Flas J 
ORIGINAL POETRY. 
EPIC FRAGMENTS —No. Il. 
A SEA VIEW. 
THE gloaming-time was near; and sweet 
_ it was, 
While at safe anchorage the vessel moor’d, 
At such delicious hour, to meditate 
The various sceue !—Here the bold beetling 
shore, 
With parting orient tipt, and there the sea 
In boundless continuity outspread, 
Wave beyond wave, to the horizon’s verge 
Reflecting the deep glow, till dim it fades 
To twilight’s sober grey. And sweet alike 
To see the moon, at first a sullen orb 
Of fire, arise, and, lessening as it rose, 
Purge off the sanguine blot, till silvery 
bright, 
Or liker ocean pearl, o’er the glad vault 
Of heaven serene, and o’er the restless 
waves 
It shed effulgence mild. The seamew’s clang 
Was heard no more, and all beside was still; 
Save the low murmurs of the ebbing tide 
That rippled down the beach: the only 
voice , 
Which told that nature slept not, nor forwent 
Her self-sustaining energies,—though all 
Her sentient tribes in opiate dews were 
steep’d, 
And to oblivion gave the tranquil scene. 
ays 
SONNET. 
Sort bud of passion trembling onthe spray, 
I see thy leaves expanding: fearfully 
They meet the breeze—and I would have 
them fear ; 
For there is danger in the doubtful ray 
‘That may but wake to blight. The vernal sky 
Not always, when its blushing hues appear 
Bright in their dawn, foretells a joyous day; 
And the young germs that premature display 
Their virgin sweets, may, ere the noontide 
hour, 
Be nipt, or wither in the sleety shower. 
Beware! beware, my bud! nor trust too free 
Thy blossoms to the gale: for should the 
blight ; 
Of disappointment mar thy bloom, ’twill 
light d 
Not on thy sweets alone, but scath the pa- 
rent tree. : bei be 
INGRATITUDE:— 
A SONNET. 
O uuman kindness! there is not a thorn 
Which rankles thy pure soul with pangs so 
deep, 
So fills its gen’rous source with grief forlorn, 
As when Ingratitude doth vilely heap 
Insults upon thy goodness, Ab me! then 
The stoic’s firmness thou putt’st on in vain ; 
For tho’ some wrongs, receiy’d from com- 
mon men, 
May fill thy mild, just bosom with disdain, 
Yet to find haseness lodg’d, where thou 
didst deem 
Love’s mirror was reflected. oh { to see 
Thyself, and all thy gentlest, fond esteem, 
Become the dupe of dire-soul’d villainy,— 
"Tis a foul sight! —’tis hideous, as the 
gleam 
Which fiery Etna sheds in Nature’s agony ! 
Hawley Cottage, Kent. Enorr. 
SONNET, 
ADDRESSED TO A VENAL’ CALUMNIATOR OF 
LORD BYRON. 
—— ‘‘ Every good to bad he doth abuse ; 
And eke the verse of famous poet’s wit, 
He does backbite, and spiteful poyson spues 
From leprous mouth, on all that ever writ; 
Such, O vile Envy was, that first in rowe did sit.” 
Spencer's Fairy Queen. 
Poetic Esau,* sordid slave to gold,! 
Thou who didst once prate loud of tyranny, 
Yet for a mess of courtly pottage sold 
The birthright of divinest Liberty ! 
Poetic Esau, like mean Judas base, 
Whose heart was Mammon’s trap, insidiously 
Thou didst kiss Freedom on her sun-bright 
face, 
Swearing thy bosom-love’s true fealty ! 
Poetic Esau! loud thy name shall ring : 
For England holds no treacherous foe like 
thee ! 
Thou, who with hollow heart and voice canst 
sing, 
“ God bless free-men !”’ aye, ‘* God bless 
slavery !” 
Away, thou poor, mean-hearted, worthless 
thing ! 
Away, thou treacherous son of vile apostacy ! 
Hawley Cottage, Kent. Enorrt. 
THE DECEIVED MERMAN: 
( Fxom the Danish. ) 
Farr Agnes left her mother’s door ; 
She met a merman upon the shore. 
«© And, love,will thou go with me,” he cried, 
‘“‘ To yonder ocean, and be my bride?” 
‘¢ And if I do, thou man of the sea, 
Shall I the richer or better be ?” 
** O yes, I’ll give thee, my winsome gil, 
Much gold, and many a costly pearl.” 
He stopp’d her mouth, and he stopp’d ler 
eyes 
And into the ocean he took his prize. 
The 
* «© And Esau sold his birthright for a mess of 
pottage.”—Genesis. Esau’s birthright was that of 
Jand, and flocks, and patriarchial dominion. Can 
the bard inspired so sell his birth-right of immor- 
tality 2 No; he never was more than half inspired, 
and that by vanity, rather than the muse, who could 
drive such a bargain. 
+ Contrast “ Joan of Arc” with ‘* Wat Tyler,” 
and ‘* Botany Bay Eclogues” with ‘* Vision of 
Judgment,” &c., and determine, if you can, the 
problem, whether the change be more conspicu- 
ous in intellect or in principle ? 
