gain by trouble and practice; but to invent, is purely the effect of genius. An elegant style pleases, and by that means prevents us from reflecting with attention on the thoughts; but when we confider them at a fecond reading, when we are not warmed by the expreffion, we then fee their excellencies and defects; we often fee the pooreft and moft trite, dreffed up in the most harmonious language. It is not only by the help of a new ftyle that writers think to deceive the world; they attempt it alfo by fetting an old thought in a new light, varying fome circumstances of it, and applying it in a manner different from what it was before. Some men gain a reputation by this practice; but we never reckon them among the fine original geniufes. Although a work be extremely well thought, yet unless it is alfo well wrote, it will please only the few. There are many more who can judge of words than of things, and who will throw afide a book, if they don't find an elegance of style. This fhows the neceffity of cloathing fine fentiments in a proper drefs; that thofe who are most likely to want inftruction may to think, by being pleafed. be tempted Would the orations of Demofthenes have had fo aftonishing an event, if the thoughts only. had been excellent? No; it was the wonderful enthusiasm of his ftyle that gave effect to his fentiments. No nation ever excelled more in all the graces of compofition, than the Greeks. We fee in all their celebrated writers, whether poets, orators, or historians, &c. how intent they were in modelling their periods, periods, and refining their language. The Grecian orator often leaves out expressions to be supplied by the imagination of his readers; and Cicero is fo exact in giving an harmony to his writings, that he adds fometimes more words than the sense requires; this redundancy pleases the reader, as it gives much grace without weakening the fentiment. But whatever commendations I have given the graces of ftyle, yet it must be allowed that the greatest geniuses have not always the finest manner of expreffing themselves. They are fenfible of the fuperiority of thoughts to ftyle, and their ideas flow in too rapid a ftream, to permit them to take fo much care of the ornaments of their work, as of the substance. A lefs extenfive genius is not hurried away by the fire of his imagination; and, to make up for what he wants in the enВ 4 thusiasm thufiafm of poetry, he labours his style, to make every part of his piece at leaft elegant. We have a ftriking inftance of this in Homer and Virgil. Homer's vaft imagination pour'd forth beauties by thousands, but the rapidity of his invention made him overlook some blemifhes in point of elegance of style. Virgil's genius was far lefs daring than the Grecian's; and as he could not rife to his fublimity, he avoided the faults of his mafter, and gave his compofition a neatnefs, and correctnefs, which is not to be found in Homer. I A work that does not furprife us by its fublimity of fentiment, fhould pleafe us by the beauties of its ftyle. When the higher excellencies are wanting, we require more of the inferior ones. In Pope we meet with little fublimity, and not many many of thofe ftrokes that speak a great genius; but his ftyle is every where elegant, his verfification mufical to the highest degree our language will admit. We even like his paftorals for the beau ties of compofition, although they contain but few original ideas.-But it is in genius only that we must look for ftriking beauties. 2: Genius deferves here to be particularly confidered; 'tis indeed impoffible to write on the beauties of compofition with any propriety, and not enlarge on its original fource. There certainly may be many beauties in a poem, unattended with any marks of genius; but those beauties will be but fecondary ones. They may please, but will not captivate. Non fatis eft pulchra effe poemata; dulcia funto, We |