Page images
PDF
EPUB

ARBOR AMORIS.

WHY THE ROSE IS RED.

I HAVE a tree, a graft of Love,

That in my heart has taken root; Sad are the buds and blooms thereof

And bitter sorrow is its fruit;

Yet, since it was a tender shoot, So greatly hath its shadow spread, That underneath all joy is dead,

And all my pleasant days are flown, Nor can I slay it, nor instead

Plant any tree, save this alone.

The rose, of old, they say, was white,
Till Love, one day, in wanton flight,
Flirting away from flower to flower,
A rose tree brushed, in evil hour,
The spreading leaves concealed a thorn
By which the boy-god's foot was torn.

The precious drops in plenteous flow
Fell on a rose's breast below,
And all her snow-white virgin pride
In blushing pure carnation died
To tell to future times unborn
How Love was wounded by a thorn.

Sobbing with pain and weeping dew,
The wounded boy to Venus flew;
But few the ills which boys endure
A mother's kisses cannot cure;
And for such pleasure after pain
Love would be often prick'd again!

Temple Bar.

Ah, yet, for long and long enough

My tears were rain about its root, And though the fruit be harsh thereof,

I scarcely looked for better fruit

Than this, that carefully I put In garner, for the bitter bread Whereon my weary life is fed ;

Ah, better were the soil unsown
That bears such growths, but Love instead

Will plant no tree, but this alone.
Ah, would that this new spring, whereof

The leaves and flowers flush into sboot, I might have succour and aid of Love

To prune these branches at the root,

That long have borne such bitter fruit; And graft a new bough, comforted With happy blossoms white and red,

So pleasure should for pain atone,
Nor Love slay this tree, nor instead
Plant any tree, but this alone.

L'ENVOY.
Princess, by whom my hopes are fed,
My heart thee prays in lowlihead

To prune the ill boughs overgrown,
Nor slay Love's tree, nor plant instead
Another tree, save this alone.

Francoys Villon.

THE WHISPER OF SPRING. Who hears the voice of death

In the tones of genial Spring; In the sigh of the south wind's breath,

So merrily whispering? Who does not welcome life

In each budding flower and leaf With hope and beauty rife,

Reckless of care or grief?

0, who can dream of death,

When merrily up there swells, Gray turrets underneath,

The chime of Easter bells ? Christmas mirth may wane

At sight of a vacant place; But the loved ones live again

In Springtide's laughing face.

SONG.

For Earth is never dead;

Though Winter's sombre wing Wave her to sleep in snowy bed,

She wakes again in spring. And happiness lives on,

And joy succeeds to grief, As surely as winter snows are gone,

When bursts yon emerald leaf.

WHERE eagle calls to waterfalls,

Where pines o’er chasms weep, The rains have made a mad cascade

To thunder down the steep. Where lilies nod their gentle heads,

Where grass is long in May, There runs a river in the meads

Too fast it runs away. But where the gales drive moaning sails

O’er seas that gloom and gleam, Across a bar the waves make war

'Gainst one persistent stream. Too far, 0 river, strained thy force!

Thou ne'er shalt know again The lilies of thy middle course, The quiet of the plain.

Dark Blue.

So up, and join the song

Ye sang mid Yule-tide dearth, Raise it loud and long

In midst of Springtime's mirth.
April passes away;

His showers are like our tears,
Giving place to golden May,
As in all the by-past years.

Tinsley's Magazine.

From The Quarterly Review, 'Tis harder to keep than to conquer the Heart; THE HANDWRITING OF JUNIUS PROFES- We admire and forget pretty Faces. SIONALLY INVESTIGATED.*

2. The work, the title of which is placed

In the School of the Graces, by Venus atat the head of the present article, possesses

tended, a value quite independent of the immedi- Belinda improves ev'ry Hour; ate question which it discusses. Its direct They tell her that Beauty itself may be

mended, object is to prove by a minute and exhaust

And shew her the use of her Pow'r. ive examination of the Junian manuscripts

3. and of the letters of Sir Philip Francis, that both of them were handwritten by

They alone have instructed the fortunate Maid

In Motion, in Speech, and Address; the same person; but indirectly it supplies

They gave her that wonderful Smile to permost valuable information and rules for

suade, guidance to those engaged in the investi- And the Language of Looks to express. gation of subjects in which a comparison

4. of handwriting is more or less involved.

