Billeder på siden

proverbs somewhat musty, and rather prosy preaching.

The loose indefiniteness of Dr. Mathews's title prepares one for a rambling work. On so wide a theme an author may be expected to wander abroad at his own sweet will. It is hard to see the connection between the several chapters that make up this volume, still harder to understand how the substance of the chapters can be brought under their headings, or what is the drift of the whole, if there is any whole at all, strictly speaking.

As the work now appears, it is neither a popular lecture nor a scientific treatise, but a mixture of the two, with something of the sermon. Far be it from us to say the mixture is not agreeable. Dr. Mathews has a pleasant chatty manner, a force and richness of expression sometimes rising to eloquence, and an accuracy of language, as well as a general purity of taste, far above the average of transatlantic literature. Hence his volume is decidedly pleasant reading, notwithstanding all its faults-which are fewer than its deficienciesreminding one not unfrequently of Mr. Smiles's "Self-Help," and other kindred works, from which he has reaped such extensive popularity. The frequent references to American literature, history, and customs cannot, of course, be expected to interest English readers so much as those for whom the work was written.

The first chapter is on "The Significance of Words," by which the author means, not their signification, but their importance. He makes the chief excellence of Tennyson, Swinburne, and De Quincey to consist in their skilful use of words, and says, "The superiority of the writers of the seventeenth century, to those of our own day

is due not less to their choice and collocation of words than to their weight of thought." Elsewhere he goes even further, "It is this cunning choice, along with the skilful arrangement of words, that, even more than the thought, eternises the name of an author." Still more questionable is the statement that "Whitefield could thrill an audience by saying Mesopotamia.'" Surely Dr. Mathews is here misled by a confused recollection of a joke in one of Sir Walter Scott's novels, where an old woman is represented as unable to remember anything more about a sermon she had heard than that there was one sweet word, "Mesopotamia," in it. At any rate, it is absurd to attribute the effect of this, or the exclamations oh! ah! uttered by him, to the words themselves alone.

In the chapter on "The Morality of Words," which treats of language as an indication of character and mind, we find the following remarks::

"What shall we think of the fact that the French language has no word equivalent to 'listener'? Is it not a noteworthy circumstance, shedding light upon national character, that among thirty-seven million of talkers, no provision, except the awkward paraphrase celui qui écoute (he who hears), should have been made for hearers ? Is there any other explanation of this blank than the supposition that every Frenchman talks from the pure love of talking, and not to be heard; that, reversing the proverb, he believes that 'silence is silver, but talking is golden;' and that, not caring whether he is listened to or not, he has never recognized that he has no name for the person to whom he chatters?

This is not only ill-natured in tone, but incorrect as to fact. There is a French word écouteur for a listener, and auditeur for a hearer.

But supposing there were no single equivalent words for the English ones, none but a very perverse mind would think of drawing so formidable an indictment against a nation with nothing more than this flimsy evidence in support of it. Dr. Mathews's inferences from idioms and words in other languages are often very fanciful. It is a curious notion also of his, that not only is the study of botany much hindered by the hard names of plants, but that of astronomy greatly promoted by such easy names as the bear, the serpent, and the milky way. Another strange idea is, that the irregularities of spelling, pronunciation, and syntactical construction" are the strongest proofs of the nobleness and perfection of our language."

Dr. Mathews says, "Everybody knows that George I. of England obtained his crown, not by hereditary title, but by an act of parliament." Surely it was both by hereditary title and an act of parliament. Had he not been the next heir to the Stuart family, which was disqualified, the crown would certainly not have been settled upon him by act of parliament.

Dr. Mathews's observations on style are sensible and just, though not remarkable for novelty :

"That it is well for a writer to famidiarize himself with the best models of style (models sufficiently numerous to prevent that mannerism which is apt to result from unconscious imitation, when he is familiar with but one), nobody can doubt. A man's vocabulary depends largely on the company he keeps; and without a proper vocabulary no man can be a good writer. Words are the material that the author works in, and he must use as much care in their selection as the sculptor in choosing his marble or the painter in choosing his colours. By profound study of the masterpieces of literature

he may not only enrich his vocabulary. but learn in some degree the secret of their charm, detect his own deficiencies, and elevate and refine his taste to a degree that can be reached in no style can be acquired by imitating any other way. But to suppose that a good one writer, or any set of writers, is one of the greatest follies that can be imagined.

Such a supposition is based on the notion that fine writing is an addition from without to the matter treated of,— a kind of ornament superinduced, or luxury indulged in, by one who has sufficient genius; whereas the brilliant or powerful writer is not one who has merely a copious vocabulary, and can turn on at will any number of splendid phrases and swelling sentences, but he is one who has something to say, and knows how to say it. Whether he dashes off his compositions at a heat, or elaborates them with fastidious nicety and care, he has but one aim, which he keeps steadily before him, and that is to give forth what is in him. From this very earnestness it follows that whatever be the brilliancy of his diction or the harmony of his periods,whether it blaze with the splendours of a gorgeous rhetoric, or take the ear prisoner with its musical surprises,― he never makes these an end, but has always the charm of an incommunicable simplicity."

