atively free.

We have already referred to the powerful influence of the essayists in
_The Tatler_, _Spectator_, _Guardian_, and _Rambler_, which may be called
the real origin of the present English press.

LATER DIVISIONS.--Coming down to the close of the eighteenth century, we
find the following division of English periodical literature:
_Quarterlies_, usually called _Reviews_; _Monthlies_, generally entitled
_Magazines_; _Weeklies_, containing digests of news; and _Dailies_, in
which are found the intelligence and facts of the present moment; and in
this order, too, were the intellectual strength and learning of the time
at first employed. The _Quarterlies_ contained the articles of the great
men--the acknowledged critics in politics, literature, and art; the
_Magazines_, a current literature of poetry and fiction; the _Weeklies_
and _Dailies_, reporters' facts and statistics; the latter requiring
activity rather than cleverness, and beginning to be a vehicle for
extensive advertisements.

This general division has been since maintained; but if the order has not
been reversed, there can be no doubt that the great dailies have steadily
risen; on most questions of popular interest in all departments, long and
carefully written articles in the dailies, from distinguished pens,
anticipate the quarterlies, or force them to seek new grounds and forms of
presentation after forestalling their critical opinions. Not many years
ago, the quarterlies subsidized the best talent; now the men of that class
write for _The Times_, _Standard_, _Telegraph_, &c.

Let us look, in the order we have mentioned, at some representatives of
the press in its various forms.

Each of the principal reviews represents a political party, and at the
same time, in most cases, a religious denomination; and they owe much of
their interest to the controversial spirit thus engendered.

REVIEWS.--First among these, in point of origin, is the _Edinburgh
Review_, which was produced by the joint efforts of several young, and
comparatively unknown, gentlemen, among whom were Francis (afterwards)
Lord Jeffrey, Lord Murray, Mr. (since Lord) Brougham, and the Rev. Sydney
Smith. The latter gentleman was appointed first editor, and remained long
enough in Edinburgh to edit the first number. Thereafter Jeffrey conducted
it. The men were clever, witty, studious, fearless; and the Review was not
only from the first a success, but its fiat was looked for by au