38"? 



tie has confined himself, (and he had his reasons 

 for so doing) solely to " variety in the direction 

 of the parts:"' he has indeed in his quotation from 

 my essay, given the words " melted as it zverc 

 into each other" though he has taken no notice 

 of them in his statement; but what is most sin- 

 gular, he has omitted, even in the quotation, the 

 Words " not angular but"— which immediately 

 precede them, and which so very particularly 

 point out and limit Mr. Burke's intention. It 

 may easily be seen how strong a first impression 

 may be made by an adversary, were he even a 

 feeble one, who quotes, indeed, some words, but 

 argues as if he had not quoted them ; who omits 

 others in his quotation, which form a most ma- 

 terial restriction ; and who totally disregards that, 

 and every restriction and limitation. 



That a round building is, generally speaking, 

 more free from angles than a square one, need 

 not be much insisted upon : and as the temple of 

 Tivoli is round, and as a great majority of the 

 ancient temples are square, it may certainly be 

 said, comparatively with other temples, to be 

 free from angles. This is all that from the whole 

 tenor of what had preceded, I could mean to 

 assert, when I said it was " in a great measure 

 free from angles." I ought indeed to have said, 

 as 1 meant, comparatively, and Mr. Knight 

 might very fairly have attacked the words as they 

 stand, had he at the same time fairly stated, what 

 he ©ould not but have known to he my meaning j 

 C c 2 



