[ 62 ] 



government or of liberty, to whom could reference be fo fafely 

 or naturally made as to thofe who were fuppofed to have known 

 beft the theory of the one and the pradice of the other ? In fdd, 

 claffical learning was perhaps never more cultivated in England 

 than for fome time previous to the revolution, and in fuch cir- 

 cumftances it was impoffible that ftyle fhould not have improved 

 in its moft effential qualities. 



It has been already obferved that the ftylc of Dryden was in 

 almoft every point of view much fuperior to that of the writers of 

 his day. So far then as he exhibited to the public better models 

 of profe compofition, fo far muft he have contributed to improve 

 the ftyle of that and the fucceeding period. But exclufive of this 

 excellence in his writings, the nature of the fubjeds of which he 

 treated in many of his profe works contributed ftill more to im- 

 prove the talte of his countrymen in compofition. Many of his 

 prefaces are profeffedly critical differtations on various kinds of 

 writing, and in thefe he communicated to the public, even to 

 thofe of them who were not the learned, fuch true principles of 

 tafte, and found rules of judgment, as muft necefTarily have acce- 

 lerated their approach to that accuracy and elegance which Englifh 

 profe fo fhortly afterward began to difplay. 



There was a ftill more immediate caufe of improvement in the 

 ftyle both of his Profe and Poetry. The polilh and refinement of the 

 court of Charles II. of which the diffolutenefs was the grave of the 

 morality of the nation, was perhaps the parent of much of that ele- 

 gance which charaderized Addifon, and thofe authors who cultivated 



our 



