style for an epic poem. In the following examples every one is sensible of an unfuitableness or incongruity: a little woman funk in an overgrown farthingale, a coat richly embroidered covering coarse and dirty lihen a mean subject in an elevated style, or an elevated fubject in a mean style, a first minister darning his wife's stocking, or a reverend prelate in lawn fleeves dancing a hornpipe.

But it is not fufficient that these terms be understood in practice; the critical art requires, that their meaning be traced to its foundation in human nature. The relations that connect objects together, have been examined in more than one view. Their influence in directing the train of our perceptions, is handled in the first chapter; and in the second, their influence in generating paffion. Here they must be handled in a new view; for they are clearly the occafion of congruity and propriety. We are so framed by nature, as to require a certain fuitableness or correspondence among things connected by any relation. This suitableness or correfpondence is termed congruity

or

or propriety; and the want of it, incongruity or impropriety. Among the many principles that compose the nature of man, a fense of congruity or propriety is one. De stitute of this sense, we could have no notion of congruity or propriety: the terms to us would be unintelligible *.

As this sense is displayed upon relations, it is reasonable beforehand to expect, that

* From many things that pass current in the world without being generally condemned, one at first view would imagine, that the sense of congruity or propriety hath scarce any foundation in nature; and that it is rather an artificial refinement of those who affect to diftinguish themselves by a certain delicacy of taste and behaviour. The fulsome panegyrics bestowed upon the great and opulent, in epistles dedicatory and other fuch compositions, lead naturally to that thought. Did there prevail in the world, it will be faid, or did nature fuggeft, a taste of what is suitable, decent, or proper, would any good writer deal in such compositions, or any man of fenfe receive them without disgust? Can it be supposed, that Lewis XIV. of France was endued by nature with any sense of propriety, when, in a dramatic performance purposely composed for his entertainment, he suffered himself, publicly and in his presence, to be styled the greatest king ever the earth produced? These it is true are strong facts; but luckily they do not prove the sense of propriety to be artificial. They only prove, that the sense of propriety is at times overpowered by pride and vanity; which is no fingular case, for this fometimes is the fate even of the sense of justice.

I

we

we should be so formed, as to require among connected objects a degree of congruity proportioned to the degree of the relation. And upon examination we find this to hold in fact. Where the relation is strong and intimate as betwixt a cause and its effect, a body and its members, we require that the things be suited to each other in the strictest manner. On the other hand, where the relation is flight, or accidental, as among things jumbled together in the same place, we demand little or no congruity. The strictest propriety is required in behaviour and manner of living; because a man is connected with these by the relation of cause and effect. The situation of a great house ought to be lofty; for the relation betwixt an edifice and the ground it stands upon, is of the most intimate kind. Its relation to neighbouring hills, rivers, plains, being that of propinquity only, demands but a small share of congruity. Among members of the fame club, the congruity ought to be confiderable, as well as among things placed for show in the fame niche. Among passengers in a stage-coach, we require ve

ry

ry little congruity; and less still at a public spectacle.

Congruity is so nearly allied to beauty, as commonly to be held a species of it. And yet they differ so essentially, as never to coincide. Beauty, like colour, is placed upon a single subject; congruity upon a plurality. Further, a thing beautiful in itself, may, with relation to other things, produce the strongest sense of incongruity.

Congruity and propriety are commonly reckoned synonymous terms; and hitherto in opening the subject they are used indifferently. But they are diftinguishable; and the precife meaning of each must be ascertained. Congruity is the genus, of which propriety is a species. For we call nothing propriety, but that congruity or fuitableness which ought to subsist betwixt sensible beings and their thoughts, words, and actions.

In order to give a full view of this fubject, I shall trace it through some of the most confiderable relations. The relation of a part to the whole, being extremely intimate, demands the utmost degree of congruity. For that reason, the flightest devia

tion is disgustful. Every one must be senfible of a grofs incongruity in the Lutrin, a burlesque poem, being closed with a serious and warm panegyric on Lamoignon, one of the King's judges:

Amphora cœpit

Institui; currente rota, cur urceus exit?

No relation affords more examples of congruity and incongruity, than that betwixt a subject and its ornaments. A literary performance intended merely for amusement, is fufceptible of much ornament, as well as a mufic-room or a play-house. In gaiety, the mind hath a peculiar relish for show and decoration. The most gorgeous apparel, however unfuitable to an actor in a regular tragedy, disgusts not at an opera. The truth is, an opera, in its present form, is a mighty fine thing; but as it deviates from nature in its capital circumstances, we look not for any thing natural in those which are accessory. On the other hand, a ferious and important subject, admits not much or