BY OUR AUTHOR. ments of great severity. He does smile however; at those moments there is a benignity and sincerity that invite confidence. He is rather awkward in his address. The peculiar character and magnitude of Mr. Munroe's pursuits have withheld his attention from the minor and less important subjects of literature. And he is very far from what we should call a man of general reading and sci ence. It is said his mind is neither rich nor brilliant, but capable of the most laborious analysis. IN THE BRITISH SPY. His countenance when grave has rather the appearance of sternness. -A smile however lights it up to very high advantage, and gives it a most impressive and engaging air of suavity and benevolence. -His attentions are never performed with the striking and captivating graces of Marlborough or a Bolingbroke. To be plain there is often in his manner an inartificial and even an awkward simplicity, &c. It is possible that the early habit of contemplating subjects as expanded as the earth itself, with all the great interests of the nations thereof, may have inspired him with an indifference, perhaps an inaptitude for mere points of literaturc. Whatever may have been the occasion, his acquaintance with the fine arts is certainly very limited and superficial. Nature has given him a mind neither rapid nor rich, but to compensate him for this he is endued with a habit of application which no difficulties can shake, no labours can lire. Having thus merely noticed some of the points of resemblance between these two performances, we shall permit the reader to form his own conclusions. To enter minutely into the consideration of all the sketches' contained in this work, would lead us into a more extended discussion than is consistent with our limits. For the present, therefore, we will barely remark, that our author has seized some of the features of Messrs. Clay, Wirt, and Barbour, although on many points we differ with him in opinion: that with some allowances for redundances of style, and exaggerations of fancy, he has done no more than justice to the uncommon vehemence of Mr. Pinkney's oratory, as well as to his intellectual endowments; that with an accurate conception of the probity, learning, and talents of Mr. Lowndes, he has produced of this gentleman rather a feeble caricature than a well finished portrait: and that, of all, he has been most happy in his delineation of Mr. King. It would have been surprising indeed if he had altogether failed in portraying the strongly marked features of a gentleman who, with the magnanimity of Aristides, has sacrificed every selfish and ignoble consideration to the public good; and at a time when his country experienced the calamities of domestic dissension and foreign war, instead of seizing the occasion to diminish the public confidence in the government, and cast censure on the administration to which he was opposed, was seen among the foremost in proposing those schemes of finance which were afterwards from necessity adopted; in devising those plans, by which the war could be brought to a successful termination, and supporting every mea sure which his wisdom and experience could suggest, with the most edifying zeal and masculine eloquence. Of all the characters, however, which the author has attempted to depict, there is none to which he has done so little justice as to that of Mr. Calhoun: and as it is due to this gentleman, as well as to our author, to state the grounds of our opinion, we hope to be excused for any apparent prolixity. In one part of the portrait our author informs us, that on all subjects, whether abstract or ordinary, Mr. C. thinks with a rapidity that no difficulties can resist, and with a novelty that never fails to delight,' that he possesses the brilliancy of Burke, and the fire of Pitt,' that with an invention that never abandons him, and whose fertility astonishes, he seems to loath the parade of rhetoric, and the glitter and decorations of art;' that in the tempest and whirlwind of his eloquence, his argumentation is so rapid, his thoughts so novel, yet apparently correct, that you can neither anticipate nor think,' that it is not until the fascination of his manner has subsided that you can feel inclined to reason; even then his witchery lingers on the imagination, and casts a veil over the judg ment:' From these laboured, if not brilliant touches, let us direct our attention to the dark shades of the picture. We are afterwards informed, that although the fertility of his invention astonishes, his creations are not those of imagination, in which he is deficient:" that with all this fascination of manner,' 'his style has none of the embellishments of art or witcheries of fancy:' and that amidst the tempest and whirlwind of his eloquence, whilst exhibiting the 'brilliancy of Burke,' and the fire of Pitt'-' he is, ALMOST TO DRYNESS, plain, UNADORNED, and concise!' From the perusal of these passages, we were impelled to the conclusion, that the first or the last part of the delineation has been greatly overcharged; and that from the vain attempt to effect impossibilities, and unite in one person the most opposite qualities, the