And this leads us naturally to the question we proposed to discuss, as to the materials we may have for estimating the relative magnitude of the great poetic stars, which we take to be in any case one of the least satisfactory and most absolutely conjectural tasks to which any sane critic can set himself. Even with regard to the material stars, astronomers have done nothing that is more questionable and more probably erroneous than the classification of them into stars of various degrees of magnitude. One of the ablest of our modern astronomers has shown how likely it is that all the work of this kind which has been done will have to be done over again on very different principles. But the attempt, we think, rashly the standards by which he measures our puny | undulations of feeling, great hopes, while modern lights? Were Byron and Shelley they almost invariably drive the most vivid substantially agreed either with each other intellects of the time far as the poles asunor the most vivid intellects of their age, der instead of uniting them, do undoubtwith Scott, with Wordsworth, with Cole-edly develop the conditions under which ridge, with Keats, on any conceivable sub- genius works with the greatest fire. ject that stirred the vividest thought of that vivid time? Did Wordsworth go up into the mountains because the most vivid intellects of the age, Lord Jeffrey's, for instance, urged him on to his poetic work, or because he wished to separate himself from the world, and give his heart to enjoy "the lonely rapture of lonely minds"? Nay, so far is M. Comte's canon from accounting for the highest successes in poetry, that we doubt if there is a single great poet in the whole history of the world who can be shown to have had his intellect vivified by the intellectual sympathy and support of the most vivid minds of his contemporaries. From Eschylus's grand picture of the perfect loneliness of Prometheus to Wordsworth's mountain musings and and unwisely made by Mr. Austin, is infiShelley's solitary wails, - (we do not come nearer to our own day because Mr. Austin denies that we have any great poet amongst us now), — it is hard to find a single great poet who did not write in an age of deep intellectual questioning and severe intellectual collisions. Was the age of Elizabeth, when Roman Catholicism was fighting its great battle with Lutheranism and Calvinism, and when the 'new philosophy of Bacon was fighting its great battle with the old scholastic system, a day when "the most vivid intellects were substantially agreed"? Was Horace, was Lucretius, was Dante, was Goethe, or Schiller, the poet of an age when 66 the most vivid intellects were substantially agreed"? To our minds, it would be far more plausible to say that almost every great poet has arisen under the stimulus of some great wave of change which has kindled high hopes and stormy passions, and so set" the most vivid intellects" at hopeless variance. It was certainly under the stimulus of such influences that the great Attic poets, the great mediæval poets, the great Elizabethan poets, and the great poets who were contemporary with the French Revolution, wrote. Wordsworth has described, in a poem which ought to have the more weight that he himself was the very opposite of a poet of action, the kindling effect of the French Revolution upon his imagination, and how its failure drove him into the wilderness to seek the calm of healing meditations. Action is not of the essence of poetry, -as far as possible from the essence of much of the very highest poetry, but great events, great nitely more hazardous. All our estimates of poets depend on a full capacity for sympathy with their poetical aims and for insight into their poetical world. Directly we catch ourselves ridiculing and depreciating poetry which has made a profound impression on minds clearly broader, or deeper, or even fuller of minor chords than our own, we may be quite sure that for estimating the relative magnitude of that poetic star in the firmament, we are utterly incompetent. Of specific faults and deficiencies in a poet whose full power we feel, we may judge. But of the relative worth of poetry which evidently has an infinitely higher attraction for other, and equally impressible, or more impressible, intellects than it has for us, we cannot possibly be respectable judges. That such a critic as Mr. Alfred Austen,- clever as he often is, - should erect himself into a common measure of these great incommensurables, strikes us with wonder at the audacity of what Mr. Disraeli calls "superior persons." It is not the great poets who depreciate the less, but the hard critics. To any mind of true poetic sympathy each poet in turn will seem the highest while it is immersed in his influence, and the attempt to grade genius of orders so different will seem almost like the attempt to compare the relative claims of heat and light, or to determine which of the colours of the rainbow is intrinsically the most beautiful. Think how Shelley wrote of poets, some of whom Mr. Austin would probably hardly recognize as poets at all, when describing the entrance of Keats among the immortals: "The inheritors of unfulfilled renown Rose from their thrones built beyond mortal Far in the Unapparent. Chatterton "And many more whose names on earth are But whose transmitted cffluence cannot die Thou art become as one of us,' they cry, which head Dryden and Pope would probably rise above any English poets, ancient or modern. All these are mere illustrations, and very imperfect illustrations, of the innumerable beads under which poets may be compared; but they are meant merely to show the folly of trying to class poets in absolute ranks at all. There is no difficulty in determining that Shakespeare far outshines in general volume of light and heat and life of all sorts, all poets known to us, but directly you descend to any lower level, it is by no means profitable, even if it is possible, to balance one sort of claim against another. The only