k to which it adds its attractions. It is an excellent
collection of the many odd and quaint and foolish and good things which
our forefathers 'did and performed.' Mr. GRISWOLD has spiced his work with
a variety, though he has done it more judiciously than a splenetic author
whom he introduces in his work, who, in a vexatious mood at some severe
criticisms on a former book, puts a dozen or more rows of interrogation
and exclamation-points, commas, semicolons, etc., and tells his readers
'they may pepper and salt it as they please.' Mr. GRISWOLD well
understands the history of American literature; and we venture to say
there is no man in the country who knows the names and contents of so many
American books as he. This knowledge he has found of great service to him,
enabling him to lay his hand at once on those things most worthy of
preservation. If he had understood the linking process a little better, it
would perhaps have added to the interest of his work. A sort of running
commentary would have given greater vivacity to the numerous extracts. The
way isolated specimens of an author are introduced affects very much the
impression they make. But Mr. GRISWOLD has succeeded well in gathering up
the ravelled ends of our early literature; and the present edition of
D'ISRAELI'S Curiosities of Literature will be the only one for the future
in the American market. The most 'curious' part of our literary history is
embraced in the revolution, with the short period preceding and following
it. The British and Tories furnished endless themes to the pasquinader and
ballad-maker, while the grave rights involved in the struggle called forth
the efforts of more serious and thoughtful pens. The Puritans of
New-England wrote most; and there is a union of the soundest sense with
the most childish folly, the strongest character with the weakest
prejudices in our good Yankee forefathers, that is quite incomprehensible.
Like the Puritans of England in the time of CROMWELL, when called into the
hall of debate to discuss the rights of man, or into the field to battle
for them, he were a bold man who dare smile at them. Yet in their
religious acts they were often bigoted, intolerant and puerile. The same
incongruity is seen in their tastes. Men of deep poetical sentiment, they
often murdered poetry for conscience sake. A man who could write a defence
of the colonies with a pen that fairly glowed with the burning Saxon that
fell from it, would no