chef-d'oeuvre of Bensley's press[A]) to do with Mr.
Southey's fine Poem of Madoc?--in which, if there are "veins
of lead," there are not a few "of silver and gold." Of the
extraordinary talents of Mr. Southey, the indefatigable
student in ancient lore, and especially in all that regards
Spanish Literature and Old English Romances, this is not the
place to make mention. His "_Remains of Henry Kirk White_,"
the sweetest specimen of modern biography, has sunk into
every heart, and received an eulogy from every tongue. Yet
is his own life

"The more endearing song."

Dr. Ferriar's next satirical verses are levelled at Mr.
THOMAS HOPE.

"The lettered fop now takes a larger scope,
With classic furniture, design'd by HOPE.
(HOPE, whom upholsterers eye with mute despair,
The doughty pedant of an elbow chair.")

It has appeared to me that Mr. Hope's magnificent volume on
"_Household Furniture_" has been generally misunderstood,
and, in a few instances, criticised upon false
principles.--The first question is, does the _subject_ admit
of illustration? and if so, has Mr. Hope illustrated it
properly? I believe there is no canon of criticism which
forbids the treating of such a subject; and, while we are
amused with archaeological discussions on Roman tiles and
tesselated pavements, there seems to be no absurdity in
making the decorations of our sitting rooms, including
something more than the floor we walk upon, a subject at
least of temperate and classical disquisition. Suppose we
had found such a treatise in the volumes of Gronovius and
Montfaucon? (and are there not a few, apparently, as
unimportant and confined in these rich volumes of the
Treasures of Antiquity?) or suppose something similar to Mr.
Hope's work had been found among the ruins of Herculaneum?
Or, lastly, let us suppose the author had printed it only as
a _private_ book, to be circulated as a present! In each of
these instances, should we have heard the harsh censures
which have been thrown out against it? On the contrary, is
it not very probable that a wish might have been expressed
that "so valuable a work ought to be made public."

Upon what principle, _a priori_, are we to ridicule and
condemn it? I know of none. We admit Vi