dominant quality of the writer. Thus a Short and compact, and a diffused and flowing expreffion are the proper confequences of certain correfponding characters of the human genius. One has a vigorous comprehenfive conception, and therefore collects his fenfe into few words. Another, whofe imagination is more languid, contemplates his objects leifurely, and fo difplays their beauties in a greater compass of words, and with more circumstance and parade of language. A polite and elegant humour delights in the grace of eafe and perfpicuity. A fevere and melancholic fpirit infpires a forcible, but involved expreffion. There are many other nicer differences and peculiarities of manner, which, though not reducible, perhaps, to general heads, the critic of true tafte eafily underftands.

2. As men of different tempers and difpofitions affume a different caft of expreffion, fo may the fame obfervation be applied, ftill more generally, to different çountries and times. It may be difficult to explain the efficient causes of this diversity,

which

which I have no concern with at prefent. The fact is, that the eloquence of the eaftern world has, at all times, been of another strain from that of the western. And, also, in the several provinces of each, there has been some peculiar note of variation. The Afiatic, of old, had its proper stamp, which diftinguished it from the Attic; just as the Italian, French, and Spanish wits have, each, their feveral characteristic manners of expreffion.

That

A different state of times has produced the like effect; which a late writer accounts for, not unaptly, from what he calls a progreffion of life and manners. which cannot be difputed is, that the modes of writing undergo a perpetual change or variation in every country. And it is further obfervable, that these changes in one country, under fimilar circumftances, have a fignal correfpondence to thofe, which the inceffant rotation of taste brings about in every other.

Of near affinity to this laft confideration is another, arifing from the corresponding genius of two people, however remote from

each

each other in time and place. And, as it happens, the application may be made directly to ourselves in a very important inftance. "Languages, fays one, always take "their character from the genius of a peo<6 'ple. So that two the moft diftant states, "thinking and acting with the fame gene"rous love of mankind, muft needs have very near the fame combinations of ideas. "And it is our boast, that in this con

66

formity we approach the nearest to an"tient Greece and Italy." I quote these words from a tract [s], which the author perhaps may confider with the fame neglect, as Cicero did his earlier compofitions on Rhetoric; but which the curious will regard with reverence, as a fine effay of his genius, and a prelude to the great things he was afterwards feen capable of producing. But to come to the use we may make of this fine obfervation. The correfponding state of the English and Roman people has produced very near the fame combinations of ideas. May we not carry

[s] A Critical and Philofophical Inquiry into the causes of prodigies and miracles, &c. p. 130.

the

the conclufion ftill further on the fame principle, that it produced very near the fame combinations of words? The fact is, as the fame writer obferves, That "we "have a language that is brief, compre "henfive, nervous, and majeftic:" The very character which an old Roman would give us of his own language. And when the fame general character of language prevails, is it any thing ftrange that the different modifications of it, or peculiar styles, arifing from the various turns and difpofitions of writers (which, too, in fuch circumftances will be correfponding) fhould therefore be very fimilar in the productions of the two states? Or, in other words, can we wonder that fome of our beft writers bear a nearer refemblance, I mean independently of direct imitation, to the Latin claffics, than those of any other people in

modern times?

But let it fuffice to leave these remarks without further comment or explanation. The use the difcerning reader will make of them, is, that if different writers agree the fame general difpofition, or in the fame national

in

natianal character; live together in the fame period of time; or in correfponding periods of the progreffion of manners, or are under the influence of a correfponding genius of policy and government; in every of these cafes, fome confiderable fimilarity of expreffion may be occafioned by the agency of general principles, without any fufpicion of studied or defigned imitation.

11. An identity of phrase and diction is a much furer note of plagiarism. For confidering the vast variety of words, which any language, and especially the more copious ones furnish, and the infinite poffible combinations of them into all the forms of phraseology, it would be very ftrange, if two perfons fhould hit on the fame identical terms, and much more should they agree in the fame precife arrangement of them in whole fentences.

There is no defending coincidences of this kind; and, whatever writers themselves may pretend, or their friends for them, no one can doubt a moment of fuch identity being a clear and decifive proof of imitation.

Yet