appeared, he was permanently joined by Addison, and the essay began to assume the definite form which it retained for a century, namely,—that of a short paper, generally on one subject, and headed with a Greek or Latin motto. Then, in January 1711, the Tatler' came to an end. Its place was filled, in the following March, by the more famous 'Spectator,' which ran its career until December, 1712. After this, in 1713, came the 'Guardian;' and in 1714 an eighth volume of the 'Spectator' was issued by Addison alone. He was also the sole author of the Freeholder,' 1715, which contains the admirable sketch of the Tory 'Foxhunter.' Steele, on his side, followed up the 'Guardian' by the 'Lover,' the 'Reader,' and half-adozen abortive efforts; but his real successes, as well as those of Addison, were in the three great collections for which they worked together. Any comparison of these two masters of the Eighteenth-Century Essay is as futile as it will probably be perpetual. While people continue to pit Fielding against Smollett, and Thackeray against Dickens, there will always be a party for Addison and a party for Steele. The adherents of the former will draw conviction from Lord Macaulay's famous defiance in the Edinburgh' à-propos of Aikin's 'Life;' those of of the latter from that vigorous counterblast which (after ten years' meditation) Mr. Forster sounded in the 'Quarterly.' But the real lovers of literature will be content to enjoy the delightfully distinctive characteristics of both. For them Steele's frank and genial humour, his chivalrous attitude to women, and the engaging warmth and generosity of his nature, will retain their attraction, in spite of his literary inequalities and structural negligence; while the occasional coldness and restraint of Addison's manner will not prevent those who study his work from admiring his unfailing good taste, the archness of his wit, his charming subhumorous gravity, and the perfect keeping of his character-painting. It is needless to particularise the examples here selected from these writers, for they are all masterpieces. About four-fifths of the Tatler,' 'Spectator,' and 'Guardian' was written by Addison and Steele alone. The work of their coadjutors was consequently limited in extent, and, as a rule, unimportant. Budgell, Addison's cousin, whose memory survives chiefly by his tragic end, and a malignant couplet of Pope, was one of the most regular. Once, working on Addison's lines, and aided, it may be, by Addison's refining pen, he made a respectable addition addition to the Coverley' series, which is here reprinted; but we have not cared to preserve any further examples of his style. From Hughes, again, another frequent writer, and an amiable man, whose contributions were for the most part in the form of letters, nothing has been taken. Next, by the amount of his assistance, comes the Bishop of Cloyne and the author of Tar-water-the great and good Dr. Berkeley. Excellent as they are, however, his papers in the 'Guardian' against Collins and the Free-thinkers do not come within our scheme. Among the remaining' occasionals' were several ' eminent hands.' These, however, though they graced the board, did not add materially to the feast. Pope, who has a couple of papers in the 'Spectator' and eight in the 'Guar'dian,' is not at his best as an essayist. His satire on 'Dedications," ,'* and his side-laugh at Bossu in theReceipt to make an Epick Poem,'† are the happiest of his efforts. His well-known ironic parallel between the pastorals of Ambrose Philips and his own is admirably ingenious; but, unfortunately, we have come to think the one as artificial as the other. The City Shower'§ of Swift scarcely ranks as an *'Guardian,' No. 4. 'Guardian,' No. 78. §'Tatler,' No. 238. essay essay at all, and his only remaining paper of importance is a letter on Slang.'* This, like Pope's pieces, is too exclusively literary for our purpose. Of Congreve, Gay, Tickell, Parnell, and the long list of obscurer writers, there is nothing that seems to merit the honours of revival. Between the Guardian' of 1713 and the 'Ram'bler' of 1750-2, there were a number of periodical essayists of varying merit. It is scarcely necessary to recall the names of these now forgotten 'Intelli'gencers,' 'Moderators,' Remembrancers,' and the like, the bulk of which were political. Fielding places one of them, the Freethinker' of Philips, nearly on a level with those great originals, the "Tatlers" and " Spectators;" but the initial chapters to the different books of Tom Jones' attract us more forcibly to the author's own 'Cham'pion,' written in conjunction with the Ralph who 'makes Night hideous' in the 'Dunciad.' Those utterances, however, which can with any certainty be attributed to Fielding, bear such obvious signs of haste that it is scarcely fair to oppose any of them to the more finished and leisurely efforts of Addison. Another of Fielding's enterprises in the 'Spectator' * Tatler,' No. 230. vein was the Covent Garden Journal,' 1752. This, besides a remarkable paper on the 'Choice of Books,' contains a masterly essay on 'Profanity,'* including a character sketch of the most vigorous kind; but the very fidelity of the picture unfits it for a modern audience. Concurrently with the Covent Garden Journal' appeared the final volume of Johnson's Rambler,' a work upon the cardinal defect of which its author laid his finger when, in later life, he declared it to be 'too wordy.' Coming from the Arch-Priest of magniloquence, this is no light admission. He seems also to have been fully alive to its want of variety, and frequently regretted that his labours had not been occasionally relieved by some lighter pen, in which connection (according to Arthur Murphy) he was accustomed to quote sonorously his own fine lines to Cave: 'Non ulla Musis pagina gratior, 'Quam quæ severis ludicra jungere 'Utilibus recreare mentem.' Lady Mary said in her smart way that the 'Rambler' followed the Spectator' as a packhorse would do a *Covent Garden Journal,' Nos. 10 and 33. 'hunter;' |