writer has presented us with a portrait which could have had no original. While he has thus mistaken the intellectual powers of Mr. Calhoun, he does not appear to have been more fortunate in his view of his political abilities. At one time Mr. C. is represented as a prodigy, astonishing the veterans around him by the powers of his mind and the resistlessness of his cloquence,' but at another, without perseverance of investigation, tension of thought, and patience of judgment:' our author admits that he has all the ingenuity, WITHOUT THE SOPHISTRY, of Godwin,' but declares that he occasionally is seen to propose schemes impracticable or inju rious, merely to show the affluence of his mind, and fertility of ingenuity: and, to complete the climax of absurdity, we are not only informed that this man, whose mind is so powerful and eloquence so resistless, can be capable of the childish weakness and contemptible vanity of proposing impracticable and injurious schemes, merely to display 'his fertility of ingenuity,' but has preserved the esteem and admiration of his political associates, by exhibiting 'inconsistency of mind, and eccentricities and aberrations of conduct.' We will not enlarge on the manifest impossibility that every part of this statement can be correct. Its incongruity is evident; and the plain fact appears to be that the author has given us the feverish creations of a distempered fancy for the sober realities of truth and justice. There is not, in our opinion, in the community, a person against whom the charge of inconsistency can be made with less plausibility than Mr. Calhoun. Frank, open, and sincere, the tenor of his life, and the dictates of his understanding, are alike opposed to political duplicity. Nor do we differ more from our author in our opinion of Mr. C. than in our anticipations of his future course. For while he is apprehensive that the sphere of usefulness of Mr. Calhoun will be contracted by his recent appointment, and that he who in the legisla tive hall, enrapt by his eloquence, may, in the cabinet, dwindle into obscurity; we feel the strongest conviction that his recent elevation will serve still more strongly to display the liberality of his views, the extent of his resources, and the energy of his character. And when we consider the habit of the American people to examine the dispositions of the heart, as well as the powers of the understanding, and advert to the fact, that no man, however high his endowments, has long continued popular without exhibiting proofs of private and public virtue, we have reason for the belief that his career will be as fortunate in its progress, as it has been auspicious in its dawn. It would have given us satisfaction if our author had not made it our duty to notice his sketch of Mr Roberts. This gentleman is described as a 'plain farmer,' who, although once à mechanic, and not able to boast of a liberal education, possesses all that can constitute and dignify the patriot and statesman.' While, with our author, we are ready to ascribe to Mr. R. the possession of 'native good sense,' and 'moral and political integrity,' we are far from considering these qualities sufficient to justify the most extravagant eulogium. It was not without surprise, therefore, mingled with disgust, that we found him compared to Aristides, Fabricius and Cato, or to the spot of fertility amidst desarts of sand, or the rock in the ocean, placid and immoveable, enduring the dangers that surround, and braving the tempests that beat upon him with undeviating firmness, for the safety of his country and the glory of his God. If this were intended as a compliment to Mr. R. it has surely been made at the expense of the community: for no one could suppose that 'moral and political integrity' could greatly abound, when its possessor has, for those qualities alone, been so highly extolled. The inference, indeed, from his allusion to "the spot of fertility amidst desarts of sand, would seem to sanction the idea, that a universal degeneracy prevailed, if not in the whole community, at least among the political associates of this gentleman. Such fulsomeness of flattery can require from us no severity of animadversion. Before we conclude this examination, we cannot omit adverting to one or two opinions advanced by our author, which may, for their singularity at least, deserve some attention. To prevent misapprehension, let us quote from him. (Page 53 & 54.) 