conceivable common measure would be the mind of a It was for thee yon kingless sphere has long poet as universal as that of Shakespeare him Swung blind in unascended majesty, self. Perhaps if we could have him with us now and know his scale of value, we might Assume thy winged throne, thou vesper of our concede that we had got something like a throng.' standard. But no narrower mind can possibly furnish one of the smallest worth. No doubt you might compare poets under For men like Mr. Austin, who are conscious one head or another,-under the head of of a certain amount of talent and a still vital force, for instance, the volume of greater amount of grudge against the praises mental shock, so to speak, which any one they hear of poets whom they deem no poets poet is capable of delivering,—a classifica- or small poets, to attempt it, seems to us tion under which Byron might probably almost silly. Many of his severest judgstand even above Shakespeare, and certain-ments are pure confessions of narrowness, ly above every other poet known to us. dark lines in the poetical spectrum cryOr you might compare them under the head ing out against the light. The very violent of variety and breadth of range, a head criticism passed upon this journal, for inunder which Byron would come compara-stance, to which we have alluded, was nomtively low, and Shakespeare, of course, inally grounded on the admiration we had would be beyond the highest of all other expressed of Mr. Clough's wonderful poem poets, Goethe possibly standing second. on Easter Day,- a poem containing one of Or you might compare them under the head the most marvellous expressions of intellectof what we ordinarily call poetic inspira- ual pain combined with true spiritual pastion, that is, in relation to the evidence of sion which Doubt ever drew from the huthe rapid, spontaneous, and unlaboured man breast. We cannot convince Mr. flow of lyrical feeling, a classification which Austin that this is a fine poem if he does not would put Shelley, perhaps, at the very feel it, any more than we can convince a head of the list, at least of English poets, blind man that the sun is shining; but then and Keats not far off him; or you might he should try and rectify the pitiable narcompare them under the head of painting- rowness of his judgment by taking a good power, a classification which would probably opinion or two. Let him ask Mr. Arnold, put Tennyson second to none but Shakes- for instance, what he thinks of it, and not peare, alike in the grandeur and the realistic cry out against a great poem because he force of his painting; or you might compare personally has no taste for it. He gives a them under the head of meditative rapture, curious indication, by the way, of this pita classification which would put Words-iable narrowness in the very same context. worth far above all poets known to the To illustrate our ignorance and folly, he present writer, and give no mean place to re-extracts and grossly garbles by omissions, Buchanan and David Gray; or you might without any marks of omission, the first part compare them for their imaginative treat- of an extract given by us from Mr. Clough, ment of the intellectual life, under which not from any of Mr. Clough's finest head Browning and Tennyson, and Matthew Arnold and Clough and Dr. Newman, would all of them probably stand above some of the greatest masters of the drama and song. Ör again, you might compare them as epigrammatists and satirists, under poems, but from a very curious and characteristic one, which we extracted expressly rather as casting a light on his personal character than for its poetry; then, he leaves out all the latter part of the extract, all which gave it meaning, mentions our having called it a "remarkable soliloquy," | energy. Their essence consists in securing and thereupon proceeds to apply to us the for a moment, and by singular devices, the courteous epithets we have before men- command of the entire supply on the martioned. Now, we do not suppose Mr. Aus-ket. But such a command can only with tin was consciously dishonest in garbling difficulty be obtained for a moment. Rare this extract (though asterisks are usual to art is needful to gain it at all. But it never indicate great elisions, especially when a lasts over many months. The gold ring fell man is somewhat vulgarly running down a as soon as the Federal Government became poet, and running down his critics for ad- a seller unexpectedly, and destroyed their miring him), and in pitying us for thinking monopoly of the supply. No clique of it was remarkable, after he had carefully left speculators wishing to raise the gold preout all that we thought remarkable, and the mium, or wishing to depress it, could ever reasons for which we thought so. We feel command the supply of so costly an article very little doubt that he did not see any differ- for six months. Mr. Boutwell, too, the ence between the grossly garbled and short-present Secretary of the Treasury, sells the ened extract and the complete one, and that his mind was incapable of seeing any such difference; but then we think that conduct of this sort does show that the man who is guilty of it is utterly blind to all the simplest conditions of true criticism. For such a man to attempt to assign the relative places of our modern English poets in the poetic scale, is like a man who is colourblind proposing himself as a judge on the relative beauty of various colours. Still, if he serves to illustrate the intrinsic difficulty of his attempt, and to show the public how utterly incommensurable the merits of almost all great poets are, he will not have been clever and scoffing and narrow in vain. From The Economist, Mar. 26. THE GREAT FALL IN THE GOLD PREMIUM AT NEW YORK. gold in uncertain amounts, and this tends to hinder speculation, because the Government is the largest of all gold dealers, is always ready to counteract any artificial price by diminishing its sales if that price is too low, or by increasing its sales if that price is too high. Again, the fall in the gold premium is ascribed to the diminished exportation of gold. And there is no doubt that the export of gold has largely diminished. We received in England from the United States: In 1866 "1868 "1869 £ 10,245,583 6,498,006 8,892,394 2,938,433 And the New York Financial Chronicle, by far the best authority in American finance, gives the following table: EXPORTS OF GOLD TO ALL PARTS. 