in a certain degree, a provincial country, there being no fixed standard of manners within the country itself, one great fource of ridicule is cut off, and an author, by that means, is not led to attempt humorous composition, or, if he does, has little chance of fucceeding.

There is another particular which may have had a very confiderable effect upon the genius of the Scots writers, and that is, the nature of the language in which they write. The old Scottish dialect is now banished from our books, and the English is substituted in its place. But, though our books be written in English, our conversation is in Scotch. Of our language, it may be said, as we are told of the wit of Sir Hudibras, that we have a fuit for holidays, and another for working-days. The Scottish dialect is our ordinary fuit; the English is used only on folemn occafions. By this means, when a Scotsman comes to write, he does it generally in trammels. His own native original language, which he hears spoken around him, he does not make use of; but he expresses himself in a language in some respects foreign to him, and which he has acquired by study and observation. When a celebrated Scottish writer, after the publication of his Hitory Story of Scotland, was first introduced to Lord Chesterfield, his Lordship, with that happy talent of compliment for which he was so remarkable, addressed him, at parting, in thefe words: "I am happy, Sir, to have met with "you,- happy to have paffed a day with you, "-and extremely happy to find that you speak "Scotch. It would be too much, were you to "Speak, as well as write our language, better "than we do ourselves."

This circumstance of a Scottish author not writing his own natural dialect, must have a confiderable influence upon the nature of his literary productions. When he is employed in arry grave dignified composition, when he writes history, politics, or poetry, the pains he must take to write in a manner different from that in which he speaks, will not much affect his productions; the language of fuch compositions is, in every cafe, raised above that of common life; and, therefore, the deviation which a Scottish author is obliged to make from the common language of the country, can be of little prejudice to him. But, if a writer is to defcend to common and ludicrous pictures of life; if, in short, he is to deal in humorous composition, his language must be, as nearly nearly as poffible, that of common life, that of the bulk of the people. But a Scotsman who wishes to write English cannot easily do this. He neither speaks the English dialect, nor is it spoken by those around him: any knowledge he has acquired of the language, is got from books, not from conversation. Hence Scottish authors may have been prevented from attempting to write books of humour; and, when they have tried it, we may be able, in some measure, to account for their failure.

In confirmation of these remarks, it may be obferved, that almost the only works of humour which we have in this country, are in the Scottish dialect, and most of them were written before the union of the kingdoms, when > the Scotch was the written, as well as the spoken language of the country. The Gentle Shepherd, which is full of natural and ludicrous representations of low life, is written in broad Scotch. Many of our ancient Scottifh ballads are full of humour. If there have been lately any publications of humour in this country, written in good English, they have been mostly of that graver fort, called irony. In this species of writing, where the author himfelf

N° 83. Тне

MIRROR.

:

1

81

himself never appears to laugh, a more dignified compofition is admiffible; and, in that cafe, the disadvantage of writing in a language different from that in which the author speaks, or those around him converse, is not so senfibly felt.

!

F

N° 84

:

N° 84. SATURDAY, February 26. 1780.

T

Clamant periiffe pudorem

Cuncti pene patres.

HOR.

O difpute the right of Fashion, to enlarge, to vary, or to change the ideas, both of man and woman kind, were a want of good breeding, of which the author of a periodical paper, who throws himself, as it were, from day to day, on the protection of the polite world, cannot be supposed capable. I pay, therefore, very little regard to the observations of fome antiquated correspondents, who pretend to fet up what they call the invariable notions of things, against the opinions and practice of people of condition. At the same time, I must observe, that, as there is a College in Physic, and a Faculty (as it is called in Scotland) in Law, so, in Fashion, there is a felect body, who enjoy many privileges and immunities, to which pretenders, or inferior practitioners in the art, are by no means intitled. There is a certain grace in the rudenefs,