kless of every pure and elevated feeling--that "the end of all
writing is to instruct, the end of all poetry, _to instruct by
pleasing_." This is the difference between the sentiment of the authors
and that of the authoress; but were that same Samuel Johnson now alive,
sooner than maintain an opinion in any the slightest manner at variance
with one expressed by her Ladyship, he would,--as he was ready to do,
according to his own avowal, when asserting something that was denied by
persons scarcely more important than himself,--"sink down in
reverential silence, as AEneas withdrew from the defence of Troy, when he
saw Neptune shaking the wall, and Juno heading the besiegers."

We do not wish to insinuate that her Ladyship has derived any advantage
from consulting the pages of either the Preface or the Essay to which we
have alluded. By no means. Nothing would be more unjust; for how could
she be indebted for any thing to what may be contained in a couple of
insignificant pamphlets, whose scarcity is such, that we might almost
suppose our copies of them to be the only ones in existence? How they
came into our hands, is a point we leave for elucidation to those who
find pleasure or profit in unravelling mysteries. There is, to be sure,
a wonderful similitude throughout, between her reflections upon the
classical and romantic drama, and those which may be read in the Essay;
but this circumstance must unquestionably be considered one of those
"remarkable coincidences" that every now and then prompt the cry of "a
miracle!" It must, else, be accounted for, by supposing that the author
of the Essay is gifted with a power over future operations of mind,
similar to that which was possessed over future events, by the wizard
who warned Lochiel against the fatal day at Culloden, and that he is
thus enabled, by his "mystical lore," to make

"Coming _ideas_ cast their shadow before."

Seriously, however, the observations of her Ladyship on this head,
furnish as nice an instance of plagiarism as we recollect. The best of
the matter is, that after filling nearly a couple of pages with remarks,
amongst which not a single original idea is to be found, save perhaps
the rather novel one, that "in Macbeth the interest is suspended at the
death of Duncan, and does not revive until that of the tyrant is at
hand;" she winds up with saying, "obvious as this train of reasoning
appears, _it has been overlooked equally by the opponents and the