6s 
Dr. Barnes on Poetry. 
artificial and elaborate ; fomething,which demanded 
more effort and ingenuity to form, than merely 
arofe from the effufions of a glowing heart ? 
<c Is not, then, the proper and peculiar charac- 
terifticof poetry, that metre or rhythm, which 
the ear fo eafily diftinguifhes, and with which it 
is fo unfpeakably delighted ? Is not this th t great 
diJUnlilion between the modulation of poetry and 
profe ; that the one, is regular, determined by 
certain laws, and returning upon the ear at ftated 
periods ; whilft the other, has no ftandard but the 
generalJenfe of harmony, and is infinitely irregular 
and various? The imagery or fentiment is a 
mere circumjlance, which does not conjlitute , how¬ 
ever it may adorn, poetic compofition. We can 
fuppofe nonfenfe in profe. Can we not equally 
fuppofe nonfenfe in poetry ? And yet, fhall there 
not be an effential difference, between poetic and 
profaic jargon ? If fo, fomething elfe, befides 
the fentiment or fenfe, is the boundary between 
them. And what is this, but that metre or 
melody, without which, the language which 
conveys the loftieft fentiments may be indeed 
poetical, but can never be, poetry itself.” 
I fhall not pretend to decide, abfolutely, upon 
the ftrength or weaknefs of the foregoing argu¬ 
ments. I fhall be happy to hear them fully 
difcuffed 
