C 106 3 



tern of improvement, and your illuftration 

 of its excellence, I will next confider your 

 defence of the detail of his practice. If, 

 as you fay, no man of tafte can hefitate 

 between the natural group of trees com- 

 pofed of various growths, and a formal 

 patch of firs (and, I will venture to add, of 

 any other trees) which, as you well ob- 

 ferve, "too often disfigure a lawn under 

 " the name of a clump" — why not ftrive 

 to imitate thofe natural groups, by attend- 

 ing to the principle on which they pleafe ? 

 The ftrong argument againft Mr. Brown, 

 and that which I Hated in my Eflay,* is, 

 that in the courfe of a long pra6tice, and 

 therefore with many opportunities of fee- 

 ing their effects, he never made a clump 

 like a natural group, though he did make 

 many natural groups like clumps; I there- 

 fore may fairly conclude that he preferred 



<* Effay on the Pi&urefque, page 359. 



the 



