<p><SPAN name="link2H_4_0035" id="link2H_4_0035"></SPAN></p>
<h2> To Dr LEWIS. </h2>
<p>Yes, Doctor, I have seen the British Museum; which is a noble collection,
and even stupendous, if we consider it was made by a private man, a
physician, who was obliged to make his own for tune at the same time: but
great as the collection is, it would appear more striking if it was
arranged in one spacious saloon, instead of being divided into different
apartments, which it does not entirely fill—I could wish the series
of medals was connected, and the whole of the animal, vegetable, and
mineral kingdoms completed, by adding to each, at the public expence,
those articles that are wanting. It would likewise be a great improvement,
with respect to the library, if the deficiencies were made up, by
purchasing all the books of character that are not to be found already in
the collection—They might be classed in centuries, according to the
dates of their publication, and catalogues printed of them and the
manuscripts, for the information of those that want to consult, or compile
from such authorities. I could also wish, for the honour of the nation,
that there was a complete apparatus for a course of mathematics,
mechanics, and experimental philosophy; and a good salary settled upon an
able professor, who should give regular lectures on these subjects.</p>
<p>But this is all idle speculation, which will never be reduced to practice—Considering
the temper of the times, it is a wonder to see any institution whatsoever
established for the benefit of the Public. The spirit of party is risen to
a kind of phrenzy, unknown to former ages, or rather degenerated to a
total extinction of honesty and candour—You know I have observed,
for some time, that the public papers are become the infamous vehicles of
the most cruel and perfidious defamation: every rancorous knave every
desperate incendiary, that can afford to spend half a crown or three
shillings, may skulk behind the press of a newsmonger, and have a stab at
the first character in the kingdom, without running the least hazard of
detection or punishment.</p>
<p>I have made acquaintance with a Mr Barton, whom Jery knew at Oxford; a
good sort of a man, though most ridiculously warped in his political
principles; but his partiality is the less offensive, as it never appears
in the stile of scurrility and abuse. He is a member of parliament, and a
retainer to the court; and his whole conversation turns upon the virtues
and perfections of the ministers, who are his patrons. T'other day, when
he was bedaubing one of those worthies, with the most fulsome praise, I
told him I had seen the same nobleman characterised very differently, in
one of the daily-papers; indeed, so stigmatized, that if one half of what
was said of him was true, he must be not only unfit to rule, but even
unfit to live: that those impeachments had been repeated again and again,
with the addition of fresh matter; and that as he had taken no steps
towards his own vindication, I began to think there was some foundation
for the charge. 'And pray, Sir (said Mr Barton), what steps would you have
him take? Suppose he should prosecute the publisher, who screens the
anonymous accuser, and bring him to the pillory for a libel; this is so
far from being counted a punishment, in terrorem, that it will probably
make his fortune. The multitude immediately take him into their
protection, as a martyr to the cause of defamation, which they have always
espoused. They pay his fine, they contribute to the increase of his stock,
his shop is crowded with customers, and the sale of his paper rises in
proportion to the scandal it contains. All this time the prosecutor is
inveighed against as a tyrant and oppressor, for having chosen to proceed
by the way of information, which is deemed a grievance; but if he lays an
action for damages, he must prove the damage, and I leave you to judge,
whether a gentleman's character may not be brought into contempt, and all
his views in life blasted by calumny, without his being able to specify
the particulars of the damage he has sustained.</p>
<p>'This spirit of defamation is a kind of heresy, that thrives under
persecution. The liberty of the press is a term of great efficacy; and
like that of the Protestant religion, has often served the purposes of
sedition—A minister, therefore, must arm himself with patience, and
bear those attacks without repining—Whatever mischief they may do in
other respects, they certainly contribute, in one particular, to the
advantages of government; for those defamatory articles have multiplied
papers in such a manner, and augmented their sale to such a degree, that
the duty upon stamps and advertisements has made a very considerable
addition to the revenue.' Certain it is, a gentleman's honour is a very
delicate subject to be handled by a jury, composed of men, who cannot be
supposed remarkable either for sentiment or impartiality—In such a
