the pursuit,
but we want and wish to see a more healthy and discriminating spirit
among buyers. Let intending collectors devote a reasonable time to a
preparatory study of the subject and survey of the field and then they
will perhaps accomplish better results at a lower cost. Let them, once
more, not be in too violent a hurry. The abundance of transmitted
writings in a metrical shape only proves more conclusively the
familiar fact that it is as easy to compose verses as it is difficult
to compose poetry. The long succession of authors who fall within the
category of poets has received an extent of editorial care and
illustration in the course of the century, however, which argues the
prevalence of a more favourable opinion of their merits. The names
which are at present commanding chief notice are those which have
always been esteemed: Shakespeare, Fletcher, Beaumont, Jonson, Daniel,
Drayton, Wither, Sir John Davis, Herrick, Carew, Lovelace, and
Suckling; and among the Scotish bards Drummond takes the lead. The
most singular feature about the matter is that, in the presence of all
kinds of critical editions, the demand is not for them, but for the
originals. The mission of the modern recensor comes to an end when, by
a stupendous amount of research and erudition, he has emphasised the
characteristics and gifts of a writer. Then the amateur steps forward,
and expresses his readiness to give any price for the good old book,
undisfigured by notes and emendations!

It is perhaps fruitless to attempt to turn the tide of common
sentiment, and gentlemen must be permitted to choose their own money's
worth. They may think and say that they want the volume as it left the
author's hands, not diluted and overlaid by commentators. Granted, it
is a product of the time, even though the author did not see the
proofs, and the printer could not always decipher the MS. But then
comes the larger and more general question: How much of the better
class of early verse-writers are worth reading? The present deponent,
without being conscious that he is very hyper-critical, states the
deliberate result of actual examination and perusal when he affirms
that of the minor poets of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries,
save perhaps Randolph, the productions of enduring value and interest
could be brought within the compass of a moderate volume.

It would be eminently unwise for any one who treats his library as an
investment to yield to the ex