ance, and whom he commonly confiders with little kindness *. Sir ANDREW's opinion of idle people and beggars occurs in No. 232, (a paper attributed not to STEELE, but to BUDGELL, or perhaps MARTIN) and does not feem to merit the cenfure of our learned biographer. There can furely be no difference of fentiment on the question, whether idleness is to be fupported at the public expence; and if the reader will refer to Sir ANDREW's letter, in No. 549, in which he announces his plan of retirement, he will find in it nothing of the unfeeling spirit of commerce, a spirit, which, if not extinct in our days, must be very induftriously concealed. Every charitable inftitution in the metropolis bears testimony to the liberal and generous fpirit of men in commercial life, and there is nothing upon record which can induce an impartial inquirer to think that the cafe was otherwise, when commercial men were a more diftinct class. It is, however, true, that little ufe is made of Sir ANDREW's character, and the fame remark may be applied to Capt. SENTRY and the CLERGYMAN. WILL HONEYCOMB Occurs more frequently, and affords more amusement, although not altogether of the unmixed kind. This character, as well as the others, was sketched by STEELE, but is not preferved with much care, or attention to moral effect. WILL is at best a sorry rake, and at the age of fixty marries a country girl, complains of his infirmities, yet talks of leaving his children "ftrong bodies and *This opinion is given in a different manner in BOSWELL'S Life of JOHNSON. ADDISON had made his Sir ANDREW FREEPORT a true Whig, arguing against giving charity to beggars, and throwing out other fuch ungracious fentiments; but that he had thought better, and made amends, by making him found an hofpital for decayed farmers.' Vol. ii. p. 70. Edit. 2d. healthy conftitutions." All this is confiftent, if we confider his letter in No. 530, as a fatire on old rakes, who neglect to enlist in social life until they are past service, and can only perform the ludicrous character of "the marriage-hater matched." Conjecture has been bufily employed to difcover the perfons meant by these characters. Sir ROGER DE COVERLEY was fuppofed, by the late Mr. TYERS, to be a Sir JOHN PACKINGTON, of Worcefterfhire," a Tory, not without good fenfe, but abounding in abfurdities." Captain SENTRY is faid to have been C. KEMPENFELT, father of Admiral KEMPENFELT, who deplorably loft his life when the Royal George, of 100 guns, funk at Spithead, Aug. 29, 1782, and WILL HONEYCOMB has been traced to a Colonel CLELAND. There appears, however, very little ground for any of these conjectures. The account of the SPECTATOR and his CLUB feems to be altogether fictitious, and the character of the SPECTATOR and of Sir ROGER DE COVERLEY are certainly among the happiest fictions that could have been contrived for the purpose they were to answer. In the other characters although there is neither so much novelty or vigour of imagination difplayed; they are occafionally admirably grouped, as in No. 34, and the whole gives a dramatic effect, adding to the other charms of that variety which has rendered the SPECTATOR One of the most popular books in any language. Of ADDISON's humour fo much has been faid, that it would not be easy to vary the praises that have been lavished for near a century. "As a defcriber of life and manners he must be allowed to ftand perhaps the firft of the first rank. His humour, which, as STEELE obferves, is peculiar to himself, is fo happily diffufed as to give the grace of novelty to domeftic fcenes and daily occurrences. He never outfteps the modefty of nature, nor raises merriment or wonder by the violation of truth. His figures neither divert by distortion, nor amaze by aggravation. He copies life with fo much fidelity, that he can hardly be faid to invent; yet his exhibitions have an air so much original, that it is difficult to suppose them not merely the product of imagination *" "Dr. JOHNSON here characterises the humour of ADDISON with fingular acutenefs of thought and felicity of expreffion. Many writers feem to think. that humour confifts in violent and preternatural exaggeration; as there are, no doubt, many frequenters of the theatre, who find no want of comic power in the actor who has a fufficient variety of wry faces and antic geftures; and many admirers of farce and fun, with whom bombaft and big words would pass for exquifite ridicule. But wry faces are made