e had merely smiled at
it; yet it had the effect of rekindling the vapid embers about the
dear old hearthstone of Olney, and the shy, gentle creatures that used
to disport there among the hares when nobody was looking became for a
moment more real from the citation. Now, the question is, What is
the superiority of a new piece of gossip like this, which involves
no witticism and confers no wisdom, over the next bit of history that
will be exchanged between the heroines of the alley-gate? When Mrs.
Jones tells Mrs. Baker that Mrs. Briggs has delivered a daughter, and
that Mr. Briggs said he had rather she had given him a wooden leg, the
epigram is quite as good as a _Bric-a-Brac_ anecdote, the people are
quite as worthy as Cowper's barber, and the effect upon the history
of letters quite as close and important. With this demurrer, we will
apply ourselves for a moment to Mr. Stoddard's last collection, which
of course we relish as much as anybody. We could wish that, after
discharging his very well-executed duty of writing the preface, he
could find some further time for elucidating the text. The present
book being about three people, whose memoirs are taken from three
volumes, it is confusing to the reader to find on a page headed
"Rogers" or "Scott" a foot-note about what "my father" said or
what "my friend" remembered, without anything to point out that
the authority is other than Mr. Stoddard's father or friend. Other
peculiarities, too, suggest that the pretty little volume is clipped
instead of edited: on page 134 we find that "William, who had lived
many years with Hook, grew rich and saucy. The latter used to assert
of him that for the first three years he was as good a servant as ever
came into a house; for the next two a kind and considerate friend;
and afterward an abominably bad master." And on page 240, that when
_Rogers_ was condoled with about the death of an old servant, he
exclaimed, "Well, I don't know that I feel his loss so much, after
all. For the first _seven_ years he was an obliging servant; for the
second _seven_ years an agreeable companion; but for the last seven
years he was a tyrannical master." This duality of epigrams seems to
show a discrepancy somewhere; or are we to believe that the wits of
the Regency used to drive their jokes as hired hacks, like the livery
carriages employed by faded dowagers in Hampton Court? The rest of the
little book is perhaps free from duplicates. It is a good one