26 ROYAL SOCIETY OF CANADA 
Nathaniel Hawthorne, who warmly recommended it to his notice. 
Praise from such a conservative and cautious English periodical as the 
North British Review, of a Colonial production, was no common thing 
in those days, and the author at once came in for a good deal of belated 
and second-hand appreciation in Canada. Lighthall tells us that it 
even became the fashion among tourists at Montreal to buy a copy of 
Saul—presumably as a souvenir of the place. What is more important, 
however, as an outcome of this review, Heavysege wisely availed himself 
of certain helpful suggestions made by the writer thereof, and subjected 
the drama to a searching revision, cutting out a number of passages 
which were not essential to, and in fact rather militated against, its 
unity and simplicity.* 
Longfellow had come upon a copy of the first edition, and was 
much impressed with its genuine dramatic power and insight. He 
said of Heavysege (somewhat extravagantly perhaps) that he was “the 
greatest dramatist since Shakespeare.” This opinion is interesting, 
coming from such a source, but not exactly convincing. Longfellow was 
more inspiring and reliable as poet than as critic. His estimates of the 
work of his contemporaries were not always sound. He preferred rather 
to over-praise than to risk giving pain by a strict adherence to critical 
standards. 
Bayard Taylor also praised Heavysege’s work,? in the Atlantic 
Monthly. He had already met him in Montreal. Saul was noticed, as 
well, and on the whole very favourably, in a good many of the best 
‘ critical journals of the day, English and American.* Richard Grant 
White, an American man-of-letters, wrote an appreciative notice in the 
Galaxy, May, 1869. Charles Sangster, one of Heavysege’s Canadian 
contemporaries, had an interesting review in Stewart’s Quarterly,* the 
same year. Both these latter reviews had reference to the third and 

* “In Saul we found a certain power of expression and wealth of imagery 
spoiled by defective versification, by anachronisms, and prolixity.’’—George 
Murray. 
* “ Much of it might have been written by a contemporary of Shakes- 
peare. . . . . Never was so much genuine power so long silent.”—Bayard 
Taylor. 
ÿ The first recognition of Heavysege in the United States was contained 
in a paper by Charles Lanman, which appeared in the New York Evening Post, 
in 1860. Five years afterwards Mr. Lanman wrote a much fuller notice, in 
the Round Table, in reply to Bayard Taylor’s article in the Atlantic. Mr. 
Lanman thought that, while the tone of Mr. Taylor’s criticism was kind, 
manly and appreciative, in regard to matters of fact connected with Heavy- 
sege’s personal history it contained a few errors, which he thought proper 
to correct. 
* Stewart's Literary Quarterly, St. John, N.B., Vol. IIL., p. 88. 
