*XCbe 2)rui5' 323 



Lawley, too, when he says " The Druid " understood so 

 well all the surroundings and accessories of the scenes 

 and characters he described as to forget that his readers 

 were seldom as well informed as himself Thus, he 

 speaks of *' Sir Wolly " as dashing the knob of his 

 walking-stick through a pier-glass at Doncaster, after 

 the victory of some horse in which he took great 

 pride, without remembering that few readers of a sub- 

 sequent generation would know that " Sir Wolly " was 

 Sir David Baird's nickname.' But, though the general 

 charge of obscurity in allusion is well founded, Mr Lawley 

 is singularly unhappy in the illustration he gives. ' Sir 

 Wollie,' or ' Wullie,' was not Sir David Baird, but Sir 

 William Maxwell of Monreith, the eccentric baronet 

 who was Lord Glasgow's sporting mentor, and who, 

 though one-armed, was one of the best shots and horse- 

 men of his day. ' The victory of some horse in which 

 he took great pride ' was the triumph of his ow?i colt, 

 Filho da Puta in the St Leger of 1815 : and, seeing that 

 ' The Druid ' alludes to him as ' one-armed ' and speaks 

 of ' his proud St Leger Eve ' in the very passage in 

 question, it is surprising that a writer like Mr Lawley, 

 usually so accurate and well informed, should have 

 made such a curious blunder. One can only say with 

 Horace, ' Aliquando bonus dormitat Homerus.' But 

 it is rather hard upon ' The Druid ' that a passage in which 

 the allusion is not obscure should be quoted as an 

 instance of obscurity. 



It has been objected to ' The Druid's ' books that they 

 are too discursive and disconnected, too full of vague 

 allusion to men and things forgotten, to have any 

 permanertt value or interest. But, granting that the 

 want of method and sequence is a grave defect, there 



