LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. 135 



and unsound, and which he, perhaps, might have modified on future 

 consideration, this is no reason for depreciating his observations on 

 natural history, where he was entitled to speak with the authority 

 of a master. If some of his later productions are thin in substance, 

 and poor in style, their inferiority cannot detract from the wealth of 

 matter, and charm of manner, which adorn his delightful " Wander- 

 ings " and " Essays." A writer's powers must be tested by the works 

 in which he puts forth his strength. We estimate the genius of 

 Shakespeare by "Macbeth" and the " Midsummer Night's Dream," 

 and not by " Titus Andronicus " and " Troilus and Cressida." 



When I pass from his intellectual qualities to his moral, it is still 

 more difficult to do Waterton justice without seeming to be in- 

 fluenced by personal prepossessions. His courage was unbounded ; 

 he feared neither physical danger nor obloquy. No abuse ever kept 

 him from saying what he believed to be true, or from doing what he 

 thought to be right. The pertinacious homage he paid to conscience 

 might, to people who knew him imperfectly, wear the aspect ol 

 opinionativeness and pride, whereas his humility was perhaps his 

 most signal virtue. His masculine courage was blended with a 

 feminine tenderness, and he could not bear to see either man or 

 beast suffer. Destitution always touched his compassion. He cai- 

 ried an old knife in his pocket, which he gave to the shoeless poor 

 whom he chanced to meet in his walks, and they took it to a shoe- 

 maker in Wakefield, who had directions to furnish the bearer of the 

 token with a pair of shoes. On one occasion, when Waterton had 

 not the token with him, he made over his own shoes and stockings 

 to a wayfarer with bleeding feet, and walked home bare-foot. His 

 anxiety that the poorer classes should participate in the enjoyments 

 of his park was a proof of his sympathy with them. His wide-spread 

 charity was unostentatious. He never put his name to a subscrip- 

 tion-list, though he often gave, and he silently allowed himself to be 

 abused for not contributing to a fund to which he was one of the 

 largest donors. He shrunk from the tribute of public testimonials 

 to his fame and philanthropy, and when a service of plate was about 

 to be presented to him at Nottingham, for his exertions in a case of 

 hydrophobia, he left the town the moment he heard of the project, 

 and wrote to request that the money might be given to the sufferer's 



