1827.] Trade and Profession. 3,>1 



Do not some of them also review any thing and every thing at five minutes' 

 notice from an editor; and scatter firebrands, and disseminate scandal, for 

 the purposes of faction, with the true fetch-and-carry docility of a French 

 poodle ? I can hardly help exclaiming, with Jack Eustace, " 'Sdcath ! 

 why should I carry on this absurd trade any longer ? Trade and profes- 

 sion profession and trade it is all one; and, to use a coarse but an 

 appropriate adage, ' the devil a barrel the better herring.' " What are the 

 hanging committees of painters but arrant tradesmen ? What are managers 

 and actors but tradesmen ? What are jobbing dealers in army commissions 

 but tradesmen? What licensing justices of the peace ? what public com- 

 missioners ? what joint-stock directors and committee-men? To sell and 

 to be sold, are in reality the great objects of the great mass of mankind, 

 arid he who makes the best bargain is the best man : fashion and success 

 making the whole difference between knavery and gentility! "Money, 

 wife!" says Peachum "money is the true fuller's-earth : there is not a 

 spot or stain but what it will take out. A rich rogue nowadays is fit 

 company for any gentleman." I beg the reader's pardon for quoting 

 from so immodest a play; for I well know that the Beggar s Opera is, in 

 these days of refinement, voted a scandalous, libellous, and indecent pro- 

 duction : but 1 cannot forget that- our fathers relished it; and the manner, 

 in the present instance, is " germane to the matter." If trade, then, be the 

 most expeditious mode of qualifying for good company, I do not see why 

 it should derogate from gentility,* or why retailing behind a counter should 

 not be deemed a liberal art, arid the professions be thought mean and sordid. 

 If money be a god, let its high priests be esteemed accordingly, and "let 

 the devil be honoured for his burning throne ;" or, since tradesmen are so 

 much of the gentlemen, and gentlemen so like tradesmen, why might they 

 not at least pass on cheek-by -jowl, and, like the other unclean beasts, enter 

 the ark of society in couples ? These are questions whi^h I beg to offer 

 for the patient consideration of my readers ; and having thus furnished 

 them with de quoi penser " the limited office of an essayist" 1 shall 

 for the present take my leave. 



