490 
The Enquirer «- 
same objects, for the most part, in their 
undertakings. In the didactic, the 
mock heroic, and the satiric, where they 
are unrivalled masters, and discover a 
more particular resemblance, we per¬ 
ceive the same study of correct lan¬ 
guage and expression—the same forcible 
yet harmonious lines—judicious and 
very melodious pauses ; and a watchful 
jealousy of admitting any unequal or 
trivial word or expression which might 
derogate from the beauty and correct¬ 
ness of the whole. 
Though it may at first view hear the 
appearance of contradiction or a para¬ 
dox, it is nevertheless true, that this 
nice care and exact attention to the 
nugee canons , has not in the least im¬ 
paired their strength, or interfered with 
the higher objects of their art. We 
find the same, and indeed often more 
fire and impetuosity in their writings 
than in those of more careless and irre¬ 
gular poets, like the founders of theLake 
School, who give full swing to their 
imaginations, and present their loose 
and disjointed productions — a sort 
of rieketty offspring—naked to the 
world. 
When we consider that Pope and 
Boilean invariably sat down to compose 
in the full reach and vigour of their 
intellect, and with little art. or study 
gave full play to their imaginations ; 
bestowing afterwards a u world of 
poet’s pains,*'’ on what they had written, 
we shall more easily account for that fire 
and polish which they so happily united 
in their works. In this respect they 
are perhaps equally excellent, though 
Pope has certainly had the advantage of 
his predecessor’s example, and made 
that use of him, which both of them 
made of Horace, in improving on, and 
infusing the beauties of older writers, 
with singular refinement, into their own 
works. Thus, however highly they 
were indebted to nature for their ge¬ 
nius and uncommon parts, they were 
still more admirable for the talent and 
fine judgment with which they em¬ 
ployed their poetic powers to the great¬ 
est advantage and on the happiest 
subjects. Of all points of resemblance 
between these unrivalled geniuses of 
the age and nations in which they 
flourished, this is the most remark¬ 
able. They invaded the property of 
other writers more like conquerors 
than robbers, and with a Midas-like 
faculty, converted at a touch, the dross 
and ore of other mens’ thoughts into 
solid gold. 
-No. XXXII: [Jan. I, 
They were indebted for their early 
fame and good fortune, to the very 
same qualities of mind, sound sense, 
emulous and unremitting study, and a 
rooted love of their art. The same 
dispositions that attracted the regard 
and friendship of Augustus tfnd Mecoe- 
nas to Virgil and Horace, gave celebrity 
to the names of Pope and Boileau at 
the French and English courts. Their 
superiors in rank became their equals 
in conversation and good fellowship, 
and their company was rather sought 
bv,than obtruded upon, the princes and 
nobles of the land. The reputation of 
both stood as high in foreign countries 
as in their own. Most of their produc¬ 
tions were translated during their life¬ 
time info other tongues: though in 
point of good version our author has 
greatly the advantage, in his transla¬ 
tors, over Boileau. The same triumphs 
that crowned them with laurels and 
acclamation, brought down upon their 
heads a shower of hisses and orange 
peel from the great’gallery of dunces 
and of critics. They seem indeed to 
have been equally reviled and bated by 
the minor wits and poets of their re¬ 
spective periods : and a species of della 
crusca , or academical war, neither giv¬ 
ing or taking quarter, was eagerly 
declared, and fiercely maintained 
against them in both countries. But 
the only advantage obtained over our 
authors consisted in their enemies suc¬ 
ceeding in having their names trans¬ 
mitted to posterity, and in place of 
becoming annihilate , being damned to 
everlasting fame. It is singular that 
both lived to befriend, and to be recon¬ 
ciled to, the very critics and poet¬ 
asters who had 1 thus unwittingly served 
to extend our authors’ fame, as the 
hones of the savage are carefully pre¬ 
served for a testimonial of the prowess 
of his victors. 
We have now to remark, in honour 
of our English bard, that of the two, 
he was always the least attendant upon 
the great, and not nearly so good a 
writer of flattering odes and panegy¬ 
rics on princes and on men in power. 
He enjoyed no pension and received no 
bounty from the charity ol patrons 
or of friends. His commendatory verses 
never appeared until his great friends 
were known to be unfortunate or out 
of power; as his satire was only di¬ 
rected at those whom lie supposed to 
be the successful enemies of truth and 
virtue while in oifice. The French 
poet we are afraid was not always so 
crnscienlious 
