mere recapitulation of authenticated facts would be dry. A more enlarged plan would demand much acquaintance with the characters of the actors, and with the probable sources of measures. The present time is accustomed to details and anecdotes; and the age immediately preceding one's own is less known to any mau than the history of any other period. Your obliged and obedient HOR. WALPole. IV. ON IMPROVEMENTS OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE, &c. SINCE I received your book, sir, I scarce ceased from reading till I had finished it; so admirable I found it, and so full of good sense, brightly delivered. Nay, I am pleased with myself, too, for having formed the same opinion with you on several points, in which we do not agree with the generality of men. On some topics I confess as frankly I do not concur with you; considering how many you have touched, it would be wonderful if we agreed on all, for I should not be sincere if I said I did. There are others on which I have formed no opinion, for I should give myself an impertinent air with no truth, if I pretended to have any knowledge of many subjects, of which, young as you are, you seem to have made yourself master. Indeed, I have gone deeply into nothing, and therefore shall not discuss those heads on which we differ most, as probably I should not defend my opinions well. There is but one part of your work to which I will venture any objection, though you have considered it much, and I little-very little, indeed, with regard to your proposal, which to me is but two days old. I mean, your plan for the improvement of our language, which I allow has some defects, and which wants correction in several particulars. The specific amendment which you propose, and to which I object, is the addition of a's and i's to our terminations. To change s for a in the plural number of our substantives and adjectives, would be so violent an alteration, that I believe neither the power of Power, nor the power of Genius, would be able to effect it. In most cases, I am convinced that very strong innovations are more likely to make impression than small and almost imperceptible differences, as in religion, medicine, politics, &c.; but I do not think that language can be treated in the same manner, especially in a refined age. When a nation first emerges from barbarism, two or three masterly writers may operate wonders; and the fewer the number of writers, as the number is small at such a period, the more absolute is their authority. But when a country has been polishing itself for two or three centuries, and when, consequently, authors are innumerable, the most supereminent genius (or whoever is esteemed so, though without foundation) possesses very limited empire, and is far from meeting implicit obedience. Every petty writer will contest very novel institutions; every inch of change in any language will be disputed: and the language will remain as it was, longer than the tribunal, which should dictate very heterogeneous alterations. With regard to adding a or o to nasal consonants, consider, sir, should the usage be adopted, what havoc would it make? All our poetry would be defective in metre, or would become at once as obsolete as Chaucer; and could we promise ourselves that we should acquire better harmony, and more rhymes, we should have a new crop of poets to replace Milton, Dryden, Gray, and I am sorry you will not allow me to add, Pope! You might enjoin our prose to be reformed, as you have done by the Spectator in your *******, but try Dryden's Ode by your new institution. I beg your pardon for these trivial observations. I assure you I could write a letter ten times as long, if I were to specify all I like in your work. I more than like most of it; and I am charmed with your glorious love of liberty, and your other humane and noble sentiments. * * * * It is as great as uncommon, and gives me as good an opinion of your heart, sir, as your book does of your great sense. Both assure me that you will not take ill the liberty I have used in expressing my doubts on your plan for amending our language, or for any I may use in dissenting from a few other sentiments in your work; as I shall in what I think your too low opinion of some of the French writers; of your preferring Lady Mary Wortley to Madame Sevigné; and of your esteeming Mr. Hume a man of a deeper and more solid understanding than Mr. Gray. In the two last articles it is impossible to think more differently than we do. In Lady Mary's letters, which I never could read but once, I discovered no merit of any sort; yet I have seen others by her (unpublished) that have a good deal of wit: and for Mr. Hume, give me leave to say, that I think your opinion, that he might have ruled a state, ought to be qualified a little, as in the very next page you say-his History is a mere apology for prerogative, and a very weak one. If he could have ruled a state, one must presume at best that he would have been an able tyrant—and yet I should suspect that a man who, sitting coolly in his chamber, could forge but a weak apology for prerogative, would not have exercised it very wisely. I knew personally, and well, both Mr. Hume and Mr. Gray; and thought there was no degree of comparison between their understandings and, in fact, Mr. Hume's writings were so superior to his conversation, that I frequently said he understood nothing till he had written upon it. What you say, sir, of the discord in his history from his love of prerogative, and hatred of churchmen, flatters me much, as I have taken notice of that very unnatural discord in a piece I printed some years ago, but did not publish, and which I will show to you when I have the pleasure of seeing you here; a satisfaction I shall be glad to taste whenever you will let me know you are at leisure after the beginning of next week. I am, sir, with great respect and esteem, your obedient, humble servant, Strawberry-hill, June 22, 1785. HOR. WALPole. V. ON GRACE IN COMPOSITION. June 26, 1785. To your book, sir, I am much obliged on many accounts, particularly for having recalled my mind to subjects of delight, to which it was grown dulled by age and indolence. In consequence of your reclaiming it, I asked myself whence you feel so much disregard for certain authors whose fame is established. You have assigned good reasons for withholding your approbation from some, on the plea of their being imitators-it was natural then, to ask myself again, whence they had obtained so much celebrity? I think I have discovered a cause, which I do not remember to have seen noted; and that cause I suspect to have been, that certain of those authors possessed grace-do not take me for a disciple of lord Chesterfield, nor imagine that I mean to erect grace into a capital ingredient of writing-but I do believe that it is a perfume that will preserve from putrefaction; and is distinct even from style, which regards expression; grace I think belongs to munner. It is from the charm of grace that I believe some authors, not in your favour, obtained part of their renown. Virgil in particular and yet I am far from disagreeing with you on his subject in general. There is such a dearth of invention in the Æneid [and when he did invent, it was often so foolishly]; so little good |