They directed her Eye, they pointed the Dart, It owes its origin, to a great extent, to ac- And have taught her a dangerous Skill; cidental circumstances, which have such an

For whether she aims at the Head or the

Heart, important bearing upon the investigation

She can wound if she pleases, or kill. before us, that it is necessary to set them forth fully :

“ The Verses and the Note are each written on

a separate sheet of common letter paper, and “ In the Christmas season of 1770, or 1771,” the handwriting of the two is different. The says Mr. Twisleton, “when Mr. Francis was on

reason of this is obvious. The humour of the a visit to his father at Bath, he danced at the compliment required such a difference. The Assembly Rooms more than one evening with a two documents, though wholly unconnected with young lady named Miss Giles. This lady, born 'St. Valentine's Day, must be regarded in the in 1751, was daughter of Daniel Giles, Esq., af- light of a valentine; the essential idea of which terwards Governor of the Bank of England; is, that whereas certain Verses in praise of a and in January, 1772, she became Mrs. King young lady had been found by accident, Miss by marrying Joseph King, Esq., of Taplow. It Giles alone merited such praise, and the Verses was the custom at balls a hundred years ago for were therefore sent to her as to the person for a lady to retain the same partner during the whom they were intended. Hence, it would whole of the evening; so that the fact of Miss have been out of keeping with the plan of the Giles having thus danced with Mr. Francis valentine if the Verses and the Note had been would imply more of an acquaintance than in the same handwriting.” would necessarily be involved in a young lady's dancing with a gentleman at the present day.

We need not for our present purpose Subsequently, she received an Anonymous Note, relate how the existence of the two docuenclosing Anonymous complimentary Verses, ments came to the knowledge of Mr. both of which she believed to have been sent to Twisleton, and how he has been enabled her by him.

to make public use of them. That the “ The note was in the following words: two documents were really sent by Fran

“ The inclosed paper of Verses was found this cis to Miss Giles no one can entertain any morning by Accident. The person who found reasonable doubt after perusing Mr. them, not knowing to whom they belong, is Twisleton's narrative, and one circumobliged to trust to his own Judgment, and takes

stance, which we shall presently lay before for granted that they could only be meant for

our readers, places the fact beyond quesMiss Giles.'

tion. " The Verses were as follows:

The connexion of these two documents 1.

with the investigation into the handwrit“When nature has, happily, finished her Part, There is Work enough left for the Graces; ing of Junius arises thus. The Anonymous

Note is in the handwriting of Junius. * The Handwriting of Junius professionally In- This will be at once evident, we think, to restigated. By Mr. Charles Chabot, Expert. With Preface and Collateral Evidence. By the Hon. Ed. any one who compares the facsimile of the ward Twisleton. London. 4to. 1871.

Note with the facsimiles of the Junian in London has been very few, and that there are

Manuscripts, and is placed beyond all giving this opinion, shewed his independquestion by the Report of Mr. Netherelift, ence by opposing the views of the person printed in the volume before us, in which by whom he was professionally employed. he proves, by detailed reasonings, that the In fact, the case which he had been called two must have been handwritten by the in to support seemed to have broken down same person. As the Anonymous Note in consequence of his evidence. Mr. was in the bandwriting of Junius, and as Twisleton at once acquiesced in the proFrancis had evidently sent it, it was taken fessional opinion of Mr. Chabot; but recfor granted as a natural consequence that ollecting from the recently published Life the Anonymous Verses were in the natu- of Francis” that his cousin and familiar ral handwriting of Francis. This was at friend, Mr. Richard Tilghman, was with first the opinion of Jír. Twisleton himself Francis at Bath when the Verses were and of many other literary and legal gen- sent to Miss Giles, it struck Mr. Twisleton tlemen to whom he showed the verses, and that Francis might possibly have availed it was confirmed by the external evidence himself of the services of Tilghman as an and the tradition among the descendants | amanuensis. Fortunately, in the Letterof Mrs. King. But now comes the most Book of Francis, which was in Mr. Twisleinteresting part of the story. Mr. Twisle- ton's possession, there were six Letters ton, whose caution and love of truth are written to Francis by Tilghman. These most strikingly exhibited in every point were now submitted, together with the of the investigation, would not finally Verses, to Mr. Chabot, who expressed his adopt this conclusion till it had been veri- unhesitating conviction that the Verses fied by a professional expert: He accord- were in the handwriting of Tilghman, and ingly applied to Mr. Netherclift, who had embodied his opinion in one of the Reports previously examined the handwriting of here printed. It would seem that Francis the Anonymous Note, as we have already with his usual caution, was unwilling to said; but finding that this gentleman, in bring his own handwriting into any conconsequence of a serious illness, could not nection with that of Junius, and accordundertake the investigation, he placed the ingly wrote the Note himself in the Jupian case in the hands of Mr. Chabot, another hand, employing his friend Tilghman to professional expert. Mr. Chabot, however, copy the Verses, who probably never saw after comparing the Verses with the let- the Note. ters of Francis, pronounced an opinion We have already referred our readers directly contrary to what was expected. to Mr. Twisleton's narrative for the proof He maintained not only that he should not of the essential point that the Note and be justified in stating that the Verses were the Verses came from Francis ; but we in the handwriting of Francis, but he will now mention the circumstance to thought that he could prove the negative, which we alluded, and which proves inconviz., that Francis had not, and could not have, handwritten the Verses; and in cor- designate lithographers, or gentlemen connected roboration of this opinion he pointed out twice in their lives to express their belief that a par