1866 $ 86,000,000 55,100,000 83,700,000 42,800,000 SOME of the Americans have said that it is the mission of their country to give the world lessons in a new political economy; but the truth is that it is their mission to give most wonderful and surprising illustrations of old political economy. The size of In part this is to be accounted for by a ditheir country makes all phenomena so large minished production of gold. The high that everybody can see them, and that prices of corn diverted much labour in Caleverybody is interested about them. In the ifornia from mining to agriculture, and the last six months there has been a rise of result is that the yield of gold has declined. about 16 per cent. in the value of their in- There is an unusually fine test of this, for convertible paper currency as compared one of the innumerable taxes comprehended with gold. So large and so quick a change in the American "Internal revenue" was a is unexampled, so far as we know, in similar tax of 1-2 per cent. on the assays of gold, phenomena. What, then, is the cause of it? and the produce of this tax fell from 488,000 It has been ascribed by some to the dols in 1866 to 323,000 dols in 1868. In breaking down of the "gold ring" and the 1869 this tax was repealed, so that we canruin of the gold exchange bank of New not so accurately test the diminution farther. York. And no doubt for a time last au- But the great diminution of the assay tax tumn the effect of that wonderful specula- between 1866 and 1868 is conclusive for tion was greatly to raise the price of gold those years, as nearly every dealer gets his at New York. The gold speculators sent gold assayed as soon as he gets it in order up the price in a few days from 135 to 160. that he may dispose of it for its true value. But such violent causes soon expend their | But to whatever extent this cause does not operate to whatever extent the diminished exportation has not been compensated by a diminished production there must have been an additional supply of gold in the market at New York; and unless there has been a corresponding augmentation of the demand, the price of gold would fall. To some unknown extent there is an increase in the demand for gold yearly for the arts, and in Texas and some other distant parts of the Union where greenbacks have not reached and where gold is the sole current money, there is an augmentation of demand for currency purposes especially when those districts are as now particularly prosperous. But still on the whole and after all these allowances, there must have been an accumulation of gold in America, and that accumulation must have tended to reduce its value as compared with the inconvertible paper currency. But this cannot be the permanent cause of so large a reduction in the value of gold. The more gold falls in value because of the diminished exportations in the past the more gold will tend to be exported in the future. If all other commodities remained of the same value and gold fell 16 per cent., it is almost certain that gold would be one of the best articles to export. In the whole list of articles of export some would quite certainly not yield 16 per cent. on exportation, even if any did so, and gold would be substituted for those which yielded a less percentage. The profits made in the commerce of the precious metal are commonly smaller, because more certain, than in most other trades, and therefore in practice gold would probably be exported sooner than a theorist would from a mere inspection of price-lists expect that it would be. Gold is an unusually transferable article, which moves as soon as there is the least profit, not an article which waits to move till all other articles have gone before it. In general it is true appreciations and depreciations of an inconvertible currency produce no effect on the export trade. But that is only because they are general. When they extend to all articles alike, they are no bounty on exporting any one article. But if they extend to any one - be it gold or be it tallow they are sure to be bounties on its export, in case of the particular depreciation and bounties on its import, if the fact be that its value has individually appreciated. The real cause is different. The fall in the gold premium is not an isolated phenomenon, but part of a much larger phenomenon. Paper prices are falling generally in the United States; gold has fallen as measured in greenbacks, but other things have fallen too. We give at the foot of this article a very careful table of prices six months ago and now, and the result is very remarkable.* The table includes 121 articles, excluding the quotations in gold; in only 11 has there been an increase in value; in all other cases has there been a decrease. In the majority of cases the fall has been above 12 per cent., or not much less than the fall in the gold premium; and in 34 cases it has been over 16 per cent., or greater than that fall. We can see, therefore, why gold is not exported from New York, though its value has fallen so much, for the value of other articles fitted for export to Europe has fallen as much or more. What we have to explain is not a fall in the paper value of gold only, but a fall in the paper value of commodities taken generally. 