case, indeed, the defendant is tried, not only by his peers, but also by
his party; and I really think, that of all patriots, he is the most
resolute who exposes himself to such detraction, for the sake of his
country—If, from the ignorance or partiality of juries, a gentleman
can have no redress from law, for being defamed in a pamphlet or
newspaper, I know but one other method of proceeding against the
publisher, which is attended with some risque, but has been practised
successfully, more than once, in my remembrance—A regiment of horse
was represented, in one of the newspapers, as having misbehaved at
Dettingen; a captain of that regiment broke the publisher's bones, telling
him, at the same time, if he went to law, he should certainly have the
like salutation from every officer of the corps. Governor—took the
same satisfaction on the ribs of an author, who traduced him by name in a
periodical paper—I know a low fellow of the same class, who, being
turned out of Venice for his impudence and scurrility, retired to Lugano,
a town of the Grisons (a free people, God wot) where he found a printing
press, from whence he squirted his filth at some respectable characters in
the republic, which he had been obliged to abandon. Some of these, finding
him out of the reach of legal chastisement, employed certain useful
instruments, such as may be found in all countries, to give him the
bastinado; which, being repeated more than once, effectually stopt the
current of his abuse.</p>
<p>As for the liberty of the press, like every other privilege, it must be
restrained within certain bounds; for if it is carried to a branch of law,
religion, and charity, it becomes one of the greatest evils that ever
annoyed the community. If the lowest ruffian may stab your good name with
impunity in England, will you be so uncandid as to exclaim against Italy
for the practice of common assassination? To what purpose is our property
secured, if our moral character is left defenceless? People thus baited,
grow desperate; and the despair of being able to preserve one's character,
untainted by such vermin, produces a total neglect of fame; so that one of
the chief incitements to the practice of virtue is effectually destroyed.</p>
<p>Mr Barton's last consideration, respecting the stamp-duty, is equally wise
and laudable with another maxim which has been long adopted by our
financiers, namely, to connive at drunkenness, riot, and dissipation,
because they inhance the receipt of the excise; not reflecting, that in
providing this temporary convenience, they are destroying the morals,
health, and industry of the people—Notwithstanding my contempt for
those who flatter a minister, I think there is something still more
despicable in flattering a mob. When I see a man of birth, education, and
fortune, put himself on a level with the dregs of the people, mingle with
low mechanics, feed with them at the same board, and drink with them in
the same cup, flatter their prejudices, harangue in praise of their
virtues, expose themselves to the belchings of their beer, the fumes of
their tobacco, the grossness of their familiarity, and the impertinence of
their conversation, I cannot help despising him, as a man guilty of the
vilest prostitution, in order to effect a purpose equally selfish and
illiberal.</p>
<p>I should renounce politics the more willingly, if I could find other
topics of conversation discussed with more modesty and candour; but the
daemon of party seems to have usurped every department of life. Even the
world of literature and taste is divided into the most virulent factions,
which revile, decry, and traduce the works of one another. Yesterday, I
went to return an afternoon's visit to a gentleman of my acquaintance, at
whose house I found one of the authors of the present age, who has written
with some success—As I had read one or two of his performances,
which gave me pleasure, I was glad of this opportunity to know his person;
but his discourse and deportment destroyed all the impressions which his
writings had made in his favour. He took upon him to decide dogmatically
upon every subject, without deigning to shew the least cause for his
differing from the general opinions of mankind, as if it had been our duty
to acquiesce in the ipse dixit of this new Pythagoras. He rejudged the
characters of all the principal authors, who had died within a century of
the present time; and, in this revision, paid no sort of regard to the
reputation they had acquired—Milton was harsh and prosaic; Dryden,
languid and verbose; Butler and Swift without humour; Congreve, without
wit; and Pope destitute of any sort of poetical merit—As for his
contemporaries, he could not bear to hear one of them mentioned with any
degree of applause—They were all dunces, pedants, plagiaries,
quacks, and impostors; and you could not name a single performance, but
what was tame, stupid, and insipid. It must be owned, that this writer had
