good family, and was originally intended for the bar, of which he is
now a member. He kept seven or eight terms at Cambridge, but left the
university without taking a degree, for the purpose of becoming an
artist. After about three years' desultory practice, he devoted himself
to literature, abandoning the design of making a position as a painter,
and only employed his pictorial talents in illustration of his own
writings. For a short time, he conducted a literary and artistic review,
similar in plan to the _Athenaeum_; but the new journal, although
characterised by great ability, perished in competition with established
rivals. He also, with the assistance of Dr Maginn, started a newspaper;
but this was unsuccessful. His first distinction was won as a writer in
_Fraser's Magazine_, _Punch_, and other periodicals of character. In the
latter amusing periodical appeared his _Jeames's Diary_, a clever satire
on the follies of the railway mania, exposing the hollow foundation upon
which railway fortunes and reputations were made. His _Snob Papers_,
published in the same manner, have since been collected and reprinted
with great success. His satire is as keen as that of Fielding. His
_Paris Sketch-Book_ appeared in 1840. His _Irish Sketch-Book_, with
numerous engravings drawn by the author, was published in 1845. In the
next year, appeared his _Notes of a Journey from Cornhill to Grand
Cairo_; and in 1847, the first numbers of _Vanity Fair_ appeared, in the
proper name of their author. This, Thackeray's first fully-developed
novel, has been followed by _Arthur Pendennis_, completed in 1851. His
Christmas-book, entitled _The Kickleburies on the Rhine_, was attacked
by a writer in the _Times_; whereupon Mr Thackeray replied, in a very
unmistakable way, in a preface to the second edition of the work. The
critic fared very badly in the contest.' The charge made against Mr
Thackeray is, that he abuses the characters of the literary class with a
view apparently of catering to public prejudice. We believe that any
such imputation is entirely unfounded; and that Mr Thackeray's
observations on the infirmities of authors are due to an honest
exposition of his subject. Mr Thackeray has lately imparted much delight
by delivering lectures on the literary personages of last century; and
in this very act has gracefully raised the public estimation of living
authorcraft.

We may extract the following passages respecting the early career of M