this cafe, what fhould be the mean, is prepofterously made the end.

The pleasures of the imagination are more obvious, but they certainly are not so refined, as thofe of the understanding. The latter are attended with fome increase of knowledge, on which the mind may, from time to time, expatiate by reflection. The former, though transporting for a time, are confined in their effects, and are quickly evanefcent. The pleasures of imagination feem to hold a middle space between the grofs enjoyments of fense, and the more refined delights of the understanding. All are, in fome degree, capable of enjoying the two former; but very few have a relifh for the latter as very few are capable of fuch a ftretch and perfeverance of thought, as alone can render them grateful.

It is owing to the indulgence of this exceffive licenfe of flattering the imagination, that, at an advanced age, as judgment ripens, the greater part of poetry becomes infipid: and the truth of this reflection may lead us to determine the fpecies of poetical compofition which is moft excellent; which is certainly that, for which our relifh does not abate with the growth of our experience and understanding; that, which abounds with fentiment, and conveys useful truths with grace, precifion, and harmony.

In fact, the true diftinguishing characteristic of poetry, feems to confift rather in the ftyle, than in

the

the matter.

The effence of true poetry, is harmony. As to the faculty of the mind, to which it properly refers, that depends altogether on the nature of the various objects it treats of, and which are common to profe as well as verse.

Sublimity and pathos àre not confined to poetry; fince profe, as well as verse, may be fublime, pathetic, narrative, or defcriptive; and may be directed to the imagination, or the judg ment, as the fubject requires. No man will venture to deny, that Longinus and Quintilian, Locke and Newton, &c. though no poets, were all men of imagination,

Admitting, however, that the fublime and the pathetic, are the most excellent fpecies of poetical compofition; yet, can it be truly said, that Mr. POPE did not excel in these?

If the critic means, that we do not find in POPE a poem, in which the fublime and the pathetic conftitute the character of the whole; this is only faying, in other words, what every one knows, that Mr. POPE never compofed a tragedy, or an epic poem. But, if he means to deny, that there are a thoufand paffages in POPE's poems, in which the fublime and the pathetic are difplayed in their utmost force and perfection; this is a miftake that all who have eyes, or hearts, or heads, muft be convinced of,

Does not the Meffiah afford inftances of the truc fublime? Has not the critic himself allowed

the

the lines, toward the conclufion of Windfor Foreft, to contain ftrokes of genuine and fublime poetry? Can any thing be more fublime and pathetic, than feveral paffages in his Essay on Man as well as in the fourth book of the Dunciad; not to mention the Verfes to the Memory of an unfortunate Lady, the Ode to St. Cecilia, and many other of his compofitions, from whence several inftances have been selected.

As to the pathetic in particular, the critic himfelf is forced to acknowledge, that the Epistle from Eloifa to Abelard, with the Elegy to the Memory of an unfortunate Lady, are truly tender and pathetic: and his feelings have, in many paffages, extorted from him the moft warm and involuntary confeffions of our poet's excellence, both with refpect to fublimity and pathos.

With what propriety then can he afk,"What is there tranfcendently fublime or pa"thetic in POPE?" when he has himself, with real tafte and candor, pointed out fo many inftances of both the one and the other, in the courfe of his criticisms on little more than one volume of our poet's works?

Perhaps, however, he will not allow POPE to excel in these qualities, because he has only difplayed them occafionally, and not made them his principal ftudy and attention. But to determine whether a writer has a genius for the fublime, the pathetic, the defcriptive, or any other mode of compofition, it is fufficient that

he

he fhews himself capable of exerting thofe various powers, whenever the nature of the feveral fubjects he treats of, requires that he should display them.

Mr. POPE has himself given us the reason why he did not cultivate thofe fpecies of poetry, which chiefly delight the imagination. rather.chofe to mix the utile dulci

He

"And stoop'd to truth,and moraliz'd his fong."

Or, as he elsewhere expreffes it,

He turn'd the tuneful art "From founds to things, from fancy to the "heart."

His ftrong fenfe, and moral caft of mind, having inclined him principally to cultivate didactic and moral compofition, many critics have endea voured to confine his genius to those kinds; and infinuated, with this effayist *, that he did not excel in the other fpecies of compofition; and have therefore been ready to compliment him with the frigid encomium, which Voltaire has paid to Mr. Boileau, and which the effayist has transferred to Mr. POPE, by ftiling him, LE POETE DE LA RAISON. A compliment,

* Speaking of Mr. POPE's defign of writing an epic poem, the critic intimates a fufpicion, that fo DIDACTIC a genius would have been deficient in that fublime and pathesic, which are the main nerves of the epopea.

which writers of luxuriant imagination and fcanty judgment, may, without prejudice to their vanity, pay to thofe who have more fenfe than themselves.

But why should the critic apply, or rather pervert, Voltaire's fentiments, to exprefs his judgment of Mr. POPE; which he modeftly confeffes himself unwilling to speak out in plain English? If Voltaire's authority is of any weight, the critic need not be told, that whatever Voltaire might think of Boileau, he entertained a very different judgment of Mr. POPE from that which the critic has paffed, by transferring Voltaire's character of the former, to the latter.

We have already feen, that he complimented Mr. POPE as one endowed with a gift given to one in a million, and that only to the true poet. -But this is not all.-In a letter from England to one of his friends at Paris, he fays farther of him," I intend to fend you one or two poems of "Mr POPE, the best poet of England, and at "prefent of all the world. I hope you are ac"quainted enough with the English tongue, to "be fenfible of all the charms of his works. "For my part, I look upon his poem, called "the Effay on Criticism, as fuperior to the Art

of Poetry of Horace; and his Rape of the "Lock is, in my opinion, above the Lutrin of "Defpreaux. I never faw fo amiable an imagi

nation, fo gentle graces, fo great variety, fo "much wit, and fo refined knowledge of the

5.

"world,