The examiner. [volume] (Louisville, Ky.) 1847-1849, 1849-04-21

shut out the lurid sun
smut out the hot, Unreasonable plain
The half-hour's sand Is run.
The ex-sditOr in "JerrOld' s;News" gives, in a
late number, some interesting particulars in re-
lstiOn to the Quarterly, Edinburgh, and some
other Reviews in Great Britain, with some
anecdotes of well-knOwn persons, which we
copy:
The Quarterly Review did not make its
appearance until 1909. The only writers
were men OF talent and great weight with
the Tory party. Canning, Frere, Ellis,
Southey, Cocker, some Of the High Church
party, and even bishops, are said to have
been among its contributors. 1t was sufi.
Gent for a work to be condemned in. the
Edinburgh TO secure il laudation in the
Quarterly. There were admirable articles
in this Review upon subjects unconnected
with politics. In its articles on classical
Literature il was far beyond the Edinburgh.
Unfortunately too many were marked By
statements wholly untrue, and by inexcusa-
BILE political virulence; in religion it was
intensely bigoted. remember an attack
upon Lady Morgan and her writings, so
wholly beneath the selErespect of any edu
Gated pen, even the virulence of the Quar-.
terly, that it attracted general attention.
Lady NJ, il was reported, attributed the
paper to Croker. / remember expressing
an opposite opinion. for though Croker was
an uncompromising foe, never knew
blush, and was not at all remarkable for
sucking al trihes, yet, as he moved in So
cieIy among gentlemen, he must, thought,
have telt that, even in laying on the lash.
TO descend beneath the level of conven.
nonsl manners always injured a cause,
especially in the case Of female. Some
years after | found had been right; Croker
was innocent OF the charge; the article was
Gitiord 5, and from him it came in the char.
acter Of the man who was low in manners
and vul gar in feeling to the last. How |
knew this, and the writers OF some other
PaPen in that work, is too long story to
tell here. The papers of Southey were
many OF them conhrmatory of the remark |
that the sPostate from principle always be-
comes the most unrelenting enemy of the
side he has forsaken. In private life Southey |
was very amlable and exemplary, but as |
public character he was bigot. after being
renegade. His articles always exhibited |
a strong faint Of Jesuitism. Upon the
resignation of Clifford in 1924, the Quar-
terly was edited by Mr.. Coleridge, Junior.
the son OF the poet, but only for a short
time. He was by no means equal TO such
task. The Quarterly then fell. through
S!r walter Scots agency, into the hands
oil MIR. Lockhart, man of genius and a
scholar, where 1t now remains.
when the Edinburgh and Quarterly
started there were extant, Of the same class
OF works, the Monthly Review. the Critical
and British Critic. remember seeing slso
some numbers Of an English Review in NV
noyhood. This last was said to be estab. |
Iished mainly through the instrumentaIity
oil Or. Thompson, friend of DR.. Par.
and author of book called 1.-THE Man in
the Moon" The Monthly Review was |
established in 1749. and up to the time ofa
The appearances Of the Edinburgh in 1902
had reputation. Il was frst the property
Of Mr.. Grifiths, who Cor a considerable |
Time was the editor, assisted by DR.. Rose i
Of Chiswick, and MIR. Cleveland; indeed | q
{ was said that they had originally project e
ID It In concert. Old Jenkinson. the first 4
Lord Liverpool, whose writings. Peter q
Findar said, showed not spark of FIRE Z
mt. they were put into the CRATE Df c
|harles Burney. not the mrsica1 Burney,
'ut the Greeian, and DR.. Rose, of En-.
,ycloPsoia renown, We're contributors.
there was little attemps at essay writing c
he work reviewed not being peg to hang a
n elaborate dissertation upon, according {
the modern sSstem. There was little b.
''ner tnat WaS discursye, while the opin. d
pos xPressed were not always founded b
pom iAr-seeing Judgment The British ei
'unc was instituted principally through
Arondescon Mares, prebendarysof Lincoln, m
not the DR.. Mares who wrote thinks o.
o Myself" knew him well, both Tor q q
'ound scholar and an excellent man. II W
vas in bis Review that DIR. Pan criticised p
he splendid edition of s'Horace," which he al
lad himself projected in concert with DIR. o.
Iombe and Mr.. Homer, but out Of which
ne doctor backed before the Joint editorship h'
perhaps thinking his coadiu- 8,
os hardly equal to the task. When the hi
BOOK came out the numerous blunders in h!
he Greek quotations canght PARIS sharp c.
ye. lie sent notice Of the work TO Dr. hi
Mares for the Review. This enraged DIR lql
;ombe, who understood midwifery better NJ
ban Greek. He reloined in a letter to lot
Vhich Psn gave an answer in pamphlet hs
d the parties who started the Critical Re. So
lew l DO not recollect the names, il ever sce
card them. All this class of reviews. hi
cIiPsed by their rivals Of London and leu
have passed away. The supe. hi
ouy OF these, always excepting their a
aennce oil honest opinion to political an po
Psihy and personal pique, when they wv,