Art. IV. The Pondercr, a Series of Essays; Biographical, Literary, Moral, and Critical. By the Rev. John Evans, Author of an Oration on the Tendency of the Doctrine of Philosophical Necessity, and Master of the Academy, Lower Park-row, Bristol, 12mo. pp. 207. Price 6s. Longman and Co.; and Norton, Sheppard, Barry, &c. &c. Bristol, 1812.

THIS Essayist professes never to have been pleased with his designation; and it was retained, on the republication of the pieces in a collective form, because to have changed it would have manifested an anxiety concerning that which in reality is of no importance.' A good reason, certainly; but nevertheless, another reason must have had nearly the same operation, though this had not been thought of; for where was another title, not previously employed, to have been found? It is a very strong indication how busy we have been about literature in this country, that a language of extraordinary copiousness, and rich in synonymes, has scarcely one unocenpied term left, that is even tolerably fit to stand as a distinctive denomination at the head of a new assemblage of miscellaneous essays. The great patriarch, the Tatler, could never dream of a posterity so numerous as to be thus driven at last to the most desperate shifts for names for the ever multiplying tribe.. Perhaps, could he have foreseen their number and quality, he might have given some sarcastic hint, with respect to soine of the more remote of these descendants, that it would not so very much signify what names they were forced to be content with, or whether they could get any at all.

The essays in the present volume, in number thirty-five, were originally published in the Bristol Mercury. The approbation expressed of them,' says the author, by a few individuals whose opinion he values, has induced him to submit them to the public in a collected form; and he now awaits its decision, to ascertain how far their opinion was dictated by the partiality of friendship.'

We think it would not be greatly wrong to lay it down as a general rule of prudence, that no man should publish on the strength of the professed opinions of his friends. Between their partiality that will naturally judge too favourably, and the insincerity or call it politeness-that will pronounce more favourably even than they judge, how is it possible for him to have a more delusive sanction?-unless he imagines that in his friends, just his friends of all mankind, it is quite impossible that kindness should fail to be accompanied by the clearest discernment, and the most courageous honesty. If he really has

come into possession of such frieads, it would not be amiss for him to consider whether his good fortune does not exceed his merits; for let him question himself whether he would be capable of manifesting this faithful honesty of friendship towards a person whose feelings, sensitive and irritable to excess from eagerness to shine as an author, he was reluctant to mortify, though decidedly of opinion that it would be a wiser proceeding for this ambitious friend to consign his compositions to the same chest, that may contain his first school exercises in writing and grammar, than to attempt forcing them into notoriety through the press. Would he unequivocally intimate his opinion, at the hazard of losing his friend? And if he would not himself practise such virtue, he really should examine carefully the foundation of his so charitable conviction that his friends are so much more conscientious than himself, as that he may be perfectly sure of having their approbation for following their advice. He ought to cast an inquisitive look round on the natural and moral world, to make himself quite certain that this is the age of prodigies, before he assumes that men ardent for literary fame can have friends that will dissuade them from the press;-not to notice that it would be another and perhaps still greater prodigy, if the persons so dissuaded should long retain their friendship for the persons so dissuading.

If a maker of compositions cannot fully rely on his own judgement, the best expedient would perhaps be to contrive to obtain the opinion of some person known to excel in criticism, and who is either a stranger to the author, or, at least, does not know nor suspect whose work it is of which his opinion is requested.

But it is time to say that we do not mean to apply the full force of these remarks to the author of the Ponderer, or to the friends whose judgement, it seems, has had so much weight with him. Those friends may not, very possibly, be much more honest than the generality of the friends of authors, but the test of their virtue must be acknowledged not to have been, in the present instance, very severe. Though we may be inclined to think it was enough for most of these papers to have had one public appearance, it is easy to believe that, under the influence of a little personal partiality to the writer, several intelligent persons might, without insincerity, express directly or by assent, an opinion in favour of their republication.

The subjects of the essays, too many for enumeration, are moral, literary, biographical, and antiquarian. Perhaps the biographical sketches are the most adapted to please, particularly that of the interesting youth of promise W. I. Roberts. The author's justice and candour are advantageously displayed

in the memoir of the late very highly respectable Dr. Caleb Evans. We are less satisfied with the account of the memorable John Henderson, one of the most extraordinary of human beings, according to the unanimous representation cf all who knew him best, and were best qualified to judge; a man never to be recalled to thought by those who delight to contemplate a prodigious proportion of mind inhabiting one person, without deep regret both for his having neglected to give to the world what such a mind owed to it, and for the fatal cause that contributed to make its stay in the world so short. Mr. Evans's notice will give but a very inadequate idea of that most original and wonderful intelligence. It refers the reader, however, to the only description that has done justice to the subject, the extremely interesting sketches of Henderson, with a monody on his death, written many years since by Mr. Cottle, who had the enviable advantage and luxury of a familiar personal acquaintance with him, and the pathetic, and pensive, and revering spirit of whose memorial, may serve to shew what a power of enchantment there was in the soul of Henderson.