with banks, who come forward as witnesses once or numerous peculiarities in the Verses which ticular document was or was not written by a cerwere not in the Letters, and numerous tain individual. The word has, then, a meaning

very different from that of general experts in hand. peculiarities in the Letters which were not writing, recognized as such in courts of justice, like in the Verses.

Mr. Chabot aud Mr. Netherelift, to whom cases of And here we may remark, in passing, disputed writing are systematically submitted from that the conduct of Mr. Chabot on this oc

time to time for their professional opinion, and who

are prepared to state detailed reasons for every such casion should be borne in mind by those opinion which they give. Having taken some pains who are in the habit of indulging in insin- to ascertain this point, I have been assured that duruations against experts.* Mr. Chabot, in ing the last fifty years the number of such experts

only two such experts in London practice now. * The following observations of Mr. Twisleton on Hence, tales about experts should be received with the subject of “experts” deserve to be remembered distrust, unless names and particulars are men. in the present investigation. — “The word 'expert' tioned, so that it may be ascertained in what sense is often used very loosely. It is frequently used to the word 'expert' is used."

testably that Tilghman was acquainted paragraph, it seems clear that Tilghman himself with the Verses. In 1772 Francis, who cannot be regarded as the author of the two was in Italy, wrote a letter to Dr. John lines, inasmuch as, in that case, the quotation Campbell, a leading literateur of the day. of them would be wanting in point, and be He was evidently proud of this letter, and nearly irrelevant. The subject under discussion attached so much importance to it, that is a poetical composition of Francis, and Tilghhe sent a copy of it to his friend Tilghman, man, while he stoutly denies the originality of who had returned to Philadelphia in Amer

that particular composition, declares himself ica, of which place he was a native. The ready to allow that Francis can weave originals, letter contains the following Latin Epi- This quotation would be singularly inappropri

and then quotes the two lines of the Verses. gram, which Francis wrote upon à marble

ate if Tilghman was merely quoting two lines of lion in the Medici Palace :

his own composition; while it was apposite, and Ungue oculoque minax, orisque horrendus might have been soothing to Francis after the biatu,

assault on his epigram, if it alluded to Francis's Imperia in sylvis tristia solus habet. Verses. The latter, therefore, may safely be Hunc catuli fugiunt, conjux, fulvique paren- | adopted as the correct explanation of the pastes,

sage; and the meaning of it is very much the Vix domini gressus auserit umbra sequi.” same as if Tilgbman had written, 'I deny that

the conception of your epigram was original, but Tilghman fully appreciated Francis’s let. I do not deny that you can weave originals, for ter to Dr. Campbell, but, in regard to the

your power to do this has been proved by your epigram, he indulged in the following crit- verses on Belinda.' At the same time, he icism in his reply : “I have no objection to probably quoted these two particular lines from the epigram of the old lion, provided you a catch of fancy in a play of words; to say will change the word conception for trans- that as Belinda, in the School of the Graces, lation, or imitation :

“improv'd ev'ry hour,' so Francis improved

what • He roared so loud and looked so wondrous

borrowed, and thus made his composi

tions originals.” grim, His very shadow durst not follow him '

The circumstances we have narrated Vide POPE περι Βαθους. .

above having enabled Mr. Twistleton to I have written this, partly out of revenge, test the sagacity and independence of Mr. and partly to show my reading and knowl- Chabot, it occurred to him as probable edge of languages.” This criticism would that, if sufficient materials were placed at be naturally unpalatable to Francis, who, Mr. Chabot's disposal, he would be able accordingly, in a Letter, which has not to give a sound opinion on the much more been preserved, seems to have waged bat- important question whether Sir Philip tle for the originality of his epigram. Francis did, or did not, handwrite the Tilghman replied in the following letter, Letters of Junius. In regard to Francis, which ends with the quotation of the two Mr. Twisleton procured, from a grandfirst lines of the second stanza of the daughter of Sir Philip Francis, through Verses:

