must not be strong and valiant, since Samson once fought at Ramath.
Nothing in literature, perhaps, is easier than to accuse a writer of plagiarism, and to summon by way of proof certain similarities of expression, and even of thought. Nearly all great authors have, at one time or another, been subjected to this kind of detraction. It is on record that an ingenious critic once sought to prove the Æneid Erse, from the likeness in sound and meaning between Arma virumque cano and 'Airm's am fear canam. But never, probably, before did the charges descend to so minute particulars as in the case of Ossian. Regarding this kind of attack, Dr. Johnson himself may be quoted. In the Rambler, No. 143, he says—"When the excellence of a new composition can no longer be contested, and malice is compelled to give way to the unanimity of applause, there is yet one expedient to be tried by which the author may be degraded though his work be reverenced. . . . This accusation is dangerous, because, even when it is false, it may be sometimes urged with probability." Only when one writer makes use of ideas or language which he could not otherwise than by theft have produced, will the charge of plagiarism hold good. There is entire absence of such a circumstance from the translation of Ossian.
