book in it, entered it under the title of, " A book that has the begining where the end should be.” This author, in the last of his crudities, has amassed together a heap of quotations, to prove that Horace and Virgil were both of them modester men than myself, and if his works were to live as long as mine, they might possibly give posterity a notion that Isaac Bickerstaffe was a very conceited old fellow, and as vain a man as either Tully or Sir Francis Bacon. Had this serious writer fallen upon me only, I could have overlooked it, but to see Cicero abused, is, I must confess, what I cannot bear. The censure he passes upon this great man runs thus :

“ The itch of being very abusive, is almost inseparable from vain-glory. Tully has these two faults in so high a degree, that nothing but his being the best writer in the world can make amends for them.” The scurrilous wretch

goes on to say I am as bad as Tully. His words are these: “And yet the Tatler, in his paper of September 26, has outdone him in both. He speaks of himself with more arrogance, and with more insolence of others.” I am afraid, by his discourse, this gentleman has no more read Plutarch than he has Tully. If he had, he would have observed a passage in that historian, wherein he has with great delicacy distinguished between two passions which are usually complicated in human nature, and which an ordinary writer would not have thought of separating. Not having my Greek spectacles by me, I shall quote the passage word for word as I find it translated to my hand. “Nevertheless, though he I was intemperately fond of his own praise, yet he was very free from envying others, and most liberally profuse in commending both the ancients and his contemporaries, as is to be understood by his writings; and many of those sayings are still recorded, as that concerning Aristotle, “That he was a river of flowing gold.' Of Plato's dialogue, "That if Jupiter were to speak, he would discourse as he did.' Theophrastus he was wont to call his peculiar delight; and being asked which of Demosthenes his orations he liked best? He answered, “The longest.'

“ And as for eminent men of his own time, either for eloquence or philosophy, there was not one of them whom he did not, by writing or speaking favourably of, render more illustrious.”

Thus the critic tells us, that Cicero was excessively vain

glorious and abusive; Plutarch, that he was vain, but not abusive. Let the reader believe which of them he pleases.

After this he complains to the world that I call him names; and that in my passion I said, “He was a flea, a louse, an owl, a bat, a small wit, a scribbler, and a nibbler.” When he has thus bespoken his reader's pity, he falls into that admirable vein of mirth, which I shall set down at length, it being an exquisite piece of raillery, and written in great gaiety of heart. “ After this list of names, (viz. flea, louse, owl, bat, &c.,) I was surprised to hear him say, that he has hitherto kept his temper pretty well; I wonder how he will write when he has lost his temper? I suppose,

, as he now is very angry

and unmannerly, he will then be exceedingly courteous and good-humoured.” If I can outlive this raillery, I shall be able to bear anything.

There is a method of criticism made use of by this author, (for I shall take care how I call him a scribbler again,) which may turn into ridicule any work that was ever written, wherein there is a variety of thoughts : this the reader will observe in the following words; "He (meaning me) is so intent upon being something extraordinary, that he scarce knows what he would be; and is as fruitful in his similes as a brother of his whom I lately took notice of. In the compass of a few lines he compares himself to a fox, to Daniel Burgess, to the Knight of the Red Cross, to an oak with ivy about it, and to a great man with an equipage.' I think myself as much honoured by being joined in this part of his paper with the gentleman whom he here calls my brother,

' as I am in the beginning of it, by being mentioned with Horace and Virgil. It is very hard that a man cannot publish ten papers

without stealing from himself; but to show you that this is only a knack of writing, and that the author is got into a certain road of criticism, I shall set down his remarks on the works of the gentleman whom he here glances upon, as they stand on his 6th paper, and desire the reader to compare them with the foregoing passage upon mine.

“In thirty lines his patron is a river, the Primum Mobile, a Pilot, a Victim, the Sun, Anything, and Nothing. He bestows increase, conceals his source, makes the machine

1

a

:

2

move, teaches to steer, expiates our offences, raises vapours, and looks larger as he sets.” 1

What poem can be safe from this sort of criticism? I think I was never in my life so much offended as at a wag whom I once met with in a coffee-house : he had in his hand one of the miscellanies, and was reading the following short copy of verses, which, without flattery to the author, is (I think) as beautiful in its kind as any one in the English tongue.

Flavia the least and slightest toy,
Can with resistless art employ.
This fan in meaner hands would prove
An engine of small force in love;
But she with such an air and mien,
Not to be told, or safely seen,
Directs its wanton motions so,
That it wounds more than Cupid's bow:
Gives coolness to the matchless dame,

To every other breast a flame. When this coxcomb had done reading them, “Heyday! (says he,) what instrument is this that Flavia employs in such a manner as is not to be told, or safely seen ? " In ten lines it is a toy, a Cupid's bow, a fan, and an engine in love. It has wanton motions, it wounds, it cools, and inflames.'