There is one paper of observations on the talents and character of Chatterton, in extenuation of whose faults, with all possible sentiments of forbearance towards that unhappy genius, we find it quite impracticable to go Mr. Evans's length; nor ean we assent to the concluding part of the assertion that, With the exception of the last act of his life, which no circumstances can justify, and no sophistry palliate, his character combined much to excite respect and pity, but nothing to call forth indignation.' Toward the end of the paper, the author's apology for Chatterton changes into a fierce attack on those who have presumed to censure him; and runs into that strain of bad morality so commonly adopted by persons who think it will appear fine and intellectual to affect a violent idolatry for genius, in spite of whatever principles or passions may have misdirected or debased it.

The only crime with which calumny could charge him was melancholy, or that consciousness of superiority, which however misnamed by Envy, or reproached by canting Hypocrisy, is inseparable from genius. Of the speculative errors of an uneducated youth, tinged as they were by the dark shades of his own despondency; but probably originating in the same morbid melancholy which made Johnson superstitious, let those be rigid censurers, who consider doubt as a high misdemeanour, and a departure from popular creeds the worst of crimes. To the soul of sensibility the very errors of genius are sacred; but the wretched moles who rake among its ashes, and take a barbarous pleasure in exposing its errors to the vulgar

come into possession of such frieads, it would not be amiss for him to consider whether his good fortune does not exceed his merits; for let him question himself whether he would be capable of manifesting this faithful honesty of friendship towards a person whose feelings, sensitive and irritable to excess from eagerness to shine as an author, he was reluctant to mortify, though decidedly of opinion that it would be a wiser proceeding for this ambitious friend to consign his compositions to the same chest, that may contain his first school exercises in writing and grammar, than to attempt forcing them into notoriety through the press. Would he unequivocally intimate his opinion, at the hazard of losing his friend? And if he would not himself practise such virtue, he really should examine carefully the foundation of his so charitable conviction that his friends are so much more conscientious than himself, as that he may be perfectly sure of having their approbation for following their advice. He ought to cast an inquisitive look round on the natural and moral world, to make himself quite certain that this is the age of prodigies, before he assumes that men ardent for literary fame can have friends that will dissuade them from the press-not to notice that it would be another and perhaps still greater prodigy, if the persons so dissuaded should long retain their friendship for the persons so dissuading.

If a maker of compositions cannot fully rely on his own judgement, the best expedient would perhaps be to contrive to obtain the opinion of some person known to excel in criticism, and who is either a stranger to the author, or, at least, does not know nor suspect whose work it is of which his opinion is requested.

But it is time to say that we do not mean to apply the full force of these remarks to the author of the Ponderer, or to the friends whose judgement, it seems, has had so much weight with him. Those friends may not, very possibly, be much more honest than the generality of the friends of authors, but the test of their virtue must be acknowledged not to have been, in the present instance, very severe. Though we may be inclined to think it was enough for most of these papers to have had one public appearance, it is easy to believe that, under the influence of a little personal partiality to the writer, several intelligent persons might, without insincerity, express directly or by assent, an opinion in favour of their republication.

The subjects of the essays, too many for enumeration, are moral, literary, biographical, and antiquarian. Perhaps the biographical sketches are the most adapted to please, particularly that of the interesting youth of promise W. I. Roberts. The author's justice and candour are advantageously displayed

in the memoir of the late very highly respectable Dr. Caleb Evans. We are less satisfied with the account of the memorable John Henderson, one of the most extraordinary of human beings, according to the unanimous representation ef all who knew him best, and were best qualified to judge; a man never to be recalled to thought by those who delight to contemplate a prodigious proportion of mind inhabiting one person, without deep regret both for his having neglected to give to the world what such a mind owed to it, and for the fatal cause that contributed to make its stay in the world so short. Mr. Evans's notice will give but a very inadequate idea of that most original and wonderful intelligence. It refers the reader, however, to the only description that has done justice to the subject, the extremely interesting sketches of Henderson, with a monody on his death, written many years since by Mr. Cottle, who had the enviable advantage and luxury of a familiar personal acquaintance with him, and the pathetic, and pensive, and revering spirit of whose memorial, may serve to shew what a power of enchantment there was in the soul of Henderson.

There is one paper of observations on the talents and character of Chatterton, in extenuation of whose faults, with all possible sentiments of forbearance towards that unhappy genius, we find it quite impracticable to go Mr. Evans's length; nor can we assent to the concluding part of the assertion that, With the exception of the last act of his life, which no circumstances can justify, and no sophistry palliate, his character combined much to excite respect and pity, but nothing to call forth indignation.' Toward the end of the paper, the author's apology for Chatterton changes into a fierce attack on those who have presumed to censure him; and runs into that strain of bad morality so commonly adopted by persons who think it will appear fine and intellectual to affect a violent idolatry for genius, in spite of whatever principles or passions may have misdirected or debased it.

The only crime with which calumny could charge him was melancholy, or that consciousness of superiority, which however misnamed by Envy, or reproached by canting Hypocrisy, is inseparable from genius. Of the speculative errors of an uneducated youth, tinged as they were by the dark shades of his own despondency; but probably originating in the same morbid melancholy which made Johnson superstitious, let those be rigid censurers, who consider doubt as a high misdemeanour, and a departure from popular creeds the worst of crimes. To the soul of sensibility the very errors of genius are sacred; but the wretched moles who rake among its ashes, and take a barbarous pleasure in exposing its errors to the vulgar