liable to be marked with the first impressions it should receive. When this passage was copied out for our learned editor, it seems to have sorely perplexed him: and, indeed, as he read it, a vasa tabula,' would have puzzled Cicero himself. The meaning, of course, our editor never attained, but, on turning to his dictionary, he found that a in Latin meant from, and that in this sense it should have a grave accent over it-thus à. He also found that the ablative case following à should be marked with a circumflex, thus, vasâ tabulâ; and accordingly he so marked it; and then, printing his fabricated Latin in a beautiful italic type, he triumphantly exhibits the passage

thus

coming, as boys do, à vasâ tabulâ, to the university,' &c.-iii. 245. which, it may be expedient to acquaint our female readers, is neither more nor less than utter nonsense.

It is now time to conclude-certainly not from lack of matter. We have on our notes above two hundred similar instances of negligence or ignorance, and have no doubt that we could produce three, or four, or five times as many; but we think it enough to have made a selection-from all classes and periods comprised in the work of blunders in chronology, history, politics, and literature, which we believe are quite unparalleled in any other publication. We have been obliged to select our instances, not merely with regard to the intrinsic importance of the individual mistake quoted, but also with reference to its brevity and to its notoriety. In such an abundance it was necessary to select the shortest and most intelligible examples; but even in the most apparently insignificant articles which we have quoted, our readers will, upon consideration, detect a principle (if we use the expression) of ignorance and absurdity, more decisive of the character of the work than errors of greater apparent importance might be: for instance, the mistakes about the gazetting' the Treasury and India Boards, prove the editor to know nothing whatsoever of political history, of official forms, or of the practical working of our government.

We have neither time, nor space, nor inclination, to examine the truth and tone of the remarks, criticisms, and judgments which the editor has interspersed on books and men. It would be wasting our pages and insulting our readers to examine the superstructure of so rotten a foundation. One single calumny we think it worth while to contradict, as it is stated on pretended authority. It is insinuated that Mr. Pitt was guilty of such habitual intemperance

as

as to have hastened his death; and, it is added, that wine at length ceased to afford the necessary excitement, and he had recourse to laudanum, of which, an eminent physician has assured us, he sometimes took 200 drops at a dose !' (i. 386.) We boldly pronounce all this to be an infamous falsehood-and we dare and defy the editor to produce any physician, eminent or otherwise, who will state that Mr. Pitt ever took one drop of laudanum for the purpose of excitement. As to all the rest of his calumnies and misrepresentations, suffice it to say, that his judgment and credibility are quite on a par with his editorial accuracy. His observations are trite and vulgar, when they are not false or foolish-his anecdotes, childish; his temper seems to be sour; his principles, sectarian; and his language a mixture of meagre tautology and muddy bombast. He has a great reluctance to speak well of any noble, eminent, or distinguished person, but joyfully expatiates in praise of mediocrity, vulgarity, and vice.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

It will not much alter the opinion which our readers have, probably, already conceived of this writer's truth and taste, to be told that he calls Dean Swift a villain (iii. 362)—thinks that, stripped of its ornaments, the sentiments of Pope's Essay on Man are commonplace, and the diction bombastic' (iii. 289)—that the Duke of Wellington looks pale and cold like an aristocrat' (ii. 104)—a word, by the way, used throughout the whole book in an opprobrious sense-that Lord Castlereagh's appearance was dull' and 'inelegant' (i. 400)—that King George IV.'s corpulency diminished as he advanced in years, but that at the middle period of his life he had been so enormously fat, that four life-guardsmen could not without difficulty lift him on horseback' (i. 124)—that an admiral had been engaged in several 'successful victories,'—that a satirist was tremendously bitter'-that one man was averse towards riding in a coach'-that another dressed foppish '—that a third committed an act of generosity '-that a certain lawyer was presented with a silk gown'-that an artist's manners were boorish, but not unpleasantly so'-that a poem on a Plate-warmer ' is more witty than sublime.' Every page teems with similar proprieties of sentiment and beauties of language.

[ocr errors]

It would, however, be unjust to the great number of characters which he grossly mistakes and disparages, if we did not give a few instances of his panegyric and applause :

'Mr. Hazlitt was one of the most judicious, able, and powerful writers of his time. He is in his peculiar walk of literature unrivalled, and in the very first rank of philosophical critics, His essays are full of wisdom.'-vol. iii. p. 397.

To match this unrivalled critic and philosopher, he has a still more transcendant poet.