Such criticisms make a man of sense sick, and a fool merry.

The next paragraph of the paper we are talking of, falls upon somebody whom I am at a loss to guess at: but I find the whole invective turns upon a man who (it seems) has been imprisoned for debt. Whoever he was, I most heartily pity him; but at the same time must put the Examiner in mind, that notwithstanding he is a critic, he still ought to remember he is a Christian. Poverty was never thought a proper subject for ridicule; and I do not remember that I ever met with a satire upon a beggar.

As for those little retortings of my own expressions, of being dull by design, witty in October, shining, excelling, and so forth; they are the common cavils of every witling, who has no other method of showing his parts, but by little variations and repetitions of the man's words whom he attacks.

But the truth of it is, the paper before me, not only in this particular, but in its very essence, is like Ovid's echo:

· Dr. Garth's verses to my Lord Treasurer.

The author.] Dr. Atterbury.

2

VOL. II.

N

Quæ nec reticere loquenti, Nec prior ipsa loqui didicit. I should not have deserved the character of a censor, had I not animadverted upon the above-mentioned author by a gentle chastisement: but I know my reader will not pardon me, unless I declare, that nothing of this nature for the future (unless it be written with some wit) shall divert me from my care of the public.?

No. 240. SATURDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1710.

Ad populum phaleras.“ PERS.
From

my own Apartment, October 20. I do not remember that in

any

of
my

lucubrations I have touched upon that useful science of physic, notwithstanding I have declared myself more than once a professor of it. I have indeed joined the study of astrology with it, because I never knew a physician recommend himself to the public who had not a sister art to embellish his knowledge in medicine. It has been commonly observed in compliment to the ingenious of our profession, that Apollo was god of verse as well as physic; and in all ages the most celebrated practitioners of our country were? the particular favourites of the muses. Poetry to physic is indeed like the gilding to a pill; it makes the art shine, and covers the severity of the doctor with the agreeableness of the companion. The

very foundation of poetry is good sense, if we may allow Horace to be a judge of the art.

Scribendi recte sapere est, et principium, et fons. And if so, we have reason to believe, that the same man who writes well can prescribe well, if he has applied him

The caustic severity of this, and the preceding paper, is the more felt for being conveyed in all the softness of good-humour.-To possess extraordinary talents for personal ridicule, and to be shy of appearing in this dazzling character, is, I think, a praise peculiar to Virgil

, and Mr. Addison. It is but from two or three lines in the Roman poet, and from two or three occasional papers, in the large and miscellaneous works of our author, that either is known to have been the keenest satirist of his time; Horace and Swift not excepted.

? Were.] Rather“ have been.”

self to the study of both. Besides, when we see a man making profession of two different sciences, it is natural for us to believe he is no pretender in that which we are not judges of, when we find him skilful in that which we un

1 derstand.

Ordinary quacks and charlatans are thoroughly sensible how necessary it is to support themselves by these collateral assistances, and therefore always lay their claim to some supernumerary accomplishments which are wholly foreign to their profession.

About twenty years ago, it was impossible to walk the streets without having an advertisenient thrust into your hand, of a doctor “who was arrived at the knowledge of the green and red dragon, and had discovered the female fern seed.” Nobody ever knew what this meant; but the green and red dragon so amused the people, that the doctor lived very comfortably upon them. About the same time there was pasted a very hard word upon every corner of the streets. This, to the best of my remembrance, was

TETRACHYMAGOGON, which drew great shoals of spectators about it, who read the bill that it introduced with unspeakable curiosity; and when they were sick, would have nobody but this learned man for their physician.

I once received an advertisement of one “ who had studied thirty years by candle-light for the good of his countrymen." He might have studied twice as long by day-light, and never have been taken notice of: but elucubrations cannot be overvalued. There are some who have gained themselves great reputation for physic by their birth, as the “ seventh son of a seventh son; and others by not being born at all, as the “unborn doctor," who, I hear, is lately gone

the

way of his patients, having died worth five hundred pounds per annum, though he was not “ born” to a halfpenny.

My ingenious friend Dr. Saffold succeeded my old contemporary Dr. Lilly in the studies both of physic and astrology, to which he added that of poetry, as was to be seen both

upon the sign where he lived, and in the bills which he distributed. He was succeeded by Doctor Case, who erased

" When.] To avoid an ungraceful repetition, he should have said—“ if we find.”