[blocks in formation]

"It follows from all this that there is no model style, and that the kind of style demanded in any composition depends upon the man and his theme. The first law of good writing is that it should be an expression of a man's self,-a reflected image of his own character. If we know what the man is, we know what his style should be. If it mirrors his individuality, it is, relatively, good; if it is not a self-portraiture, it is bad, however polished its periods, or rhythmical its cadences. The graces and witcheries of expression which charm us in an original writer, offend us in a copyist. Style is sometimes. though not very happily, termed the dress of thought. It is really, as Wordsworth long ago declared, the incarnation of thought. In Greek, the same word, Logos,

stands for reason and speech,-and why? Because they cannot be divided; because thought and expression are one. They each co-exist, not

weardige, bread-keeper, from hlaf bread, loaf, and weardian, to keep, look after." The original word is

one with the other, but in and through hlafdige from hlaf, a loaf, and digan,

the other. Not till we can separate the soul and the body, life and motion, the convex and concave of a curve, shall we be able to divorce thought from the language which only can embody it. But allowing, for the moment, that style is the verbal clothing of ideas, who but the most povertystricken person would think of wearing the clothes of another? It is true that there are certain general qualities, such as clearness. force, flexibility, simplicity, variety, which all good styles will alike possess. just as all good clothing will have certain qualities in common. But for all men to clothe their thoughts in the same manner, would be as foolish as for a giant to array himself in the garments of a dwarf, a stout man in those of a thin, or a brunette in those of a blonde."


Under the head of "Curiosities of Language," Dr. Mathews has the following curious derivation, among others. Hip! hip! hurrah! is said to have been' originally a warcry adopted by the stormers of a German town, wherein a great many Jews were all put to the sword, amid the shouts of 'Hierosolyma est perdita.' From the first letters of these words (h e p) an exclamation was contrived." Surely the force of folly can go no further than this absurdity, which reminds one of the derivation of King Pippin from the name Hooper thus: Hooper, dooper, diaper, napkin, nipkin, pipkin, pippin. Even supposing the exclamation hip! could be imagined to have such a farfetched origin, how is hurrah! to be explained? Dr. Mathews's derivation of the word lady is not quite correct. "Lady primarily signifies bread-keeper. It is derived from the Anglo-Saxon, hlafdie, i.e. hlaf

[ocr errors]

to serve out, so that the primary meaning is a bread distributor. The author is decidedly wrong in his derivation of the word hypocrite, which he says "comes from two Greek words, signifying under a mask; "the fact being, as every one with a small smattering of Greek knows, that it comes from a compound Greek word, meaning one who answers, hence one who converses on the stage, or a player; and, that there is no trace of any word meaning a mask. Dean

Alford, with all his alleged "dogmatic small talk," could never have perpetrated so gross a blunder.

The concluding chapter on "Common Improprieties of Speech" is the only part of the volume that contains matter of much practical value. Even this is of no great value, because the real improprieties are such as no properly educated person would be guilty of, and are better prevented by early training than corrected by popular lectures or books. Besides, they have already been pointed out by other writers. Some of the expressions to which Dr. Mathews objects have the sanction of much better authority than his. He makes a bold assertion, unsupported by any attempt at proof, in saying, "Seldom or never is a common vulgarism."


In many cases the alleged faults are very trivial, mere matters of taste. upon which every one must decide for himself, and no one can be pronounced positively wrong. Mathews might as well have pointed out that the impropriety "I had rather" springs from "I'd rather," which is a contraction for "I would rather."

Hogan, M.P. A novel, 3 vols. Henry S. King & Co. London, 1876. -There is a considerable amount of cleverness in this novel, though we cannot say that the ability of the writer has proved quite equal to the ambition of his design. He had evidently two leading objects in view-to exhibit a ridiculous picture of the pretension and vulgarity of a certain class of parvenu society in Dublin, and to expose the demoralizing tactics of priests and agitators who trade on party in Ireland. These aims are kept consistently enough in view throughout, and in many respects are realized with much rough force and striking effect. Hogan is a model of the unprincipled patriot of our day. He represents fairly the class of unscrupulous adventurers who obtain seats in Parliament by pandering to the revolutionary incendiarism that is a curse to the country. He is a Roman Catholic, the nephew of a Bishop, and is thus introduced to the reader :—

