eaches Edinburgh; and Scott himself, in his essay on Mrs. Radcliffe,
regrets that explanatory chapters had ever been invented. The reviewer
broadly hints his belief that Scott is the author; and on the whole,
except for a cautious lack of enthusiasm, the notice is fair and kindly.
The "Monthly Review" differed not much from the Blue and Yellow (the
"Edinburgh Review").

"It is not one of the least merits of this very uncommon production that
all the subordinate characters are touched with the same discriminating
force which so strongly marks their principals; and that in this manner
almost every variety of station and interest, such as existed at the
period under review, is successively brought before the mind of the
reader in colours vivid as the original.

"A few oversights, we think, we have detected in the conduct of the story
which ought not to remain unnoticed. For example, the age of Stanley and
Lady Emily does not seem well to accord with the circumstances of their
union, as related in the commencement of the work; and we are not quite
satisfied that Edward should have been so easily reconciled to the
barbarous and stubborn prejudices which precluded even the office of
intercession for his gallant friend and companion-in-arms.

"The pieces of poetry which are not very profusely scattered through
these volumes can scarcely fail to be ascribed to Mr. Scott, whatever may
be judged of the body of the work. In point of comparative merit, we
should class them neither with the highest nor with the meanest effusions
of his lyric minstrelsy."

Lord Byron's "Grandmother's Review, the British," was also friendly and
sagacious, in its elderly way.

"We request permission, therefore, to introduce 'Waverley,' a publication
which has already excited considerable interest in the sister kingdom, to
the literary world on this side the Tweed.

"A very short time has elapsed since this publication made its appearance
in Edinburgh, and though it came into the world in the modest garb of
anonymous obscurity, the Northern literati are unanimous, we understand,
in ascribing part of it, at, least, to the pen of W. Scott.

"We are unwilling to consider this publication in the light of a common
novel whose fate it is to be devoured with rapidity for a day, and
afterwards forgotten forever, but as a vehicle of curious and accurate
information upon a subject which must at all times demand our
attention,--the history and manners of a