"We shall never envy the honours which wit and learning obtain in any other cause, if we can be numbered among the writers who have given ardour to virtue, and confidence to truth."-DR. JOHNSON.

ORIGINAL COMMUNICATIONS.

STRICTURES upon the LONDON RE-
VIEW of RICHARD CUMBERLAND.
SIR,

from the malignity of anonymous criticism that this patriotic undertaking was established, I wish it every success it deserves.

HAVE observed in your Magazine Another part of its arrangement, for November and January last, which is equally open to censure, is, some observations upon the probable that the pages of the review are filled, success of the "London Review," to not with well-proportioned and inbe edited by Mr. Cumberland. To structive or amusing extracts from the opinions there stated, and to the the books examined, but with the auguries there promulgated, I fully wearisome speculations and opinions assented; and now that the first num- of the reviewers themselves. The ber of this Review has made its appear- consideration of these, however, beance, I will, with your permission, longs more immediately to what I examine its contents, and endeavour shall say of the excellence or defects to ascertain what are its claims to at- of the criticisms. To them, therefore, tention, either from its arrangement, I shall now procced; and, as Mr. from the excellence of its criticism, Cumberland's name appears first, it or from the authority of the names is from no invidious motive that he that are disclosed. If my censure passes under the first examination, outweigh my applause, I may expect I may disclaim all personal influence that Mr. Cumberland and his asso- in this task which I have imposed ciates will ascribe it to malignity, or upon myself. I never had the pleaenvy, or stupidity. But of malignity, sure of being in Mr. Cumberland's my heart acquits me; of envy, niy company but once in my life, and judgment and, for my stupidity, then, without any direct intercourse I leave that in the hands of your with him; and as to the other gentlereaders. There is another topick of men, if I except the Poet Laurent, consolation, also, which my strictures their very names are unknown to me. may afford: they will, at least, serve Let them not, however, exclaim in to disseminate the knowledge of the the words of Milton's Devil : existence of the "London Review."

Not to know us, argues yourself un

known.

The arrangement I consider as essentially defective. The works selected are eleven in number; and In examining the language of Mr. of these, the second is a book on Cumberland, I was struck with its cookery; the fifth, a book not yet uncommon imbecility, coarseness, written, and, consequently, not yet and vulgarity. In endeavouring to published; and the seventi., Joe Mil- make it natural and easy, he has ler! If, in making this selection, made it feeble and undignified. It is Mr. Cumberland has been influenced disgraced by colloquial barbarisins, by the capacities of his associates, his and obscured by grammatical errors. prudence may claim that praise which I will use no subterfuge, nor assert must be denied to his judgment. If what I am unable to prove. it was to rescue such important works the following exemplifications, thereUNIVERSAL MAG. VOL. XI.

2 B

Let

"Charles' connection with those ladies might be vicious, but at a moment when that connection was upon the point of being finally and irrecoverably dissolved, to concern himself about their future welfare, and to recommend them to his brother with earnest tenderness, was virtue."

in many respects, has earned con- could no longer protect them himsiderable reputation. Perhaps Mr. self! Mr. Cumberland says he wrote Cumberland thinks that his name is his review upon an "empty table:" to act as a talisman, which is to put I wish the Christian' volume had lain judgment to sleep, and awe criticism before him, that it might have purified into silence; or else he would hardly his moral notions. In my opinion, have told his readers" that they won't the distinction of Fox is philosophilearn much from him;" that "he cally accurate, and honorable to his shall not send them to their books, for heart :he has none within his reach to resort to:" and that he writes upon an empty table, without authorities to aid him." p. 8. This may be candid, but it surely is not decorous and if Mr. Cumberland really had nothing to tell, if he could neither instruct nor amuse, I, for one, am of opinion that he would have consulted his reputation by remaining silent.- Mr. Cumberland is ridiculous when Nothing but overweening vanity, he says that no writer," (p. 13.) could tempt him to suppose, that any "should employ notes in his comreader would be pleased with such positions;" but that every thing which an explicit avowal of his own inability is necessary to be known should be for the task he had undertaken. The woven into the general narrative.— cause of literature will never be bene- I would ask Mr.Cumberland whether fited by flippancy of style, errors of grammar, and deficiency of knowledge; nor can accumulation of years be a security for that which possesses no intrinsic worth.

