He was very punctual and regular in his devotions; he was never known to enter upon his recreations or sports, though never so early in the morning, before he had been at public prayers; so that on hunting days, his chaplains were bound to a very early attendance. He was likewise very strict in observing the hours of his private cabinet devotions; and was so severe an exacter of gravity and reverence in all mention of religion, that he could never endure any light or profane word, with what sharpness of wit soever it was covered; and though he was well pleased and delighted with reading verses made upon any occasion, no man durst bring before him anything that was profane or unclean. He was so great an example of conjugal affection, that they who did not imitate him in that particular, durst not brag of their liberty; and he did not only permit but direct his bishops to prosecute those scandalous vices in the ecclesiastical courts against persons of eminence and near relation to his service.

His kingly virtues had some mixture and alloy that hindered them from shining in full lustre, and from producing those fruits they should have been attended with. He was not in his nature very bountiful, though he gave very much. This appeared more after the Duke of Buckingham's death, after which those showers fell very rarely; and he paused too long in giving, which made those to whom he gave less sensible of the benefit. He kept state to the full, which made his court very orderly, no man presuming to be seen in a place where he had no pretence to be. He saw and observed men long before he received them about his person; and did not love strangers, nor very confident men. He was a patient hearer of causes, which he frequently accustomed himself to at the council board, and judged very well, and was dexterous in the mediating part; so that he often put an end to causes by persuasion, which the stubbornness of men's humors made dilatory in courts of justice.

He was very fearless in his person; but in his riper years not very enterprising. He had an excellent understanding, but was not confident enough of it; which made him oftentimes change his own opinion for a worse, and follow the advice of men that did not judge so well as himself. This

made him more irresolute than the conjuncture of his affairs would admit. If he had been of a rougher and more imperious nature, he would have found more respect and duty. And his not applying some severe cures to approaching evils proceeded from the lenity of his nature and the tenderness of his conscience, which, in all cases of blood, made him choose the softer way, and not harken to severe councils, how reasonably soever urged. . . .

So many miraculous circumstances contributed to his ruin that men might well think that heaven and earth conspired it. Though he was, from the first declension of his power, so much betrayed by his own servants, that there were few who remained faithful to him, yet that treachery proceeded not always from any treasonable purpose to do him any harm, but from particular and personal animosities against other men; and afterwards the terror all men were under of the Parliament, and the guilt they were conscious of themselves, made them watch all opportunities to make themselves gracious to those who could do them good; and so they became spies upon their masters, and from one piece of knavery were hardened and confirmed to undertake another, till at last they had no hope of preservation but by the destruction of their master. And after all this, when a man might reasonably believe that less than a universal defection of three nations could not have reduced a great king to so ugly a fate, it is most certain that, in that very hour when he was thus wickedly murdered in the sight of the sun, he had as great a share in the hearts and affections of his subjects in general, was as much beloved, esteemed, and longed for by the people in general of the three nations, as any of his predecessors had ever been.

To conclude: He was the worthiest gentleman, the best master, the best friend, the best husband, the best father, and the best Christian that the age in which he lived produced. And if he were not the greatest king, if he were without some parts and qualities which have made some kings great and happy, no other prince was ever unhappy, who was possessed of half his virtues and endowments, and so much without any kind of vice.

THE LITERATURE OF QUEEN ANNE'S REIGN.

QUEEN ANNE, in the beginning of the eighteenth century,

gave her name to a literary period in English history, as Elizabeth had done in the sixteenth, and Victoria has done in the nineteenth. Yet Anne had little regard for literature or for authors. The great conflict of the previous century which had closed with the Revolution of 1688, gave way to the less important, yet hardly less bitter, struggle between Whigs and Tories, and between the Church and Dissent. Anne, though personally inclined to the Tories, long upheld the Whigs, to whom she owed her throne. Appeal was made to the people by both parties and in every possible way-by pamphlets, songs, ballads, satires and newspapers. London was the centre of this stirring strife, and there every writer was compelled to be an active participant. Men of the highest talent were thus politicians by necessity, and their works bear the stamp of their party. The great leaders enlisted for their respective sides the best poets and prose-writers, and rewarded them for their contributions of praise for their patrons or their fierce attacks on their enemies; personal satire flourished. The general result was the lowering of the ablest writers, who abused their gifts for paltry ends, and the starvation of the meaner scribblers, who have bequeathed the name of Grub Street, as indicative of their class.

Yet other effects can be seen which were of permanent

value in English literature. The fierce personal contest among the writers led to a close study of form and style. This study was assisted by the corresponding change which had taken place in France. The labors of Malherbe and Boileau and the French Academy were of indirect benefit to the English language. The prose of Swift and Steele and Addison owes much of its simplicity and clearness to the example of their French predecessors. Still another result, partly due to the French influence, can be observed. The varieties of city life and character came to be closely studied and depicted. Entertainment had formerly been sought by the representation of remote scenes and ideal life, whether of courts or shepherds or fairy land. Now attention was turned to the actual life of towns and to the variety of character developed under its influence. Something of this had been seen in the Elizabethan dramatists, still more in the dramatists of the Restoration, who followed the lead of Molière. Now the portrayal of characters, whether by way of satire and censure, or of genial and picturesque description, became prevalent in various forms of literature, but especially in the essay, whether prose or poetical.

Although essays, brief discussions of themes, more or less important, had already appeared in English literature, dignified by the names of Francis Bacon, Abraham Cowley and others, yet this form of writing was but an incidental part of their works. In the reign of Queen Anne arose a class who gave to the essay a prominence and importance which it has never since lost. Addison and Steele are generally regarded as deserving the most credit for this innovation, but practically it was a result of the rise of the newspaper into literary importance.

Newspapers began in England during the Parliamentary war, though there had been news-letters and pamphlets of foreign news before that exciting period. Among the earliest newspapers were official gazettes, while others were the results of private enterprise. The London Gazette, commenced in 1665, has appeared regularly twice a week since that time. Roger L'Estrange, otherwise noted in literary history, was appointed surveyor of the press" after the Restoration.

Newspapers increased in number and importance under the reign of Queen Anne. Then first did they become vehicles of genuine literature. Daniel Defoe, in his Weekly Review, commenced in 1704, occasionally discussed questions of literature and manners. Following this example, Sir Richard Steele, in 1709, started The Tatler, treating only of social topics suited for general conversation. It appeared thrice a week, until January, 1711, and was speedily succeeded by The Spectator, which was conducted as a daily by Steele and Addison, until December, 1712, when it was extinguished by a stamp-tax. In his contributions Addison exhibited that easy polished style which was long a standard and model for writers of English. These papers did much to raise and refine the tone of conversation in English society.

The great prose writers of the reign of Queen Anne were Addison, Steele, Swift and Defoe. While Addison is best known as a genial essayist, he was highly regarded by his contemporaries as a poet and dramatist. Steele was a social humorist, and paved the way for Addison's finer genius. Dean Swift, though a prominent churchman, was a fierce and truculent politician and savage satirist. Defoe, immortalized by his "Robinson Crusoe," was a busy pamphleteer, who wrote many fictions which passed as facts.

The great poet of the age of Queen Anne, Alexander Pope, began writing verse at the age of twelve, and published his "Essay on Criticism" when he was twenty-three. In a few years he gained fame and profit by his translation of Homer, which still remains the most popular English version, in spite of many defects. Pope's sharpest satire is the "Dunciad," in which he takes his revenge on the poetasters who had seriously annoyed him. During this part of his career Pope was associated with Swift, Gay, Parnell, Prior, and others, who formed the Scriblerus Club. To the influence of Lord Bolingbroke is due Pope's "Essay on Man" and his "Moral Essays." In most of his poetry he used the heroic couplet which he polished to the utmost perfection. For a long time he remained as supreme in poetic style as Addison was in prose.