nothing to charge his conscience with, on the side of flattery; for I
understand, he was never known to praise one line that was written, even
by those with whom he lived on terms of good fellowship. This arrogance
and presumption, in depreciating authors, for whose reputation the company
may be interested, is such an insult upon the understanding, as I could
not bear without wincing.</p>
<p>I desired to know his reasons for decrying some works, which had afforded
me uncommon pleasure; and, as demonstration did not seem to be his talent,
I dissented from his opinion with great freedom. Having been spoiled by
the deference and humility of his hearers, he did not bear contradiction
with much temper; and the dispute might have grown warm, had it not been
interrupted by the entrance of a rival bard, at whose appearance he always
quits the place—They are of different cabals, and have been at open
war these twenty years—If the other was dogmatical, this genius was
declamatory: he did not discourse, but harangue; and his orations were
equally tedious and turgid. He too pronounces ex cathedra upon the
characters of his contemporaries; and though he scruples not to deal out
praise, even lavishly, to the lowest reptile in Grubstreet who will either
flatter him in private, or mount the public rostrum as his panegyrist, he
damns all the other writers of the age, with the utmost insolence and
rancour—One is a blunderbuss, as being a native of Ireland; another,
a half-starved louse of literature, from the banks of the Tweed; a third,
an ass, because he enjoys a pension from the government; a fourth, the
very angel of dulness, because he succeeded in a species of writing in
which this Aristarchus had failed; a fifth, who presumed to make
strictures upon one of his performances, he holds as a bug in criticism,
whose stench is more offensive than his sting—In short, except
himself and his myrmidons, there is not a man of genius or learning in the
three kingdoms. As for the success of those, who have written without the
pale of this confederacy, he imputes it entirely to want of taste in the
public; not considering, that to the approbation of that very tasteless
public, he himself owes all the consequence he has in life.</p>
<p>Those originals are not fit for conversation. If they would maintain the
advantage they have gained by their writing, they should never appear but
upon paper—For my part, I am shocked to find a man have sublime
ideas in his head, and nothing but illiberal sentiments in his heart—The
human soul will be generally found most defective in the article of
candour—I am inclined to think, no mind was ever wholly exempt from
envy; which, perhaps, may have been implanted, as an instinct essential to
our nature. I am afraid we sometimes palliate this vice, under the
spacious name of emulation. I have known a person remarkably generous,
humane, moderate, and apparently self-denying, who could not hear even a
friend commended, without betraying marks of uneasiness; as if that
commendation had implied an odious comparison to his prejudice, and every
wreath of praise added to the other's character, was a garland plucked
from his own temples. This is a malignant species of jealousy, of which I
stand acquitted in my own conscience.</p>
<p>Whether it is a vice, or an infirmity, I leave you to inquire.</p>
<p>There is another point, which I would much rather see determined; whether
the world was always as contemptible, as it appears to me at present?—If
the morals of mankind have not contracted an extraordinary degree of
depravity, within these thirty years, then must I be infected with the
common vice of old men, difficilis, querulus, laudator temporis acti; or,
which is more probable, the impetuous pursuits and avocations of youth
have formerly hindered me from observing those rotten parts of human
nature, which now appear so offensively to my observation.</p>
<p>We have been at court, and 'change, and every where; and every where we
find food for spleen, and subject for ridicule—My new servant,
Humphry Clinker, turns out a great original: and Tabby is a changed
creature—She has parted with Chowder; and does nothing but smile,
like Malvolio in the play—I'll be hanged if she is not acting a part
which is not natural to her disposition, for some purpose which I have not
yet discovered.</p>
<p>With respect to the characters of mankind, my curiosity is quite
satisfied: I have done with the science of men, and must now endeavour to
amuse myself with the novelty of things. I am, at present, by a violent
effort of the mind, forced from my natural bias; but this power ceasing to
act, I shall return to my solitude with redoubled velocity. Every thing I
see, and hear, and feel, in this great reservoir of folly, knavery, and
sophistication, contributes to inhance the value of a country life, in the
sentiments of</p>
<p>Yours always, MATT. BRAMBLE LONDON, June 2.</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />