time to have recourse to the poetry of Wordsworth as one of our direct instruments in education." His "sense of the beauty of the world," and his "flexible command. of the resources of the English tongue," are pointed out. The latter, the editor says, is "only surpassed by Shakespeare, and is not surpassed by Spenser or by Milton." The selection is well made, but the author should not have given titles of his own to any of the poems. In 1857, Mr. William Johnston edited The Earlier Poems of William Wordsworth, corrected as in the latest editions. His arrangement is not chronological, nor does it follow Wordsworth's own classification, except in part. Some of the Sonnets, and the Poems on the Naming of Places, the Inscriptions, and the Poems referring to Old Age, are arranged as Wordsworth arranged them; but the rest are mixed together arbitrarily. There was greater reason for keeping the Poems of "the Fancy" distinct from those of "the Imagination," and those of "the Affections" from both, than for following Wordsworth's classification in the other instances. Mr. Johnston's preface is valuable, and the various readings of the text, though incomplete, add a distinct feature to his edition. In 1866, the Messrs. Moxon published a Selection from the Works of William Wordsworth, arranged by Francis Turner Palgrave. This is an excellent selection of 123 poems, arranged by Mr. Palgrave on a principle of his own. It contains much of Wordsworth's best work, and scarcely one poem-if there be one-that is not of absolute and permanent value. In 1874, the Messrs. Rivington published a small volume of Selections from the Poetical Works of William Wordsworth, edited with notes by Hawes Turner. There are only thirty poems in this selection, and it was prepared for the use of schools. It follows Wordsworth's own plan of arrangement, without any reference, however, to his classification. To thirteen of them Mr. Turner has given titles of his own, a somewhat hazardous experiment, and, in one case at least, unhappy as well as inaccurate, when Stone Arthur is called "Wordsworth Peak." A second edition of this little book was published in 1881. In 1879, Mr. Arnold's Selection, already referred to, was issued by the Messrs. Macmillan. In 1883, Mr. Gardner of Paisley published a volume of Selections from Wordsworth, edited by J. S. Fletcher, with an introductory Memoir. (The latter cannot be commended, as the Selection can.) One hundred and five of the best poems are brought together, in the order of the poet's own arrangement, without allusion to his classification. It is done with care and success, and is praiseworthy. In 1885, a small volume entitled The Poetical Works of William Wordsworth, was edited by Mr. A. J. Symington, and issued by Walter Scott. It is a selection of 134 of the poems, and it would have been better to have been called a Selection. In this book, as in Mr. Turner's, we find new titles given to the poems, a practice which must be condemned. One is called "University Life," another "Moral Truth," another "Life under the British Constitution," another "Loyalty to State and Church," another "Happy Cottage Homes." No student of Wordsworth need be told that these are not his titles, but "the general reader" should be told that he was incapable of giving such titles. Yet they are printed alongside of others which are Wordsworth's own, with no indication of when the poet and when his editor is speaking. The Selection is, however, made by a genuine lover of the poet, and with discrimination. A few short extracts from the letters of one or two members of the Society who have assisted in this Volume may add to its interest. Mr. Browning wrote in August, 1885: "I will, as you desire, attempt to pick out the twenty poems which strike me and so as almost to take away my breath!— as those worthiest of the Master." (Mr. Browning's reference to Wordsworth in The Lost Leader, and his letter to Mr. Grosart on the subject of that poem, are well known.) In November of the same year he wrote: "The edition I shall use is that belonging to my wife, pencil marked throughout, in which circumstance there may lie some help to me." In February, 1886, he wrote: "We remember few more commonplace admonitions to a poet than that he would wiselier have written but a quarter of the works which he has laboured at for a lifetime, unless it be this other, often coupled with it, that such works ought to be addressed to the general apprehension, not exclusively suited to the requirements of a (probably quite imaginary) few. Each precept contradicts the other. Write on set purpose for the many, and you will soon enough be reminded of the old 'Tot homines!' Write as conscientiously for the few, your idealised 'double' (it comes to that), and you may soon suit him with the extremely little that suits yourself. Now, in view of which of these objects should the maker of a Selection of the works of any poet worth the pains begin his employment? I have myself attempted the business, and know something of the achievements in this kind of my betters. They furnish a list of the pieces which these selectors have found most delight in and I found also that others, playing the selector with apparently as good a right and reason, are dissatisfied with this unaccountable addition, that as inexplicable omission,-in short, that the sole selector was not himself. The only case in which no such stumbling-block occurs is that obvious one-if it has ever occurredwhen a Public wholly unacquainted with an author is presumed to be accessible to a specimen of his altogether untried productions-for, by chance-medley the sample of the poetry of Brown and Jones may pierce the ignorance of somebody, say of Robinson. It is quite another matter of interest to know what Matthew Arnold thinks most worthy in Wordsworth: but should anybody have curiosity to inquire which fifteen or twenty of his poems have most thoroughly impressed such an one as myself, all I can affirm is that I treasure as precious every poem written during about the first twenty years of the poet's life.1 After then the selection grows weaker, the crystals gleam more rarely, and the assiduous stirring up of the mixture is too apparent and obtrusive. To the end, crystals are to be come at; but my own experience resembles that of the old man, in the admirable Resolution and Independence 'Once I could meet with them on every side, 1 Doubtless his poetic life.-ED. Last year I sent a copy of the poems selected for this edition to Mr. Browning. He went over it, and expressed his approval of all that were proposed to be included, but added the following fifteen :-The Reverie of Poor Susan, Goody Blake, The Complaint of the Forsaken Indian Woman, The Danish Boy, Lucy Gray, The Pet Lamb, 'Tis said that some have died for Love, The Childless Father, Rob Roy's Grave, The Farmer of Tilsbury Vale, The Power of Music, Star-gazers, Dion, The Eclipse of the Sun, and The Jewish Family. In reference to the last of these poems,—which belongs to the years which Lord Selborne has edited,—the latter writes: "I have hesitated about the Jewish Family, but I do not quite like 'that exquisite St. John,' or the last line of 'proud Jerusalem,' otherwise, I should have included it." Mr. Russell Lowell writes: "The other day going into the country for a longer visit than usual, I took your list with me" (it was the whole list in this volume), "and studied it with attention. Assuming that such a selection should have two objects mainly in view, the choice of characteristic poems, and of fine ones, the former in subordination to the latter, I am of opinion that the list is altogether satisfactory." Those who have helped in the volume, whether by advice and suggestion, or the actual writing of notes, are the following. I arrange them alphabetically. Mr. Browning, Mr. Stopford Brooke, Lord Coleridge, Mr. Cotterill, Mr. Aubrey de Vere, Professor Dowden, Principal Greenwood, Mr. Richard H. Hutton, Mr. Heard, the late Lord Houghton, Mr. Russell Lowell, Professor Nichol, Mr. Rawnsley, Mr. Rix, The Dean of Salisbury, |