poetry is not often rendered more interesting and more valuable, by illustration? or whether, if the poet alludes to some fact not generally known, his verse would be improved by introMr. Cumberland has written two ducing into it the general narrative? other articles in this review; but as it Are there not many things in history, is my intention to examine its con- in philosophy, in morals, which are tents consecutively, they must remain usefully comprised in notes, but which till the progress of my remarks leads would absolutely be a blemish in any me to them. I might here also other place? Mr. Cumberland supadvert to some of the opinions pro- ports his opinion by a reference to mulgated by Mr. Cumberland; but his own works; but it is to be recolopinion is boundless controversy, and lected, that a man's occasion for a it rarely happens that conviction fol- store-house, will be in proportion to lows even the most elaborate confu- what he possesses. tation, or that a man fails to find ar- There is one remark of Mr. Cumguments to support what he has once berland's so strikingly condemnatory advanced. I must, however, advert of the principle upon which this reto Mr. Cumberland's denial that view is conducted, that I shall exCharles the Second's anxiety about, tract it. Speaking of Mr. Fox, he and provision for, his mistresses, when says, Who, that had enjoyed the on his death-bed, was an act of virtue. partnership of his social hours, and If to do good be a virtue, who shall been admitted to inspect his heart, deny it to the expiring king? Is it would be so sturdy an enthusiast for Mr. Cumberland's philosophy, first impartiality as to sacrifice all the feelto corrupt and debase, and then to ings of friendship to the dignity of leave your victim to the consequences truth?" Let this be the motto to the of your own iniquity? The impulse London Review, and every reader will of passion might impel Charles to then know what to expect. seduce: nay, he might have loved I pass now to some of Mr. Cumand respected the objects of his se- berland's coadjutors: names now first duction: yet, it was not virtue to heard of, and from whose hands shelter them from misery, and to English Literature is to receive salsecure them from insult, when he vation.

The first is a Mr. J. Smith, who, proudly conscious of his own powers, has chosen, for their theatre, awhat? I am ashamed to write ita DOMESTIC COOKERY! I hope, Mr. Editor, your readers are fully aware, how important it is that such works should be rescued, from the malignity of anonymous criticisin, and how necessary such a review as the present is, to secure, to culinary eloquence and knowledge, its just fame and celebrity. Triumph and rejoice ye Hannah Glasses, and ye John Farleys! Your immortality is secure, as long as the "London Review" exists: fear the rancour of critics as little as your own fires: sooner shall authors feed upon soups and jellies than your renown wither away and sooner shall Orford dumplings be preferred to a green goose pye, than the "London Review' suffer a cook's glory to be invidiously tarnished.

less merriment pervades the greater part of the criticism, if I must prostitute the word.

But I have a heavier charge against this Mr. J. Smith, and which affects the very principles of the "London Review;" as the bulwark which is to secure literature from anonymous misrepresentation and malignity.— Will it be believed, then, that in this very article, as gross an instance of wilful prevarication is to be found as can be produced from the pages of the meanest hireling of the press? Yet it is so, as the following will prove : -

"She informs us, that, to make home the sweet refuge of a husband fatigued by intercourse with a jarring world, to be his enlightened compauion, and the chosen friend of his heart, these are woman's duties,' and adds, in the same breath, made in cool weather are best,''

" candles

But to be serious.-Would any per-` p. 33. son, who had been told (as the whole the expression in the same breath, Would it not be imagined, from public were told) what were the rea- that the writer, or compiler, of this sons for establishing this review, have Domestic Cookery" had actually expected to find fourteen pages de- joined two such incongruous subjects voted to a book on cookery I can together in the same page? Upon assign only one excuse for this. and referring to the volunie, however, that is, that this Mr. J. Smith ac- I find that FIFTEEN PAGES separate commodated his task to his powers. candour and integrity that are to be the one from the other! Is this the expected from avowed criticisms? What author, what work, might not be rendered ridiculous and contemptible, by uniting two topics of discussion, which are separated, in the volume itself, fifteen pages from each other, and representing them in the review as nearly contiguous? But Mr. J. Smith is not contented: he goes still further; and adds,

But let us see how he has executed his task; for even ignoble labours may be performed with relative excellence. I will readily allow that his language far transcends the vitiated diction of Mr. Cumberland. He at least writes correctly; and sometimes, perhaps, with humour: but his attempts at the latter are mostly abortive. He may, himself, be greatly amused by such silliness as the following; but, for my own part, if I smiled at all, it was certainly a smile of contempt:

"'How rarely,' exclaims our authoress in a pathetic tone, do we meet with fine melted butter!' This calamity was not overlooked by our immortal bard, whose Moor of Venice bewails his want of that article with

tears:

Unused to the melting mood, Dropt tears as fas'," &c. p. 50. Any thing more despicably senseles in the form of wit, I never recollect to have seen: and this strain of worth

"Talents here find themselves placed in the same sentence with treacle; custards are coupled with conjugal fidelity; and moral duties with macaroni." ib.

Mr. J. Smith has not been ashamed This is UTTERLY FALSE: and tho' to put his name to such wiltul misquotation, I feel a sense of shame that any man should do so. The design is, evidently, to injure. The fact is, that the volume in question contains some judicious preliminary observations upon that sort of educa