To return to the earliest writers of dedications in English (we have forsaken regularity of method in the present paper, but shall endeavor to regain it); Bacon's dedication of the Advancement, to the King, is a piece of keen satire and magnificent eulogium united, forming a composition of wonderful ingenuity and eloquence. Dryden's dedications are equally splendid and fulsome. We cannot help admiring his rich musical style, and copious matter (a Field of Cloth of Gold), but at the same time we lose all confidence in the sincerity of a man who could address the most insipid peer of the realm in the same glowing colours with which he would depict the features of the prince of poets. His critical prefaces are even finer yet, and may be justly styled æsthetical treatises. Mere prefaces in a confined sense Dryden did not write, but rather rich, copious, critical essays. On his own premises, and with his artificial education, Dryden reasoned vigorously, and illustrated his views with beauty, and even splendor of ornament. He has left on record the finest portraits of the Elizabethan dramatists, Shakspeare, Jonson, Beaumont, and Fletcher. But Dryden is not without defects. He is tediously minute in criticising his own dramatic pieces, and displays too much of erudition on points of comparatively trifling impor

tance.

Steele's dedication to the Lover we have extracted. The dedications of the volumes of the Tattler are hardly less finc. They are much shorter, and less personal, but graceful and natural. In the dedication of the first volume, to Mr. Maynwaring, he thus admirably sets forth (what should have been placed in a preface, for it relates to the work itself, and not to its patron) the sum of his endeavors, and which might be assumed with the greatest propriety by every work of the kind: "The general purpose of this paper is to expose the false arts

of life, to pull off the disguises of cunning, vanity and affectation, and to recommend a general simplicity in our dress, our discourse and our behavior." In the dedication to the second volume, to Mr. Edward Wortley Montague, he thus delicately compliments his benevolent generosity:-"I know not how to say a more affectionate thing to you, than to wish that you may be always what you are; and that you may ever think, as I know you now do, that you have a much larger fortune than you want." The third volume opens with a perfect specimen of amenity and courteous eloquence. It is addressed to Lord Cowper, in Steele's proper person, and includes a brilliant portrait of the great statesman and forensic orator. The concluding volume of the series is presented to Lord Halifax, the Mecenas of the day, to whom every author of eminence offered the first fruits of his genius, and dedicated the choisest productions of his maturer taste. He was the nobleman, ambitious of literary fame, who was "Fed with soft dedications all day long," by Addison, Steele, Pope, Swift (who afterwards changed his tune upon being neglected by him), &c.

Addison's dedications have not so genial a tone as his fellow-laborer's; yet they are unquestionably impressed with the habitual elegance of his style. He was fortunate in his patrons, the first four volumes of the Spectator being addressed to Somers, Halifax, Boyle, and Marlborough.

Pope's preface, we remarked, was, perhaps, the finest in the language. It is curt, polished, full of sense, with a dash of caustic irony and refined sentiment, curiously blended, and written as with a pen of steel. The same antithetical manner, precision of thought, and brilliancy of expression, that mark the epigrammatic verse of the Wasp of Twit'nam prevail in

his prose; and in none of his prose do they appear in such a vivid light as in the preface to his Miscellaneous Works.

We can only refrain from transcribing passage after passage by the apprehension of exceeding our prescribed space, and by the reflection that, as the works of Pope are so universally accessible, quotation would only tend to encourage indolence in the reader, who can turn to it readily.

Mr. Chalmers speaks of Johnson's dedications as "models of courtly address; they might have been such in the reign. of the dull Dutchman, George II., but now-a-days they read a little too much like the pompous flourishes of the ancient regime. Goldsmith's dedications are much briefer, but more to the point, and more graceful. In an introduction, despite of the triptology of his style, Johnson was at home. And his style was admirably suitable to occasions of moment and themes of weight and importance. From the sonorous music of his best writing, we can readily admit that Temple (as has been asserted) was one of the models of Jchnson's prose. In point and vigor, Johnson was his superior, but he wants Temple's simplicity and ease. Johnson used to say, there were two things he knew he could do well-state what a work ought to contain, and then relate the reasons or deduce the causes why the writer had failed in executing what he proposed. The first of these talents he possessed to perfection, as we see by his prefaces, most of which were written to order, and are often vastly superior to the book they introduced to the reader. The preface to Rolt's Dictionary of Trade and Commerce is a striking instance. Johnson had never seen the book, but was asked to give a preface, which he wrote accordingly. He said he knew what such a book ought to contain, and marked out its expected contents. According to Chalmers, the production was almost worthless.

When a bookseller's drudge, the noble old moralist indited many an introduction to books of travel and science, school treatises, translations, catalogues. Only a few of these have been preserved in the correct editions of his works.

Johnson possessed great faculties of method and classification. He had clear and strong, though not fine and subtle powers of analysis and classification. Hence resulted this talent of telling what a book should contain. In a preface, it was not his business to go farther. But in his lives and extended criticisms he was equally happy in assigning the causes of ill success and of certain failure, on particular grounds. Goldsmith's prefaces were less vigorous, less pointed, but more graceful and simply beautiful.

After the dissolution of the Johnsonian school of writers, we read few classical prefaces save by pupils of the old classical school. Irving is the last of these. Scott expended considerable pains on his introductions, and proposed rewriting all of his prefaces to the Waverley novels, just before his death. Much of Sir Walter's pleasantest writing occurs in these rambling preludes to his animating narratives. Bulwer's prefaces are distorted by the narrowest egotism and unbounded assumption; yet they are such as a man of his talents would alone write. The poets have written the best prose and the best prefaces, too; such are (wide apart to be sure) Hunt's lively gossipping introductions, and Wordsworth's elevated lectures, for such they amount to, on the dignity and nobleness of his art.

We trust the day is coming when writers will return to the composition of prefaces, if only to preserve an historical interest in their works. Much of the interest of the old prefaces is derived from the names at the top and bottom of the page, with the date of publication. Prefaces thus afford

authentic materials for literary history, and if carefully executed, for literary criticism. They preserve, too, a regard for the good and well-tested standard forms of writing, and in themselves require a species of talent that should not be neglected. To declare his principal aims, and explain his chief intentions, thereby giving the reader a proper clue to the argument of the whole work, with a candid and open avowal of deficiencies, is the proper business of a preface, and of a writer of books. To address his friend, or at least the reader, with cordiality or respect, in accordance with the spirit of the production; to bespeak his favorable notice, or seek to avoid unmerited neglect, is the province of the dedication. To accomplish these ends, a recurrence to standard models cannot be hurtful, since there is something of a formal, and, as it were, of artistical etiquette in the matter, and which is not to be lost sight of. The author, who is also a gentleman, and it is the effect of letters to make him such, will certainly endeavor to carry himself with as genteel an air on paper as in company. In every place, he will observe the universal laws of polite regard and the local observances of conventional decorum. One of these is to write a preface to every book he publishes, which should also be accompanied by a dedication. In the first, he addresses the public; and in the last he acknowledges the claims of private affection or personal gratitude, of admiration for talents or virtue in one of the stars of contemporary renown, or of worth and excellence in obscure genius and unobtrusive merit. The preface pleads, apologizes, defends or attacks: the dedication conciliates and compliments. Let an author be friendless and humble, he still can appeal to the "gentle" reader for sympathy and confidence.