Billeder på siden

Warton, the author of the “ History of English Poetry," was a man of considerable note in his day, much beloved by a large circle of friends. His most important work is an “ Essay on the Genius and Writings of Pope," much of which he afterwards incorporated in an edition of that poet's works. It may be mentioned that it appears from a letter of Johnson's to Warton that the pay of the contributors to the Adventurer was two guineas a number. There is a good deal of loose talking about the wretched remuneration writers received during the eighteenth century. Vast sums such as Scott, Dickens, and Macaulay got for their works would, of course, have appeared almost fabulous even to the most successful author of that time, when the reading public was so small compared to what it is now. But it may be doubted if literary “journeywork” was not paid just as well as at present

The World, begun in January 1753, and carried on weekly for four years, is of interest as being the periodical in which ap. peared Lord Chesterfield's articles on Johnson's “ Dictionary," which called forth the “great lexicographer's” celebrated letter. The proprietor of the World and its principal contributor was Edward Moore, whose tragedy, the “Gamester," is still occasionally acted. Horace Walpole, Lord Hailes, and Soame Jenyns, whose book on the “Origin of Evil” formed the subject of one of Johnson's most caustic criticisms, also occasionally wrote in it. Chesterfield's two papers in recommendation of Johnson's “ Dictionary” appeared in November 28 and December 5, 1754. Johnson seems to have thought over his rejoinder for a considerable time, his letter bearing date February 7, 1755.

In the Connoisseur, a periodical begun in January 1754, and continued weekly for three years, appeared in 1756 the first publications of William Cowper. His first paper was on “Keeping a Secret,"containing sketches of faithless confidantes; the second an account of the present state of country churches, their clergy, and their congregations; and the third an essay on conversation and its abuses. Two other papers have, on uncertain evidence, been attributed to him. The chief writers



[blocks in formation]

in the Connoisseur were George Colman, a lively play-writer, and Bonnel Thornton, who was well known in his day as a clever writer of satirical verses and essays. The character of this periodical is thus given by Dr. Drake: “ The Connoisseur labours under the same defect which has been attributed to the Worldit is too uniformly a tissue of ridicule and caricature. In this line, however, several of its papers are superior to those of the same species in the World, and it displays likewise more classical literature that its rival. It is, on the whole, more entertaining than the World, but, if we except a few papers, inferior in point of composition. To the juvenility of the two chief writers in it, and to their strong attachment to satire and burlesque, we are to attribute its occasional incorrectness of style and its porerly of matter."

With the Mirror and the Lounger, two periodicals published at Edinburgh, and conducted by Northern literati, the list of classical papers of the Spectator class closed, for though a few followed the two mentioned, none of them attained any celebrity. The Mirror was published pretty constantly every Tuesday and Saturday from January 23, 1779, to May 27, 1780. Its editor and principal contributor was Henry Mackenzie, the author of the “Man of Feeling," who gives the following account of its origin :-" The idea of publishing a periodical paper in Edinburgh took its rise in a company of gentlemen whom particular circumstances of connection brought frequently together. Their discourse often turned upon subjects of manners, of taste, and of literature. By one of those accidental resolutions of which the origin cannot easily be traced, it was determined to put their thoughts into writing, and to read them for the entertainment of each. The essays assumed the form, and soon after some one gave them the name, of a periodical publication; the writers of it were naturally associated, and their meetings increased the importance as well as the number of their productions.” By and by the idea of publication suggested itself; and as number after number of the Mirror appeared, it came to be regarded by all Scotchmen with just pride. Of the hundred and ten numbers of which it consists, Mackenzie was the sole author of thirty-nine, besides assisting in the composition of others. Among the other contributors were Lord Hailes; Professor Richardson of Glasgow; William Strahan, the printer, frequently mentioned by Boswell; Beattie, the author of the “Minstrel ;” and David Hume, the nephew of the historian. In interest and variety of contents the Mirror is superior to the Adventurer, with which its merits in other respects are about on a level. The most noticeable contribution to it is probably Mackenzie's "Story of La Roche," the pathos of which has been much praised. The publication of the Lounger, a continuation of the Mirror, possessing the same characteristics, and likewise conducted by members of the “Mirror Club," as it was called, begun on February 5, 1785, was continued till January 6, 1787.

