[ 50 J 



Dramatic works, by the ftrength with which they put forward 

 a variety of charadlers, ufually keep that of their author un- 

 perceived. Thofe writings in which the author gives his detail 

 in perfon, and particularly oratory and lyric poetry, where he 

 fpeaks from the fulnefs and force of his own mind, muft bear 

 the flrongeft marks of his peculiar habits of thinking. 



One author, it is true, often imitates another, and thus 

 prefents the peculiarities of another's mind inflead of his own. 

 When the imitations are general, when authors of one defcrip- 

 tion imitate avithors of another, in the fame fenfe in which 

 the moderns are generally faid to imitate the antients, a falfe 

 colouring is vmdoubtedly laid on which difguifes the truth, 

 and traditional fentiments are conveyed, which not being the 

 genuine offspring of the author's mind bear little imprefTion 

 of its peculiarities. The works of authors however cannot be 

 wholly made up of fuch ficSticious materials, and even among thefe 

 it may be obferved that the feletflion of feme particular authors 

 from among the w'hole clafs, the preference given to fome 

 parts of their works above others, may give information 

 as to the individual mind of the writer who borrows from 

 them. When the imitation is particularly confined to one 

 fiivourlte author, fome degree of fimllarity in turn of thought 

 or difpofition may in all cafes be concluded on. If this lias 

 not led to the imitation it Vv?i!l naturallv follow it. The fame 

 habits of thinking, the fame modes of confidering a fubjeift, 

 will be infenfibly contracted. The tafte will be formed on the 

 favourite model, and opinions delivered in a flyle of which we 



comniend 