with little effort, caricatures may be sketched by a very unskilful hand, and he who has no command of natural expreffion, may eafily put together gigantic figures and rumbling fyllables. It is only a GARRICK who can do juftice to Benedict and Ranger; but any candle-fnuffer might perfonate Pistol and Bombardinian. ADDISON'S humour resembles his ftyle. Every phrafe in the one, and circumftance in the other, appears fo artless and fo obvious, that a perfon who had never made the trial would be apt to think nothing more easy than to feign a ftory of Sir ROGER DE CoVERLEY, or compofe a vifion like that of Mirza. But the art and the difficulty of both are fuch as Horace had in his mind when he faid "Ut fibi quivis Speret idem fudet multum, fruftraque laboret *JOHNSON's Life of ADDISON, + BEATTIE ubi fupra. But although ADDISON's humour was original, it was not abfolutely incommunicable. It has been already hinted*, that STEELE imbibed a confiderable portion of it. Of this there are fome few inftances in the TATLER, but many in the SPECTATOR. Indeed no two men, even allowing the fuperiority of ADDISON, were ever better qualified, by correfpondence or difpofition of mind, to act as auxiliaries in a work of this nature. In most cases, what the one sketched the other could fill up: what the one began the other with little difficulty could continue. We have an early example in STEELE'S outline of Sir ROGER DE COVERLEY, and the ufe ADDISON made of it: in ADDISON'S account of his taciturnity, and STEELE's happy illuftration of it in No. 4. No. 64, by STEELE, muft, I think, be allowed the most exact imitation of ADDISON'S ftyle and humour ever attempted, yet it carries every proof, that fuch a cafe can admit, of having been written with cafe. Another inftance of their mutual exchange of fubjects appears in the propofal for an infirmary to cure illhumour, by STEELE, in No. 424, and 429, which was adopted by ADDISON in No. 440. Other examples may be traced in thefe volumes †; and a few of the other contributors, as well as many of the unknown correfpondents ‡, aimed at a kind of uniformity, in which they were not unsuccessful, prefenting occafionally fome of thofe delicate ftrokes of humour, which in ADDISON were habitual and diftinctive. HE every where difcovers the ingenium par materia, every where preferves the equability of * Pref. Hift. and Biog. to the TATLER. ↑ No. 14. is pointed out by the annotators on the SPECTATOR, as meriting the attention of fuch as pretend to diftinguish with wonderful facility between ADDISON's and STEELE's papers." See No. 599, 608, 612, 615, and 619, the authors of which are unknown. his mind, the kindness of his difpofition, and the pleasure he took jucunda et idonea dicere vita. No. 69 is an inftructive example of the benevolent views he delighted to take of mankind and of Providence. There is a perpetual smile on his countenance; he rarely exhibits the fneer of the fatirist, and perhaps never the frown of the rigid moralift. A higher praise than what belongs to human wit yet remains, and cannot be bestowed in language more appropriate than that of JOHNSON. "It is justly observed by TICKELL, that ADDISON employed wit on the fide of virtue and religion. He not only made the proper ufe of wit himself, but taught it to others; and from his time it has been generally fubfervient to the cause of reason and of truth. He has diffipated the prejudice that had long connected gaiety with vice, and eafinefs of manners with laxity of principles. He has restored virtue to its dignity, and taught innocence not to be ashamed. This is an elevation of literary character above all Greek, above all Roman fame. No greater felicity can genius attain, than that of having purified intellectual pleasure, separated mirth from indecency, and wit from licentioufnefs; of having taught a fucceffion of writers to bring elegance and gaiety, to the aid of goodness; and, if I may use expreffions yet more awful, of having turned many to righteoufnefs."-" As a teacher of wif dom, he may be confidently followed. ligion has nothing in it enthusiastic or fuperftitious; he appears neither weakly credulous nor wantonly fceptical; his morality is neither dangerously lax nor impracticably rigid. All the enchantment of fancy and all the cogency of argument are employed to recommend to the reader his real intereft, the care of pleafing the Author of his being." Many of the fubjects difcuffed in thefe volumes VOL. I. b His re |