We pass on to a new era in periodical literature, which dawned when, in 1802, the first number of the Edinburgh Review appeared. Of the origin of this epoch-making journal, Sydney Smith, one of its earliest and most brilliant contributors, has given the following account:-“ Towards the end of my residence in Edinburgh, Brougham, Jeffrey, and myself happened to meet in the eighth or ninth storey, or flat, in Buccleuch Place, the then elevated residence of Mr. Jeffrey. I proposed that we should set up a Review. This was acceded to with acclamation. I was appointed editor, and remained long enough in Edinburgh to edit the first number of the Review. The motto I proposed for the Review was • Tenui Musam meditamur avenâ'—'We cultivate literature on a little oatmeal. But this was too near the truth to be admitted; so we took our present grave motto from Publius Syrus (“: Judex damnatur cum nocens absolvitur "_"The judge is condemned when the guilty is acquitted "), of whom none of us had, I am sure, read a single line; and so began what turned out to be a very important and able journal. When I left Edinburgh, it fell into the stronger hands of Lord Jeffrey and Brougham, and reached the highest point of popularity and success." This account, bating a slight touch or two of humorous exaggeration, as, for example, "the eighth or ninth

The Edinburgh Review.

449 storey,” is substantially correct. The effect of the first number of the Review was, says Jeffrey's biographer, Lord Cockburn, “electrical.” To readers accustomed to the tedious, inane twaddle which formed the staple of the magazines of the day, it was a very welcome relief to find such fresh, vigorous writing as was to be found in the new periodical. Yet it cannot be said that the early volumes of the Review strike one who looks at them nowadays as of any extraordinary merit or interest. Many of the articles are of the kind called "padding," consisting of a sort of epitome of the work noticed, with copious extracts. In the early years of the Review's existence, it contained none of those brief monographs, often having only a very slight connection with the works nominally under notice, in which writers possessed of special knowledge on particular subjects tersely sum up the results of their investigations. Some account of Jeffrey's connection with the Review has already been given. He was succeeded by Macvey Napier, Professor of Conveyancing in Edinburgh University, who occupied the editorial chair till his death in 1847. The entertaining volume of selections from his correspondence, published in 1879, shows how difficult he found his position in having to settle the conflicting claims of various contributors, and, in particular, of having to pacify as best he could the vindictive passions of Brougham, who wished to make the Review a vehicle for venting his spite against his political opponents. Since Napier's death, the Review has been edited by Jeffrey's son-in-law, William Empson ; Sir George Cornewall Lewis, distinguished as a statesman and a scholar; and Mr. Henry Reeve, its present editor, who succeeded Sir G. C. Lewis in 1855. Mr. Reeve, who is Registrar of the Privy Council, is chiefly known by his translation of De Tocqueville's "Democracy in America.” A very long and brilliant list of the leading contributors to the Edinburgh Review under its various editors might be drawn up, including such men as Sir Walter Scott, Hallam, Macaulay, Carlyle, Henry Rogers, the author of the "Eclipse of Faith," whose really wonderful gift of style should keep his memory

[ocr errors]

alive ; Sir James Stephen, Lytton, Thackeray, Leigh Hunt, Froude, and others.

During the early years of the existence of the Edinburgh Review it did not adopt a very decided tone in politics. Social and political reforms were indeed advocated, but the advocacy was not carried on in very emphatic fashion; and the Review could scarcely be called a party organ till the appearance in 1808 of an article on the work of Don Pedro Cevallos on the “French Usurpation of Spain” gave undisguised expression to its Whig leanings. Great was the consternation and indignation excited by the article in the breasts of many Tories, not a few of whom had already begun to regard the Review with suspicion. When the number containing it appeared, Scott wrote to Constable, the publisher, in these terms :—“The Edinburgh Review had become such as to render it impossible for me to continue a contributor to it. Now it is such as I can no longer continue to receive or read it.” The list of the then subscribers exhibits, in an indignant dash of Constable's pen opposite Scott's name, the word—“Stopt!!!” The eccentric Earl of Buchan took a more conspicuous way of showing his displeasure than Scott Throwing the obnoxious number on the floor of his hall, he solemnly kicked it out into the street. Already there had been negotiations among various parties as to the starting of a Tory Quarterly, and the article on the “French Usurpation of Spain" had the effect of bringing these negotiations at once to a point. Canning, then Secretary for Foreign Affairs, was warmly interested in the new project; Scott exerted himself to the utmost to further it; many eminent writers of Tory politics promised their aid : and at length, in February 1809, the opening number appeared. The original editor was William Gifford, who retained the post till within about a year of his death in 1826. Gifford, " a little dumpled-up man,” who, originally a shoemaker, had fought his

to eminence and power, is now chiefly remembered for his connection with the Quarterly, and for the work he did in editing the old dramatists. His satires, the “Baviad” and the “Mæviad,” are now as entirely forgotten as the schools

[ocr errors]
« ForrigeFortsæt »