The Press.
London, England, 1858-05-01 00:00:00

THE QUARTERLIES.*

IN the present number of the Quarterly several
very interesting topics are handled with va-
rious degrees of ability. Strong literary
articles are the first two and the sixth—on
Dr. Johnson, on Bohemia, and on the art
of Public Speaking, respectively. The first-
mentioned paper is founded upon Boswell's
Letters, and takes much the same view of his
character as we remember to have seen in the
Dublin University Magazine about a year ago—
i.e., a medium between Carlyle and Macaulay,
and attributing Boswell's close attendance
upon Johnson to his real relish for wit, rather
than to his love of goodness on the one hand,
or innate sycophancy on the other. In this
opinion we fully concur, and we are glad to
see it sanctioned by so high an authority as
the leading quarterly periodical. While,
however, agreeing with the estimate herein
given both of Johnson and his biographer, we
are sorry to see so unfavourable a description
of one of the brightest stars in that accom-
plished circle of which the Doctor was the
centre. We are unwilling to believe that Gold-
smith can really deserve such an accumulation
of epithets as " awkward, envious, conceited,
" and dissolute." That he was awkward may
be true, but that was his misfortune. His
envy and conceit were, we suspect, no greater
than that of very many literary men, who do
far more injury to their contemporaries by
anonymous detraction, than the simple exhi •
bition of spleen on poor Goldsmith's part
could ever have accomplished. His jealousy
and vanity lay only on the surface ; beneath
you found a generous appreciation of his con-
temporaries, and of Johnson above them all.
We should remember also—a fact that is too
frequently forgotten—that Goldsmith's contri-
butions to English literature were, after all,
superior to anything which Johnson had done
up to the time of Goldsmith's death. The
Dictionary, of course, we exempt from the
comparison. But certainly, if there is any
one of Johnson's works which can be
thought to place him on a level with the
author of " The Vicar of Wakefield," " The
Deserted Village," and " She Stoops to Con-
quer," it is the " Lives of the Poets," which
did not appear till Goldsmith's place in
Gerard-street knew him no more. Of course
we do not mean to imply a doubt of Johnson's
intrinsic superiority. His powerful and lumi-
nous intellect placed him far above the rivalry
of any man of that generation. But no
doubt Goldsmith may sometimes have fairly
thought that his own more purely literary
greatness was unduly obscured by the side of
Johnson's conversational prowess. That he
should have felt sore at the inferior part ho
was sometimes condemned to play, cannot be
wondered at. He knew, like Addison (if
Addison ever really said it), that he could
" draw for a thousand pounds ;" and it was
mortifying to be exposed before strangers be-

• 1. The Quarterly Review, April, 1853. Murray —S. The
Edinburgh Review. Lougmans-3. The Westminster Review.
John Chapman-1. The National Reeiew. Chapman and Hail
—b. The London Review. ileylin.

cau
phnjutesor :sate!.
thet Aee possi-
bilityllBtts
ee r
oohf
feht
ihhs
ea
rdpresent forgotten
ga r
the
celhei sshui
h most
ihneatveerNeviisaltlihotgiaskeeesapruleyept
yweoafhia.
career. We
from• picture of
them
todheermaan o "literaryle
ttemrsa, • its
b
man,"
a s distinguished
ph
It shows us what he may be. Till past middle e.
life there was nothing to distinguish John
on
from any ordinary journalist or magazines
writer of the present day. He lived their life
and talked their talk, and though he disliked
the drudgery, never seems to have suspected
that this
in either
of gaining his livelihood was
wanting either dignity or earnestness. He
did not in the least set himself up as a re-
former of society at large, or give himself the
airs of a man who was above his business. He
brought his merchandize to market in all sin-
cerity of heart; nor could he have understood
why it was less honourable to get a guinea for
an opinion on a book than for one upon a
legal case. We dwell the more on this aspect
of Johnson's character that it has lately be-
come the fashion in certain quarters to sneer
at " the literary man," as such. And we take
this opportunity, therefore, If reminding all
these delicate, kid-gloved critics that in so
doing they must consent to include one of the
half-dozen names which have created an epoch
in our literature. " Fictions of Bohemia" is
a review of various recent works relating to
that land of liberty. It is written in a genial
and sympathetic style, and with more appre-
ciation of the subject than we should have
expected from the Quarterly Review. The
greater portion of this article is devoted to
Parisian Bohemia—to the student with his
ingenious shifts, and the grisette with "her
" facile pleasures and merry industry "—the
only objection to it being that it is a little
behindhand, the two principal French works
on which it is founded having been out for
three or four years, and already treated at
length in various periodicals. Mr. Whitty's
" Friends of Bohemia" is cursorily passed
over, though the British Bohemian is a curious
study, and the more so, indeed, as he lives in
an atmosphere so uncongenial to all around
him. There is one question with regard to
all this race that we should like to see solved.
Do the Bohemians ever grow old ? We never
hoard of one who did. Either whisky or
wedlock is usually fatal to these gallant spirits
before they arrive at middle age. Pauci guys
a'quus amavit Jupiter—the few who rise to
writing in the Times may perhape live and die
old men in their " dear native country," but
these great men, dis yeniti, are rare instances,
as rare as a swallow in November or a wood-
cock in June. And, indeed, we think " what
becomes of the Bohemians" would be just as
interesting and puzzling a question to literary
inquirers as what becomes of the first men•
tioned bird of passage has been to naturalists
like White and Jesse. We now pass on to a
paper upon public speaking, which is capitally
written, terse, and complete. But we must
protest against the injustice done to Boling-
broke here, as to Goldsmith in a previous
article. No one who has ever read attentively
the letter to Sir William Wyndham, the poli-
tical tracts, and "The Case of Dunkirk Con-
sidered," could possibly deny that these aro
models of a political style—a clear sweep of
luminous logic, language at once sinewy and
elegant, and periods easy and unlaboured, but
occasionally terminating in points far more
effective than that artificial flow of rhetoric in
which later English writers have indulged to
excess As a set-off to this reviewer's remarks,
we shall quote the opinion of Lord Brougham,
in his contributions to the Edinburgh Re
view :—" If Bolingbroke spoke as he wrote, ho
" must have been the greatest of modern
orators, as far as composition goes, for ho
" has the raciness and spirit, occasionally even
" the fire, perhaps not the vehemence, of Fox,
" with richer imagery and far more correct
" diction—the accurate composition of Pitt,
the
" sionally the depth, of Burke, wthout his
withc
p i oiunsfinnei:st .1 ye
lmmoorset grace
learning, and varal end' c c
i
" wearily-elaborate air; his speech never.de
" generates for an instant into disser,tat_iolne.
" which Burke scarcely ever avoids. 1
as able as
political article of the Quarterly

