$25 
circumftance of a /oug reign fimply, can 
be difcovered as poffeiiing, for the abate- 
ment of invective and adiration, I cer- 
tamly know not.—Belides, /f ong feaimes 
of “character, if good, may overpower 
petty. cenfures; if bad, may moderate 
xtravagant applaufe; but how jirong 
feaiures, in general, can effect this, 1s not 
evident. Undoubtedly, the exprefiion 
is altogether too lax and indifer ‘iminate. 
Inftead of © a uniform,” write “az 
uniform.” And, what an infipid con- 
clufion have we here-—‘“ a uniform 
judgment with regard to. her condué.”’ 
‘The pooreft fcribbler could not have 
clothed his fentimént in more beggarly 
expreffion. Nor is it true, Ll apprehend, 
what the judgmen: of writers, or aris. 
is uniform on this point. 
_ © Her vigour, her conftancy, her mag- 
nanimity, her penetration, vigilance, 
addrefs, are allowed to merit the higheft 
praifes, and appear not to have been fur- 
pafled by any perfon that ever filled a 
throne.”’ ae 
Confiancy, in this general fenfe, is well 
reprefented by the conf mtia of the Ro- 
mans ; but Englifhmen rather apply the 
word fpecifically to lve or friend/bip ; 
perfeverance,, frmnefs, ficady refolution, or 
fomething equi ivalent, would better have 
reprefented the writer's intention in 
this place. The left claufe, however, 
in this fentence, is tame and cold in the 
extreme; and ‘‘ appears to me not to 
have been furpafied by any perfon that 
ever’ received the applaufe of fine 
writing. 
“* A conduét lefs rigorous, lefs impe- 
rious, more fincere, more indulgent to 
her people, would have been req. uifite to 
form a perfect chara€ter.” 
“How would bave been ? At one time 
more than another? No, furely : it fhould 
be “* 7s reaguifite,”’ in addition to. her 
éxcellencies. . And, perneps, we fthall 
come. nearer propriety and truth, by 
aflerting an eatire frecdoni oy u 
feéts, rather 

of tnem, to be the Wak ‘the 
oe Sole of her ch 
“ By ee fo - = hp } iw On 
fi ECE-OF es nina, me Con 
trclled all her more aétive and fircnger 
naliti J at 59) AVAWPY ted they freon 
quant re ai pre Ente Them trom 
running into excels.” 
This ee to me a contrad ie on 1 to the 
fermer‘paragraph. If fhewere free from 
eacefs in her { ftronger qualities, ee fhould 
we with her to have been Jefe rigorous, 
lefs J imper sous, thar fhe was ? > T acknow- 
ledse ’myfelf puzzled here. The writer 
E : ; 
appears attuated by a ftrong defire to ex- 
Mr. Wakefield.on the Style of Hume. 
[ May, 
hibit a ftriking antithefis, without pof= 
fefiing clearnefs of conception, or dex- 
terity of language, fufficient for his pur- 
pofe: and it is this fuperficial glitter 
that dazzles the quick and _heedlefs 
reader, but will not impofe on judicious 
* critics, nor is difcoverable in the compo= 
fitions of a fuperior artift. There is an 
aukwardnefs tco in the phrafeolegy more 
active and frronger: better ** more flrong 
and aétive ;’’ or without more, but with 
the latter arrangement of the adjectives, 
for the fake of a more modulated cadence. 
Indeed the whole fentence is infipid, and 
betrays not a fingle ftroke of a mafter. 
“« Her heroifm was exempt from teme- 
rity, her frugality from avarice, her 
friendihip from partiality, her active 
temper from, turbulence, and a vain 
ambition.” 
This is not exceptionable 3 in point of 
compofition ; but of the four pofitions, 
the two laf are very difputable, and will 
be acceded to by few, I fhould think, who 
have ftudied the conduét of this queen. — 
“ She guarded not herfelf with equal 
care, or equal fuccefs, from leffer infirmi- 
ties 5 the rivalfhip ao beauty, the defire 
of admiration, the jealoufy of love, and 
the fallies of anger.” 
I find nothing here alfo particularly 
reprehenfible. The defire of admiration 
wants vigour, and rhe falhes of anger 
makes a moft unmufical conclufion. A 
well-tuned ear will perceive the fupe-. 
riority of a different arrangement—* the 
fallies of anger, and the jealo uly of love.” 
But, Mr. “Editor, I I am afraid of weary- 
ing you and your readers, though 1 
might have been more circumftantial in 
my exceptions, with an examination of 
what may appear to many, very flight 
and unimportant improprieties ; and 
will, therefore, referve the remainder of 
my examination for fome future Number, 
if this difquifition fall in with the pur- 
Lo of your Mifcellany. And, in the 
1€an time, if your readers, after feeing 
what Humezs, thould be inclined to view 
what he zs zor, but ozgbt to have been, to - 
deferve the commendations which are la- 
vithed upon him; let them turn-to John- 
fon’s prefate to oie Shak {peare, or his 
Lives of the poets, and their conviétion 
will be complete. They will pafs from. 
the contemplation of a puny bantling and 
his little ftruétures in the duft, tothe - 
achievements of a giané of mighty bone 
and bold emprife, piling Offa on Olympus, 
and Pelium on Offa, till he feales the fkies. 
GILBERT WAKEFIELD. 
Hackney, April 30, 1797+ 
