not, of affording the most exquisite delights; but then, it will probably take place of all other ornamental acquirements. And, though such a sacrifice may be worth making, under the circumstances described, yet to make it, with a view of creating a taste for any pursuit, merely amusive, is, I think, to estimate, falsely, the value of things. If, however, experience shows, that musical pleasures may be enjoyed in moderation, and so as to make an agreeable variety, without occupying the place of any thing preferable, my objections are at an end. The same may be said of drawing, and various other tastes and acquisitions, concerning which, accident and inclination, if regulated by prudence, may be suffered to determine the choice.

I have now, I think, pointed out to you, sources, which will supply sufficient materials, of easily procurable pleasure, if you bring to them, what is absolutely essential to the success of any external means of happiness,-a mind, in harmony with itself. This, nothing but conscious worth and virtue can bestow.

HISTORY AND BIOGRAPHY ESTIMATED.

THAT, to a human being, no study can be more important, than that of the character and fortune of mankind, may be almost assumed, as a selfevident proposition. What, indeed, can be so

necessary, to all ranks and conditions, as a knowledge of the creatures with whom they are to live and act, on whom so large a share of their happiness is to depend, and from whose fate they are enabled to infer their own?

History and biography are the great records of man; the first, of what he has been and done, collectively, the second, of the same, individually. The limits between the two cannot exactly be defined; for, on the one hand, societies being composed of individuals, the history of the former consists of the actions of the latter; and, on the other, the actions of individuals being frequently displayed in their effects on societies, they cannot be considered, without entering into the discussions of history. This intercommunication of subject, however, admirably fits them for throwing light upon one another, and supplying each other's deficiencies. History, as it has been too much the custom to compose it, gives a distinct view only of those great events, as they are called, which, from their uniformity and simplicity, instruct less, in the real nature of mankind, than the story of domestic and civil life. Wars, confederacies, treaties, contentions for supreme power, and the final triumph of the strong over the weak, fill, with few exceptions, the whole space of the historical tablet; and the individuals who are brought forward on its canvass, and supply it with figures of portraiture, are often less distinguished from each other, by characteristic marks, than many who remain unnoticed in the crowd.

Biography has taken the personages of history, and, by painting them as single portraits, has given more exact delineations of their features; but it has likewise selected many from the groups of common life, and has thereby made a display of human character, vastly more copious, varied, and distinct, than is to be found in history, alone.

If, on this comparison, the advantage seems to lie on the side of biography, it must, however, be confessed, that this is liable to peculiar causes of misrepresentation, which, if not corrected, either by general history, or by the spirit of philosophy, are extremely apt to mislead.

Almost

every professed biographer sits down with the intention of making a hero of his subject; and not only raises his personal character above its merits, but gives him an undue share of consequence, in the public events in which he was concerned, or in the advancement of the art or science in which he was eminent. Some, in their gross daubings, lay on every glaring color of moral and intellectual excellence, to decorate their portrait, without the least attention to nature and congruity. Others, more artful, and therefore more delusive, only exaggerate qualities really possessed, palliate or wholly conceal defects, and form such a general resemblance, as a flattering painter gives to draughts, which are designed rather to please than to strike.

In biographical writing, almost every thing tends to nourish this fault of favoritism. The original choice of subject is usually made from some cir

cumstance of predilection; such as personal friendship, community of studies, of profession, of party, or country. It is frequently to be lamented, that the very connexion, which affords the means of accurate information concerning a person, gives a bias to the mind of the writer, and unfits him for faithful narration. Such a relation as that of master, patron, or benefactor, while it brings the superior within the eye of the inferior, can scarcely fail of imposing upon the latter the shackles of gratitude or enthusiastic admiration, and thereby incapacitating him for the exercise of that critical scrutiny, which alone can develope the secret springs and motives of action, and bring to view the latent discriminations of character. Even the simple propensity, of rendering a picture the perfect exemplar of its genus, seduces an ingenious writer to heighten his touches and improve effect, at the expense of reality.

With respect to the grosser inducements to violate truth, which operate upon biographers, historians, and the eulogists,* of every species, who receive pay for their labors, it is scarcely necessary to bestow particular animadversion upon them, since, whenever they are detected, they will be held in due contempt; and it is not often, that they can escape detection. In some, indeed, the temptation, or rather obligation, to partiality, has been so unblushingly displayed, that it is wonderful they could ever have been thought capable

* Those who eulogize, or write eulogies, or encomiums upon others.

What reader of com

of effecting their purpose. mon sagacity would look for a faithful account of transactions in the pages of a royal or national historiographer ?* The office has now, I believe, by the good sense of modern times, been reduced to a sinecure; but when Louis XIV.† made his unjust and ostentatious expedition into the Low Countries, he actually took with him the two greatest writers in his kingdom, Boileau§ and Racine, (poets, both, and therefore well practised in fiction,) in order to record the great actions he was to perform, by means of his generals. The best proof they gave of their judgement, on the occasion, was, that they never published a single sentence of what they composed in their new capacity. This instance of vanity and absurdity may be added to the examples of the benefits proceeding from the boasted alliance between the learned and the great.

Formerly, kings had in their service persons, who were employed to write the histories and recount the deeds of their

masters.

+ See note on page 156, for an account of Louis XIV.

The kingdom of the Netherlands is called the Low Countries, from being situated on a very low level. Holland, Belgium, Flanders, and other provinces, are included in the term.

§ Despréaux Nicholas Boileau, a celebrated French poet, was born near Paris, A. D. 1636, and died in 1711. Some of his works met with extraordinary applause.

|| Jean Racine, a celebrated French tragic poet, was born December 21, 1639, at Ferte Milon, a town in France, about sixty miles from Paris. He spent most of his life at Paris, devoted entirely to poetry. He died April 22, 1699.