178 Literary and Philosophical Society. 



Dr. Ferriar complains of the neglect of the poet, and there 

 certainly was no critical edition of his works till 1805, 

 twenty-one years after this essay was written. 



We are inclined to look on the literary criticism as 

 good in the Society's memoirs. Criticism had a rich field ; 

 it did not require to enter into minute details to excite in- 

 terest, and it attempted less than some have done since to 

 adorn the poets by improvements, gilding refined gold and 

 making a Shakspeare that would be new to the author. 



Dr. Ferriar's comments on Stern-e are very searching 

 (see 4th vol. p. 84), and they show a great amount of 

 varied and remarkably careful reading. He traces the 

 ideas of Sterne as well as his language to various authors, 

 but still defends his use of thoughts taken from others. He 

 says, speaking of his own remarks, * They leave Sterne in 

 possession of every praise but that of curious erudition, to 

 which he had no pretence, and of unparalleled originality, 

 which ignorance only can ascribe to any polished writer ' 

 (the meaning of this may be asked or questioned). ' It 

 would be enjoining an impossible task to exact much 

 knowledge on subjects frequently treated, and yet to pro- 

 hibit the use of thoughts or expressions rendered familiar 

 by study, merely because they had been occupied by 

 former authors. There is a kind of imitation which the 

 ancients encouraged, and which even our Gothic criticism 

 admits when acknowledged.' He says, ' The talents for so 

 delicate an office as that of literary censor are too great 

 and numerous to be often assembled in one person. Rabe- 

 lais wanted decency, Sterne learning, and Voltaire fidelity. 

 Lucian alone supported the character properly, in those 

 pieces which appear to be justly ascribed to him.' 



We cannot agree to this position given to Lucian, but 



