CANADIAN NOMS-DE-PLUME IDENS^IFIED. 261 



Tn very recent times, several literary ladies have veiled their sex 

 under such noms-de-plume as George Sand, George Eliot, Currer 

 Bell, Acton Bell, Ellis Bell; and by the adoption of this course, 

 they have created for themselves an entity, so to speak, independent 

 of their proper persons ; a thing which has happened in similar 

 manner to some male authors also. When we hear or read of Sholto 

 and Reuben Percy, of Thomas Ingoldsby, of Father Prout, of Arthur 

 Sketchley, of Barry Cornwall, who is not inclined to think of each 

 of them as substantial, real personages'? We hear sometimes of 

 persons carving out a name for themselves ; here the process is re- 

 versed — names carve out and create for themselves persons. 



In the United States they have closely followed the literary prac- 

 tices and caprices of the mother country. Some years before the 

 Revolution, Eranklin was widely known as Richard Saunders, the 

 "Poor Richard" of the Almanac from 1732 downwards. In later 

 times, Dietrick Knickerbocker, historian of New Amsterdam, i.e., 

 New York, became a qu.asi-actuality, whilst the second assumed name 

 of the same author, Geoffry Crayon, became a familiar expression 

 throughout England as well as the United States, and was regarded by 

 many as almost a real cognomen. In late years, Mr. Hosea Biglow 

 has nearly equalled Geoffry Crayon in extent and degree of reputa- 

 tion. Numerous other appellations of this class have likewise 

 become household words, throughout the United States at least ; for 

 example, Ik. Marvel (Donald Mitchell), Jack Downing (Seba Smith), 

 Gail Hamilton (a lady, Miss Dodge), Mark Twain (T. L. Clemens), 

 Petroleum J. Nashby (D. R. Locke), &c. The supposed United 

 States characteristic practice of citing only the initial of an inter- 

 mediate Christian name, as here, has given rise to the not very 

 elegant nom-de-plume of Orpheus C. Kerr (R. H. Newell), intended 

 to be a bit of satire on carpet-baggers and other lumgry parasites of 

 the several governments and municipalities. 



Now, our Canadian literature has something to shew analogous to 

 these developments in the literatures of older communities. Our 

 Canadian literature, indeed, in what may be called its more infantile 

 stage, has consisted, in great measure, of productions to which, for 

 reasons arising out of the times, were aifixed fictitious signatures. 

 And I have thought that it might be a matter of some interest, and 

 even of some utility, to collect the more important of these feigned 

 names, giving at the same time samples of the writings to which they 