'Between oratory and poetry there is, I conceive, an essential difference. Conviction is the object of the orator, and pleasure that of the poet. The powers of mind necessary to produce these different results are not the same: reason governs the one and imagination the other. The former is confined to argument and truth, the latter to imagery and sentiment. The orator analyses and reasons, compares and deduces; the poet combines and imitates. Memory and judgment are the powers employed by the former: "imagination and invention those exercised by the latter.” As our author has here stated the difference between the orator and poet, it follows that they can have none of those qualities in common, which are the distinguishing characteristics of either. According to this novel theory, then, conviction is the object of the orator, but not of the poet, and pleasure is the object of the poet, but not of the orator. Reason governs the orator, but not the poet, and imagination the poet, but not the orator. While the orator is confined to the dull regions of argument and truth, the poet alone is permitted to soar in the elevated atmosphere of imagery and sentiment. Memory and judgment are the powers employed by the orator: but while the poet is condemned to eternal forgetfulness, he enjoys some remuneration in the exclusive possession of imagination and invention. Such are the absurdities in which our author is involved, by attempting to draw distinctions which do not exist in nature. We should be gratified to see him strip the orations of Cicero and Burke of their imagery and sentiment, and all those beauties which flow alone from a creative imagination, and then inform us what remains to confirm their reputation as consummate orators. And we are inclined to the opinion that Homer, Virgil, and Shakspeare, are quite as much indebted, for their immortality, to their reason, memory, and judgment, as to the unequalled fertility of their ima gination. The simple fact is, between the orator and poet there is the closest alliance. They both employ tropes and figures for the purpose of enlivening, beautifying, and invigorating the diction; and it is the object of the former, as well as the latter, to delight the fancy, as in epic; impart instruction, as in didactic; and move the passions, as in tragedy. Having thus formed, we believe, the first idea of an accomplished orator entirely destitute of imagination, the author afterwards tells us (page 99,) what are the faculties of mind and attainments in knowledge which he conceives to be essential to this character. The following are his words: 'I do not conceive that the highest powers are necessary to form ar orator of the present day.' His object is not to inform, but to propel and stimulate the mind to action. For this purpose it is sufficient that his sensibilities are acute, that his knowledge of mankind is accurate, and that his acquaintance with the common affairs and transactions of life is not more imperfect than that of those around him.' 'We do not wish him to exhibit the philosopher or poet.' We will not affront the understanding of the reader by attempting a formal refutation of an opinion opposed by every writer upon the subject, ancient and modern. But even admitting that Cicero was mistaken when he declared that the progress which he had made in the art of speaking was not so much owing to the precepts of rhetoricians, as to the lessons of philosophers; that there was neither wit nor sense in his attempt to ridicule those who should undertake to instruct others in what they had never learned themselves; and that Quintilian was equally incorrect when he inculcated the opinion that there was no accomplishment, art, or science, in which an orator should be deficient; it would still afford us pleasure to be informed by what process our author himself would propel and stimulate,' without at the same time informing the minds of others. Can it have been his intention, after depriving his orator of imagination and invention, literature and philosophy, to invest him with the thong and ferula, that he might at least apply external stimulants to the bodies of his hearers? We will conclude our examination of these letters, by presenting the reader with only a few specimens of the style, not that we are apprehensive of their being resorted to as a model of chaste composition, or that they will have any tendency to corrupt the literary taste of our country; but to exhibit another proof of the liability of all writers to commit the faults they can detect and censure in others, and to show that our author himself is not free from false glitter, affected antithesis, and highly inflated, but unmeaning expressions. 'The mind which is occupied in trifles, will not be apt to amaze by its greatness, or astonish by its magnificence; it may glitter, but will never blaze.'—p. 40. Darkened by prejudice, or warped by passion.'— p. 41. Foolery and splendour of fantastic fashion, and the mean and inelegant costume of affected eccentricity.'-p. 44. • Contortions of cunning, and drapery of hypocrisy.'-p. 47. Frippery and festooning of rhetoric, and meretricious and extensive drapery of imagination.'—p. 50. 'Sparkle on the fancy, play around the imagination.-p. 62. You never see him employed in weaving garlands, or strewing flowers on your path; he never strives to 'lap in elysium,' or to delight in the rainbow colours, and eratic blaze of fancy.'-p. 53. Plunge in the labyrinth of science, or be conversant with the intricacies of art.'-p. 99. 'We do not wish the orator to sport in the rainbow, or flutter on a moonbeam; but with the torch of truth to illumine our path, and lead us in safety through the darkness of error and obscurity of ignorance.-p. Trammels of error, cobwebs of sophistry.'—p. 94. His (Mr. Clay's) gate [for gait] is stately but swinging.'-p. 93. The course 94. · |