the insolence of knowledge is as insupportable as the affectation of folly. The subjects of ridicule are to be justly chosen and carefully distinguished.
Concludes with some Reflections on the authors of the Grubstreet-Journal, who have undertaken the drudgery of invective under pretence of being champions for politeness.
Weekly Register, Jan. 34. No 41.
HE remarks, that from an ambition of emulating, without a capacity to equal another's excellencies, have arisen an infinite number of pretenders to reputation. The regular physician is intruded upon by the empyrick; the masterly painter is slighted in favour of impudence and ignorance; the most elegant and chaste compositions of musick, are forc'd to give way to amusements less polite: Quackery interferes with trade, and undermines honesty. The pedlar stiles himself a merchant; No wonder then that authors of every character are so wretchedly personated. Exclaims against bad writers, from the Court-scribbler to the Grubfstreet hackney.
Proceeds to the description of a good author; says, his principal end, in occasional writings, should be to entertain the publick innocently and genteely; to insinuate knowledge in the disguise of amusement, and trifle the world into virtue and good manners: he should consider every reader as a critick and a gentleman, and be fearful of offending either: points out what a writer should observe, who would recommend himself and entertain the world; i.e. an important subject, a clear and expressive method, a flowing and natural stile, imagination and judgment, truth and impartiality, modesty in his images, pity for the failings of human nature, and endeavours to amend 'em. He shou'd think himself a son of the publick and be an example of the generous spirit he would recommend; he should be able to trace the passions thro' all their disguises; have knowledge in his head, and good humour in his heart: he should be an enemy to vice, but a friend to all mankind.
Weekly Register, Jan. 30. No. 42.
THIS is a continuation of a former discourse upon criticism, wherein he points out several excellencies that distinguish a good critick from a bad.
He then considers the manner of criticism, that some are Fox-hunters in censure, and declare war against all writers in general. Some are like Fig and Sutton, the declar'd antagonists to one another. Some are Whigs and Tories, divided into parties, always applauding themselves, and condemning their opposers. Some are Grubstreet hawkers, who make a penny of throwing about censure at random without distinction or regard of persons.
The design of criticism is amendment; and concludes with acknowledging his own failings, and his readiness to be handsomely corrected.
The Universal Spectator, Saturday Jan. 2. No. 117.
MR. Stonecastle, the nominal author, begins this day's entertainment with observing that men are not born for themselves; that we are not only bound to relieve the necessities of others, but in all our dealings, &c. with mankind to render ourselves grateful to all, offensive to none, much less take pleasure in doing disagreeable things. Says there is a sett of people who are frequently committing ill-bred, rude, and even shocking things, which they excuse by only saying, 'tis their humour. Instances in a certain knight, who never spoke himself, nor suffer'd any body in his presence to speak louderthan
