In reading works of taste, it is the business of criticism, to remark in what manner any of these properties of thought, or others of the incidental kind, fuch as Pathos, Refemblance, Contraft, Congruity, and the like, are exemplified, or violated.

AFTER the Thoughts themselves, the next object of criticism is the METHOD in which they are difpofed.

NOTHING is more inconfiftent with good-fense and true tafte, than the contempt with which fome affect to treat that methodical arrangement, which Horace fo happily ftyles lucidus ordo. Every kind of writing is certainly illuminated by an accurate difpofition of its several parts. Method is fo far from being an abfolute proof of stupidity, that it is no very questionable indication of strength of mind, and compass of thought. The first conceptions, which accidental affociation may raise in the mind, are not likely to come forth fpontaneously in that order, which is most natural, and best fuited to form a regular piece. It is only by the exercife of much attention and accurate judgment, that a writer can give his work the beauty of regularity amidst variety and without this, the detached parts, however excellent, are but the members of a disjointed ftatue *. The reader, therefore, who wishes to form an accurate judgment concerning the merit of any literary production will inquire, whether the author's general arrangement be fuch as best fuits his defign; whether there be no

* Neque enim, quamquam fufis omnibus membris, statua fit, niß collocetur. QUINTIL.

confufion in the difpofition of particular parts; no redundancies or unneceffary repetitions; in fine, whether every fentiment be, not only juft, but pertinent, and in its proper place.

THE laft, but not the leaft extenfive field of criticism is EXPRESSION.

HERE the first quality to be confidered is PURITY. This confifts in fuch a choice of words, and fuch a grammatical conftruction of fentences, as is confonant to the analogy of the language, and to the general ufage of accurate writers. Purity in the choice of words requires that, except in works of fcience, where new terms are wanted, no words be admitted but such as are established by good authority; that words be used in the fense which is commonly annexed to them, and that all heterogeneous mixtures of foreign or antiquated words be avoided. In the prefent ftate of modern languages, particularly the English, ftability and uniformity are of more confequence than enlargement. It is not in the power of fashion to justify the affectation of introducing foreign words and phrases to express even that, which cannot be so concifely expreffed in the vernacular tongue. With refpect to grammatical purity, its importance, as a fource of perfpicuity and elegance, is univerfally acknowledged: but, it is too commonly taken for granted, that a competent acquaintance with grammar, efpecially with the grammatical. ftructure of the English language, which is remarkable for its. fimplicity, may be eafily acquired. Hence fo little attention is paid to grammatical accuracy by fome

writers,

writers, in other respects of distinguished merit, that it would not be difficult to felect from their works examples of the most flagrant violations of syntax. These are faults not to be protected by authority: and it is one of the most useful offices of criticism, to detect and expofe them.

A SECOND kind of excellence in expreffion is PERSPICUITY. The chief fources of this effential property of good writing are (befides clearness of conception, already confidered) Precision in the ufe of Terms, and Accuracy in the ftructure of Sentences.

VERBAL PRECISION requires, that a writer express his exact meaning, without tautology, ambiguity, or redundance; that he be careful not to load his fentences with words which are fynonimous, or nearly fo; that he make ufe of no terms, or phrafes, but fuch as convey a determinate meaning; and that he avoid the introduction of uncommon words, where words in ordinary use would answer his purpose as well. Perfpicuity is equally injured by an exceffive multiplicity of words, and by a parade of pompous and stately language.

GRAMMATICAL arrangement is favourable to perfpicuity, when it marks diftinctly the relation of the several parts of a sentence, and confequently of the ideas which they reprefent; and when it avoids fuch deviations from. the natural, or customary order of words, as might mislead or perplex the reader. It may also contribute, in fome measure, towards perfpicuity, to preferve, during the course of a sentence, unity of person and scene; avoiding, as much as poffible, all abrupt tranfitions from

one

one perfon, or fubject, to another. But there seems to be no fufficient ground for a rule, which has of late gained fome authority, that a writer, for the fake of diftinctness, should confine himself to the expreffion of a fingle thought in each fentence. It would be easy to fhow, by examples, that this fashionable method of reducing fentences to one standard, whatever it may add to the neatness and elegance of style, will at least equally diminish its richness and variety; and-which is still more important—that it must, often, materially impair the fenfe, by interrupting the relation and dependance of the thoughts. A writer who thinks closely, and in a train, will frequently have occafion to express combina-tions of ideas, which will require sentences of confiderable length. The beft writers of the laft period, such as Swift, Addifon, and Middleton, who difdained to confine their conceptions within the narrow inclosure of fuch arbitrary rules, took all the scope, in the structure of their periods, which the extent and concatenation of their thoughts required; and thus produced many fuccessful imitations of the beft models of antiquity, in that kind of writing, which is copious without verbosity, and complex without intricacy.

WHATEVER mode of construction a writer's subject, or genius, may lead him to adopt, he should, however, be careful, that it be employed in a manner perfectly confiftent with perfpicuity. If, for the fake of ftrength and energy, he be difpofed to lean towards concifenefs, let him cautiously avoid that elliptical diction, which leaves the reader too much to fupply. If, through the fertility

of

of his invention, his language naturally becomes diffufe, let him guard against that kind of obscurity, which is the effect of involving the fenfe in a cloud of words. At all events, a writer fhould ftudiously avoid every mode of expreffion which is unfavourable to perfpicuity: for, what can be a greater fault, than that language, which is only useful fo far as it is perfpicuous, fhould need an interpreter *? Perfpicuity requires, not only that what is written may be understood, but that it cannot poffibly be misunderstood t. Every violation of this law of good writing, it is the business of criticism carefully to remark.

MELODY is another excellence in expreffion, of too much confequence to be overlooked. In every kind of writing, according to the degree of fkill, with which foft and rugged, long and fhort, accented and unaccented founds, whether fimple or complex, are combined, the ear receives an agreeable impreffion, in some degree similar to that, which is produced by a melodious fucceffion of mufical notes. This effect is heightened, when the divisions of distinct claufes, and the cadences at the close of entire sentences, are agreeably diverfified, Melody is so intimately combined with the other graces of expression, and has fo large a fhare in the pleasures produced by fine writing, that it deferves more attention, both among writers and critics, than the moderns have been inclined to allow it.

Oratio vero, cujus fumma virtus eft perfpicuitas, quam fit vitiosa, fi egeat interprete! QUINTIL.

† Non ut intelligere poffit, fed ne omnino poffit non intelligere. ID.

ELEGANCE,