• As

[ocr errors]

As a poet, Shelley has never been surpassed; and we could point out many passages which are without their equal, even if we looked for their parallel in Shakspeare and Milton!!-iii. 454.

[ocr errors]

A lady (whose name we need not mention, for we really hope and believe that the poor woman was mad) is celebrated for a trembling delicacy of sentiment-and for a character which, though not affording a safe model for general imitation, yet merits our admiration,'-and for conduct which did certainly not originate in any indelicacy of mind'-(vol. iii. p. 418.) Yet we had been previously informed that this delicate spinster had, at the mature age of thirty-three, produced a bastard child (whether her first is not stated)—that she attempted to drown herself because she found that one of her lovers kept a mistress; and that being picked out of the Thames, she returned to their common lodgings, and modestly consented that the lover, the new mistress, and herself should all live amicably together. Trembling sensibility!' 'worthy of admiration!' but still not quite a safe model for general imitation!

Of a certain officer-we shall not mention the man's name, for he may be still living-he says

'No British soldier was ever more eminent for activity and intrepidity, and it is to be regretted that government should have so ill rewarded the services of one who contributed not a little to the success of the British arms in the Eastern campaigns of his time.'-vol. ii. p. 496.

This hero was a private soldier, who having been for his courage, and to his misfortune, promoted to a commission, was obliged by excessive imprudence to sell it, and again enlisted as a private, and being again raised to his former rank, again lost it by misconduct, and was dismissed the service by a court-martial-and the ingratitude of the government was, that it twice over promoted this man, and twice over allowed him to sell commissions which he had not bought, and which he had neither character nor conduct to keep.

One person he distinguishes by the praise of being

a man of peculiarly FINE sensibility, and universally respected for his amiability and integrity.'-iv. 431.

This being of exquisite sensibility was Grimaldi the clown.

Another special favourite, upon whom indeed is bestowed nearly the highest eulogium in the whole work

As a tender parent, an affectionate husband, with a mind capable of the most friendly sentiments-a favourite with George III. and Queen Charlotte-and beloved, respected, and regretted, in a manner superior to the dignity of a TITLE,'—iv. 215—

was one Ryland, an engraver, who was HANGED for forgery in

1783!!

By

By way of affording another and final measure of our author's judgment, we may adduce the relative importance which he assigns to various individuals: the soldier we have just mentioned has a more copious notice than Lord Lynedock, Lord Combermere, or Lord William Bentinck-Grimaldi the clown has about as long an article as Kemble-and a painter of the name of Robson a longer one than Sir Thomas Lawrence-Mr. Tierney is despatched in less time than either Alderman Waithman or Madame VestrisMr. Oxberry the player occupies an equal space with Lords Holland and Ripon united-Major Cartwright outweighs Lord Howe, General Wolfe, and Sir Ralph Abercrombie-Owen of Lanark extends over as many pages as Bishops Hoadly, Sherlock, Butler, and Newton-and Mr. Kean occupies a larger share of the Georgian Era than Lord Somers, Lord Townshend, and Lord Rodney, Sir Godfrey Kneller, Dr. James, Dr. Arbuthnot, Horace Walpole, Gray and Crabbe, all put together. It is well for those who have been hitherto called illustrious, that they had established their reputation prior to the new weights and measures of the "Georgian Era.'

We have given this silly and impudent production much more space and attention than it intrinsically deserves; but if a work of this pretension, dealing with so many existing persons, were not contradicted and exposed at the moment, it might hereafter obtain a kind of authority, and the silence of contempt might be misconstrued into assent and confirmation.

ART. VIII.—1. An Address to the Churchwardens, Guardians, Overseers of the Poor, and Rate-Payers of the Wingham Division of St. Augustine, in the County of Kent, on a Resolution adopted at a Meeting held at Wingham, on Thursday the 22d of January. Canterbury. 1835.

2. Two-and-Twenty Reasons for refusing Assent to the Proposition for instituting large Unions of Parishes, and the erection of Central Workhouses, particularly in the neighbourhood of Seven Oaks, in the County of Kent. London. 1835. 3. An Account of the Foundling Hospital in London, for the Maintenance and Education of Exposed and Deserted Young Children. London. 1885.

ON

N the day the Poor-Law Amendment Act passed into a law, it occurred to us, that were we to go personally to any spot where it might be determined to bring the new code at once into operation, we should be enabled calmly to review the old condemned

law

« PreviousContinue »