6 3 
Dr. Barnes on Poetry. 
Different languages vary, exceeding widely, 
in their capability of modulation ; and, from this 
caufe, will vary as much, in the mode and cha¬ 
racter of their rhythm , or mufical compofition. 
Every good and rounded ftile, in profe, as well 
as in poetry, has a metre, or mufic, which the ear, 
when at all refined by claffical tafte, can imme¬ 
diately feel , and enjoy. There is, in finifhed com¬ 
pofition as much of melody and fweetnefs, in 
the arrangement of profaic fyllables, as in the 
moll poetical. The ear as nicely difcriminates 
the loft, the plaintive, the bold, the nervous, 
the elegant, by the flow of mufical expreffion , as 
in the mod exact and perfeft poem. From this 
circumftance alone, we are able, at once, to dif- 
tinguilh the ftile of Addison, and Sherlock, 
of Tillotson and Watts, and Young. We 
diftinguifh them, as eafily, as a connoifleur in 
mufic, who feels , at once, the compofitions of 
Handel, and thofe of Corellt. 
It is probable, the ears of the antient Romans 
and Grecians were more nicely tuned, to dif- 
ccrn the melody of arrangement, and of cadence, 
than ours. Or, probably, we have loft that 
“ tune,” or mode of pronunciation, in which 
their languages were fpoken •, for a modern ear 
cannot feel that richnefs and harmony of numbers, 
which appears to have been, to them, fo inex- 
preflibly delightful. “ Cicero tells us, that he 
was himfelf a witnefs of its influence, as Carbo 
< was 