Mr. Merivale, one of the two authors of " MY DEAR FRANCIS,

the “ Life of Francis,” a Letter-Book con“I have receiv'd your packet of the 17th of taining forty-two original Letters written July. You are very tenacious of your epigram. and sent by Francis to his brother-in-law I observe you contend for it as if your reputa- or to his wife in the years from 1767 to tion as a poet depended on it. I did not con- 1771 inclusive. And in regard to Junius, demn the composition - I only said it was no not only had the Trustees of the British an original, and I say so still; but yet I am Museum recently purchased all the originready to allow you can weave originals, because al Letters and writing3 of Junius in the • In the School of the Graces, by Venus at- possession of Mrs. Parkes, which had betended,

longed first to Mr. Henry Dick Woodfall, Belinda improves ev'ry hour.'"

and afterwards to her late hushund, Mr. Upon this Mr. Twistleton remarks : Parkes, but Mr. Murray readily gave ac“ Now, on an attentive consideration of this cess to the original Manuscripts of the Letters of Junius to Mr. Grenville which I though Mr. Chabot has written his Reports un. were in his possession. Under these cir- der professional responsibility, and they thus cumstances Mr. Twisleton gave formal deserve to be read with more than ordinary atwritten instructions to Mr. Chabot “that tention, he is desirous — and I publish his Rehe should submit the handwriting of Ju- ports with the same desire – that his conclurius to a searching comparison with the sions should in no respect be accepted on Letters of Sir Philip Francis, and should grounds of mere authority, but that they should state, professionally, his opinion in writing advances in their behalt.”

be judged of entirely by the reasons which he whether the Letters of Francis and of Junius respectively were, or were not, In seeking to prove that two different written by the same hand.”

handwritings have been made use of by Subsequently Mr. Twisleton requested the same person, it is important to observe Mr. Chabot to report whether the nega- the method pursued in the investigation. tive could, or could not, be proved respect. Most persons are content with a general ing Lady Temple and Lord George Sack- comparison, without endeavouring to ascerville, as well as the affirmative respecting tain the principles which govern the handSir Philip Francis. This request was sug- writing, or the characteristic habits in the gested to Mr. Twisleton by what had two handwritings under discussion. They passed respecting the Anonymous Verses, thus form their judgment by the impreswhen Mr. Chabot had negatived Francis's sion left upon their minds by general claim before Tilghman had been discov- similarity, without that careful examination ered as their handwriter; and it seemed to of the peculiar and distinctive formations Mr. Twisleton interesting to ascertain of individual letters which characterize the whether there were, or were not, any habits writing. “ The principles which underlie or peculiarities of writing in Lady Temple, all proof by comparison of handwitings or Lord George Sackville, which appeared are very simple, and when distinctly enunto Mr. Chabot incompatible, or not easily ciated, appear to be self-evident. To to be reconciled, with habits or pecu- prove that two documents were written by liarities in the handwriting of Junius. the same hand, coincidences must be shown

The result is contained in two elaborate to exist in them which cannot be acciReports, occupying 197 quarto pages, one dental. To prove that two documents on the handwriting of Sir Philip Francis, were written by different hands, discrepanand the other on the handwritings of cies must be pointed out in them which Lady Temple, Lord George Sackville, and cannot be accounted for by accident or by others. These are followed by facsimiles, disguise. These principles are easy to taken by photo-lithography, of the letters understand, but to exemplify them in of Junius and of the proof-sheets of these observations is by no means always easy." letters, as well as by similar facsimiles of It is the merit of these Reports that they the letters of Sir Philip Francis and of give an analysis of the handwriting by exthe other persons to whom the authorship amining separately the elements or letters of the Junian Letters has been at various of which it is composed. It would be imtimes ascribed. Thus we have an amount possible, however, to convey any adequate of evidence which has never previously idea of the method pursued by Mr. been presented to the public; and, indeed, Chabot in his investigation without enteras far as Francis is concerned, all the ing into minute details; and even then they facsiiniles of his autographs which have would be hardly intelligible without conbeen published in "Junius Identified," stant reference to the lithographed plates, in the “ Chatham Correspondence,” and in which we have not the means of reproducthe “ Memoirs of Sir P. Francis," do not, ing on our pages. But we can promise combined, quite equal in the number of such of our readers as will take the trouwords the first Letter of Francis contained ble to study Mr. Chabot's remarks and in the volume before us.

reasoning, with the help of the lithoThere is one peculiar feature in these graphed plates, a rich mine of instruction Reports to which Mr. Twisleton directs on a subject which had never yet been exspecial attention : —

plained in any systematic treatise. We “ As far as is known, they are the only in- may first state in general the conclusion stance in which an expert has deliberately pub- at which Mr. Chabot has arrived on the lished the result of his investigations into the long-disputed controversy respecting the handwri*ing of Junius and Francis; and most Junian handwriting. undoubtedly, they are the only instance in which any such expert has written professionally, and “ I find generally," says Mr. Chabot, “in subscribed his name to his opinion. Still, al-I the writing of the Letters of Sir Philip Francis

« PreviousContinue »