in a certain degree, a provincial country, there being no fixed standard of manners within the country itself, one great fource of ridicule is cut off, and an author, by that means, is not led to attempt humorous composition, or, if he does, has little chance of fucceeding.

There is another particular which may have had a very confiderable effect upon the genius of the Scots writers, and that is, the nature of the language in which they write. The old Scottish dialect is now banished from our books, and the English is fubftituted in its place. But, though our books be written in English, our converfation is in Scotch. Of our language, it may be faid, as we are told of the wit of Sir Hudibras, that we have a fuit for holidays, and another for working-days. The Scottish dialect is our ordinary fuit; the English is ufed only on folemn occafions. By this means, when a Scotfman comes to write, he does it generally in trammels. His own native original language, which he hears spoken around him, he does not make ufe of; but he expreffes himself in a language in fome refpects foreign to him, and which he has acquired by ftudy and obfervation. When a celebrated Scottish writer, after the publication of his Hi

Поку

Story of Scotland, was first introduced to Lord Chesterfield, his Lordship, with that happy talent of compliment for which he was fo remarkable, addreffed him, at parting, in thefe words: "I am happy, Sir, to have met with

you,- happy to have paffed a day with you, ❝—and extremely happy to find that you speak "Scotch.-It would be too much, were you to "Speak, as well as write our language, better "than we do ourfelves.”

This circumftance of a Scottish author not writing his own natural dialect, must have a confiderable influence upon the nature of his literary productions. When he is employed in arry grave dignified compofition, when he writes hiftory, politics, or poetry, the pains he muft take to write in a manner different from that in which he speaks, will not much affect his productions; the language of fuch compoftions is, in every cafe, raifed above that of common life; and, therefore, the deviation which a Scottish author is obliged to make from the common language of the country, can be of little prejudice to him. But, if a writer is to defcend to common and ludicrous pictures of life; if, in fhort, he is to deal in humorous compofition, his language muft be, as nearly

nearly as poffible, that of common life, that of the bulk of the people. But a Scotsman who wishes to write English cannot easily do this. He neither, fpeaks the English dialect, nor is it fpoken by thofe around him: any knowledge he has acquired of the language, is got from books, not from converfation. Hence Scottish authors may have been prevented from attempting to write books of humour; and, when they have tried it, we may be able, in fome measure, to account for their failure.

In confirmation of thefe remarks, it may be obferved, that almoft the only works of humour which we have in this country, are in the Scottish dialect, and most of them were written before the union of the kingdoms, when the Scotch was the written, as well as the fpoken language of the country. The Gentle Shepherd, which is full of natural and ludicrous reprefentations of low life, is written in broad Scotch. Many of our ancient Scottish ballads are full of humour. If there have been lately any publications of humour in this country, written in good English, they have been moftly of that graver fort, called irony. In this fpecies of writing, where the author

himfelf

himfelf never appears to laugh, a more dignified compofition is admiffible; and, in that cafe, the disadvantage of writing in a language different from that in which the author fpeaks, or those around him converse, is not fo fen fibly felt.

F

N° 84

N° 84.

T

SATURDAY, February 26. 1780.

Clamant periiffe pudorem

Cuncti pene patres.

HOR.

O difpute the right of Fashion, to enlarge, to vary, or to change the ideas, both of man and woman kind, were a want of good breeding, of which the author of a periodical paper, who throws himself, as it were, from day to day, on the protection of the polite world, cannot be fuppofed capable. I pay, therefore, very little regard to the obfervations of fome antiquated correfpondents, who pretend to fet up what they call the invariable notions of things, against the opinions and practice of people of condition. At the fame time, I must observe, that, as there is a College in Phyfic, and a Faculty (as it is called in Scotland) in Law, fo, in Fashion, there is a felect body, who enjoy many privileges and immunities, to which pretenders, or inferior practitioners in the art, are by no means intitled. There is a certain grace in the rude

nefs,