im
in my 'Convention of Cintra.'[259] Indeed, he spoke in very proud and
contemptuous terms, of the populace. 'Comus' is rich in beautiful and
sweet flowers, and in exuberant leaves of genius; but the ripe and
mellow fruit is in 'Samson Agonistes.' When he wrote that, his mind was
Hebraized. Indeed, his genius fed on the writings of the Hebrew
prophets. This arose, in some degree, from the temper of the times; the
Puritan lived in the Old Testament, almost to the exclusion of the New.

The works of the old English dramatists are the gardens of our language.

One of the noblest things in Milton is the description of that sweet,
quiet morning in the 'Paradise Regained,' after that terrible night of
howling wind and storm. The contrast is divine.[260]

[259] Page 174 (vol. i.), where Milton speaks of the evils suffered by a
nation,' unless men more than vulgar, bred up in the knowledge of
ancient and illustrious deeds, conduct its affairs.'

[260] _Paradise Regained_, iv. 431.

What a virulent democrat ---- is! A man ill at ease with his own
conscience is sure to quarrel with all government, order, and law.

The influence of Locke's Essay was not due to its own merits, which are
considerable; but to external circumstances. It came forth at a happy
opportunity, and coincided with the prevalent opinions of the time. The
Jesuit doctrines concerning the papal power in deposing kings, and
absolving subjects from their allegiance, had driven some Protestant
theologians to take refuge in the theory of the divine right of kings.
This theory was unpalatable to the world at large, and others invented
the more popular doctrine of a social contract, in its place; a doctrine
which history refutes. But Locke did what he could to accommodate this
principle to his own system.

The only basis on which property can rest is right derived from
prescription.

The best of Locke's works, as it seems to me, is that in which he
attempts the least--his _Conduct of the Understanding_.

In the Summer of 1827, speaking of some of his contemporaries,
Wordsworth said, T. Moore has great natural genius; but he is too lavish
of brilliant ornament. His poems smell of the perfumer's and milliner's
shops. He is not content with a ring and a bracelet, but he must have
rings in the ears, rings on the nose--rings everywhere.

Walter Scott is not a careful composer. He allows himself many
liberties, which betray a want of respect for his reader. For i