66 But what is the cause of this general fall? To account for it we must consider carefully the exact case of America. We may describe it (subject to a correction which we shall give directly) as a country with an unaugmented paper currency, but with a largely augmented amount of business. The number of greenbacks issued by the Government is the same, but the uses of these greenbacks, the bargains for which they are wanted, the commodities which they have (as Americans say) to move," have increased very rapidly. The South is now again beginning to be prosperous. The whole country, which at the end of the war was a desert, is now again in part thriving, not everywhere or with equal vigour, but still in most places to a considerable extent, and in some places to a remarkable extent. The same greenback currency which at the end of the war only circulated in and had to do only the work of the victorious country, now circulates in and must meet the needs of the defeated half too. The business of the South is new, and as it has to be transacted in the old money, there is a fresh demand for that money, and the value of it rises. It may indeed be replied that the Government paper currency is not the only paper currency of the United States. That there is also a National Bank currency; but in the first place the amount of this is limited by law. In the next place, the value of it must be the same as that of greenbacks, for it is payable in greenbacks; and a fixed proportion of greenbacks must be held as a reserve against it by every issuing bank; and thirdly, the South never got its due proportion of this Bank currency. It was THE LIVING AGE does not copy the long table referred to. too poor to get it. This National Bank | with chagrin and despair if told at the currency must be secured by a deposit of hotel that they were to have rooms on the United States Bonds, and this is a consider-eighth story. What a change has taken able investment of capital. The South has place! The comfortable, nay, luxurious not been able to pay down enough to obtain elevator has reversed all these things. Old a due share in its circulation. A secured ideas are no longer current. A new order circulation necessarily is a heavy burden on of things has come about. Now the top a very poor country, though a very light story is the most desirable. The view from burden on a rich country. The amount of the windows, the pure air of heaven, the National currency distance from noise and confusion - these and many other attractions render these elevated regions the choicest of all. Last year, on 9th October, was -showing no real increase. 299,578,000 This is no puff for elevator men- - neither for hotels. We shall mention the name of none in the business. We are led to The case then is one of the most remark- moralize and philosophize by the wondrous able in economical history. Owing to the change that has come over our tastes as enormous increase in the amount of Ameri- regards altitudes. Once New York city can business - an increase probably un- was not expected to grow in any other wise precedented when we consider both the than longitudinally towards Harlem River, area of business and the quantity of busi- the waters of the bay and the Hudson and -the same amount of paper currency East Rivers having combined to prevent is not as efficient as it was once; and its any lateral expansion. But now old resivalue is approaching to that of gold now dents are taken literally off their feet by that the South is rapidly improving, and the tendency of the city to grow upwards. that its improvement aids all who sell to it We are now fully prepared to see next a and deal with it. The principle of this phe-downward growth begun into the bowels of nomenon is old and European, but its size the earth. is new and altogether American. ness - From The N. Y. Evening Post. THE NEW WAY OF GETTING UP STAIRS. WHAT would our ancestors have thought, in the days of George Washington, if they had heard people talk of going up stairs by steam! In those good old times it was the elegant thing for a gentleman to have his drawing-room, library, dining-hall, chambers and kitchen all on one floor and to dispense entirely with stairs of any kind excepting as a means of getting into the cockloft or garret. But in these advanced times our wealthy citizens think nothing of occupying a suite of elegant and expensive apartments in the seventh story of the Grand Hotel, and are probably not overparticular whether there are stairs or not in the building, as all they have to do to get to their delightful home in the skies is to walk into a small but handsomely furnished room on the ground floor, wink at the young man who ever sits just inside the door, and away they go up to the clouds like one of the happy fellows we read of in the Arabian Night's Entertainments. It is not so many years since weary travellers just arrived jaded and dusty from the night train would have well-nigh fainted It is the steam elevator which has done all this. The hotels are beginning to be modern Babels. One on Broadway has lately been adding ten or a dozen stories to its already dizzy height. We confidently look for the day when the city shall be built up so high that vertical city railroads will be run up and down by corrupt corporations. Some twenty years ago or more, hoisting apparatus began to be introduced something after the fashion of modern elevators, but with none of the improvements. Then merchants and manufacturers began to make use of more convenient machines for the hoisting of merchandize, and steam was soon introduced as a power. As years passed on, and men of genius devised new modes of applying the theory, the hotels ventured to try the experiment of coaxing otherwise unwilling guests into the upper stories. The plan proved a success, and now a hotel without a steam elevator is like a gun without a barrel. Even younger readers can remember the time when such a thing as going up-stairs in a dry-goods store was rare indeed. But now, not only are we invited up-stairs in such palaces as those of A. T. Stewart & Co., and Arnold, Constable & Co., and H. B. Claflin & Co., but we are hurled up through the air, past story after story of their magnificent buildings, and brought into their fourth and fifth floors in a shorter |