usual. It is, however, principally confined to
our relations with France. We subjoin a pas-
sage of rather more general application :
The certain has again been drawn up. New actors are
upon the stage, having at least this title to favourable
notice, that they have been involuntarily, if not reluctantly,
summoned to the arduous duties of national representation.
It will probably also be admitted, by many who are not
their habitual partisans, that they may fairly lodge another
claim. They succeeded to a great national dilemma, as
t unsolved, and to a generally embarrassed state of
foreign relations. At home an empty Exchequer stared,
and as yet stares, them in the face: the Government of
Lord Palmerston had earned popularity last year by part-
ing prospectively with their money ; and it has left them
to settle the account and provide for the public service.
The domestic history of the late Ministry (we omit some
paiflful features of a more personal character) will be
chiefly memorable for profusion in the public expenditure,
carelessness as to the means of providing for it, relaxation
in all the rules of public administration, and an unlimited
multitude of legislative abortions. Indeed its few achieve-
ments in legislation have been chiefly such as to make the
country thankful for the failures as the lesser evil. The
present Finance Minister has lately informed the House
of Commons that he cannot estimate the charge of com-
pensations under the Court of Probate Act past last year
at less than two hundred aad filly thousand pounds per
annum. At this modest price it is that the nominal testa-
mentary powers of the IF.pisoopal body have been extin-
guished, a vast body of well-paid and contented officers
compulsorily turned out to enjoy salaries and do nothing
in return, and new and valuable offices created to feed and
occupy another set of functionaries, who may some day
get compensated and sent out to feed on the fat pastures
of idleness, in their turn, should Parliament, at any time,
think fit to reinstate what Mr. Bright has well declared to
have been the very wrst Government of our time. What
titles Lord Derby may make, in the regions of legislation
and administration, to public gratitude, remains yet to be
seen; but he starts with infinite advantage in the power of
establishing, at small cost, a favourable contrast with his
predecessors. His opening address to the House of Lords
produced a favourable impression. It carried, at least, the
conviction that we were now governed by a man of con-
scientious earnestness as well as of brilliant powers. In
foreign affairs already and at once we have derived immense
benefits from the change of Ministry. The liberation of
Mr. Hodge in Piedmont, and of Watt and Parkes in the
Kingdom of the Two !Mollies, has probably been due to
his cause.

The political article in the Edinburgh we
have already noticed in our political columns.
It is weak because it has a weak cause, but
the style is occasionally good. Other notice-
able articles in the Edinburgh are those on
Edgar Poe, and M. Thiers' " History of
the Consulate and the Empire," the latter of
which contains a searching exposure of the
author's gross partiality of tone, and gross
mistakes of fact. It contains other papers on
good sound subjects, but scarcely abreast of
the topics which are just now most attractive
to the public.

The three most notable articles in the
Westminster are, in our opinion, those on
"Party Government," "Our Relations with
the Princes of India," and " Army Organiza-
tion." The first we may dismiss briefly. The
writer condemns Party Government because
it compels men to vote against their convic
tions, and prevents us from knowing which of
the Ministry is mainly responsible for parti-
cular measures—thus practically destroying
Ministerial responsibility altogether. We do
not sympathize with this opinion, because we
hold it better that Ministers should agree on
principles and differ on details, than that they
should agree on details and differ on princi-
plea. But we would shortly say this,—Don't
let the country stand " shiny. shallying " be-
tween the two theories. Either cease to de-
mand a majority, as an essential condition of
every Cabinet, or give them the means of
obtaining it. If the view in this article is
right, then nine-tenths of the objections urged
against the present Ministry are wrong. If
these objections are well founded, then, in the
name of common sense, let us have no more
such articles as this. One curious passage we
must notice before quitting the subject :
An avowed dictator, if at all wisely chosen and fur
very limited time, will often rule better than a cumbrous
machine, especially if the honour which is to be his reward
:will depend on the success of bis measures. But the
lamentable result of the present rule of Party is, that the very
Ministers who are so overpowerful to indulge in foolish and
ruinous appointments, to misspend vast sums of money,
to
entangle us in wars of hideous criminality, and to throw
aesy foreign liberties by intrigue,—these same men are by
the. very same agencies made feeble to repress malversa-
lion, to enforce justice towards our weak dependants, or to
I,2,Tirt foreign and rightful freedom by purely moral
."ratifir May dread to offend great families ors single
eolleagup, to announcer the enmity GI fanatics, to
resist fon* 11144,1049
COitrt, sad, *To Olt k 0n044 ihs