[blocks in formation]

turned home to take his place in his father's drapery shop. This was even less to his taste than the clerical career, but his efforts to free himself from the toils of the hated business were unavailing. After a year or two of discontented servitude, the fates willed it that his father should die suddenly, and he found himself, at the age of nineteen, master of his own destiny. He confided his wishes and aspirations to his mother's brother, the then P. P. of St. Columbkille. Father O'Rooney good-naturedly consented to give him a chance, and

After a


carried him up to Dublin. severe and continuous course of study he passed a brilliant entrance examination into Trinity College, and, without being afterwards distinguished, got through his legal and other studies with the reputation of being a sure and solid, if somewhat slow student. eked out his resources by teaching; and on his mother's death, which happened the same year that he was called to the English Bar, found himself possessed of some twelve hundred pounds' worth of railway stock, and not a single encumbrance, wherewith to face the world. He was clever and good-looking, very gentlemanlike in appearance, and had an irreproachable accent-a most important item in our inventory of his qualifications."

Ambitious and pliant, to obtain a seat in Parliament as representative of Peatstown, Hogan adopts, against his better judgment, the platform of the extreme party, which he thus mockingly sets forth :

"Home Rule, absolute and unconditional; Clerical control of Education; Tenant-right; Amnesty; and-ah-oh-of course, the Holy Father's Grievances-"

At the same time, he secures the support of a Tory nobleman who has influence in the borough, by pledging himself to do his best in promoting the carriage of a railway bill in which his lordship is personally interested. In this way Hogan secures his election, though opposed by the parish priest, who regards with suspicion his professions of patriotism.

Hogan had become the companion and dupe of a Dublin broker, called Saltasche; and when in Parliament he maintains himself principally by speculating on the Stock Exchange, under the inspiration of Saltasche, and by editing The Beacon, a weekly paper, which that enterprising company-monger had established for the purpose of inflating his financial bubbles.

In due course Hogan sinks lower in the scale of political rectitude, and his moral sense becomes correspondingly obdurate. At last Saltasche, when all his schemes were matured, elopes with another man's wife, his splendid bubbles burst, and all who trusted him are victimized. Amid the general catastrophe, Hogan, who is utterly ruined, manages, nevertheless, to save himself. He sacrifices the affection of an amiable girl, and marries, for her money, a Protestant lady much older than himself, through whose family influence he is appointed secretary to a Colonial Governor, with a salary of £300 a year. And so terminate ingloriously the fortunes of the aspiring patriot.

Such, briefly, is the outline of Hogan, M.P., and if, instead of refined, delicate, and pungent satire, there is too much of rather broad and coarse caricature in the filling up, still we must admit that the descriptions generally have truth and point, more especially in the sketches of society, in which the Raffertys, the Branigans, the Muldoons, and the Cogarties so conspicuously figure. Here is some truth anent Roman Catholic University Education :

[blocks in formation]

**All in good time,' laughed the barrister, emptying his glass. I hope to be one day.'

“I think,' said Saltasche, 'that one important feature in the case is the social distinction of Trinity. That has an attraction for Catholics of a certain grade. There is a marked desire on the part of many of the professional set to know and mix with the other persuasion.'


Decidedly so. And an equally marked desire on the part of their ecclesiastical rulers that they shall do nothing of the kind. Anyhow,' added Hogan, if the Catholics want to get into Protestant society, they don't go the right way about it. Men, of course, know each other; but it's the women who bar the way. R. C. women are terribly behind the age. Did you hear the last story of Lady St. Aldegonde ? She wrote to her friends, the Hawardens of Westmeath, to come up in time for the dinner of the 14th. We shall have only our own friends," said she; none of these dreadful Dublin lawyers' wives.'



As a specimen of our author's facetime we may quote the follow

"Do you imagine they looked for ing:

concurrent endowment?'

"Hardly,' replied the broker. "They know better than to take a State provision; but they thought to get it, and think they will get it still, for a Catholic University.'

[ocr errors]

"Hogan shook his head. 'No, no,' said he; Trinity is absorbing such Catholic youngsters as want college education and degrees. I think the Stephen Green University merely draws medical students. After all, they have a very good excuse for patronizing Trinity. Few people can afford to lose time and money taking out a degree that has no market value-a mere certificate. Look at me, for example. What should I be doing with a Catholic

"Well, I heard a good story from Father Tom McCollumby the other day,' said Father Desmond.

Tell us that, Father Dan; it's sure to be good.'

"Father Desmond cleared his voice, took a sip of toddy, and began in a dry solemn way,—


A friend of his, a priest, was hearing confessions one Saturday, and a boy came to him and said he had a rale bad sin on his mind. "Well, me good boy, come on wid it," said his reverence: sure we must all be forgiven; so what is it now?" Augh den, your riverence, I do be always sayin', Be the Holy Father." "You

« ForrigeFortsæt »