aste
from rapid degeneracy.

OBSERVATIONS UPON "OBSERVATIONS"

A SECOND LETTER TO JOHN MURRAY, ESQ. ON THE REV. W.L. BOWLES'S
STRICTURES ON THE LIFE AND WRITINGS OF POPE.

* * * * *

_Now first published_.

* * * * *

Ravenna, March 25. 1821.

Dear Sir,

In the further "Observations" of Mr. Bowles, in rejoinder to the
charges brought against his edition of Pope, it is to be regretted
that he has lost his temper. Whatever the language of his antagonists
may have been, I fear that his replies have afforded more pleasure to
them than to the public. That Mr. Bowles should not be pleased is
natural, whether right or wrong; but a temperate defence would have
answered his purpose in the former case--and, in the latter, no
defence, however violent, can tend to any thing but his discomfiture.
I have read over this third pamphlet, which you have been so obliging
as to send me, and shall venture a few observations, in addition to
those upon the previous controversy.

Mr. Bowles sets out with repeating his "_confirmed conviction_," that
"what he said of the moral part of Pope's character was, generally
speaking, true; and that the principles of _poetical_ criticism which
he has laid down are _invariable_ and _invulnerable_," &c.; and that
he is the _more_ persuaded of this by the "_exaggerations_ of his
opponents." This is all very well, and highly natural and sincere.
Nobody ever expected that either Mr. Bowles, or any other author,
would be convinced of human fallibility in their own persons. But it
is nothing to the purpose--for it is not what Mr. Bowles thinks, but
what is to be thought of Pope, that is the question. It is what he
has asserted or insinuated against a name which is the patrimony of
posterity, that is to be tried; and Mr. Bowles, as a party, can be no
judge. The more _he_ is persuaded, the better for himself, if it give
him any pleasure; but he can only persuade others by the proofs
brought out in his defence.

After these prefatory remarks of "conviction," &c. Mr. Bowles
proceeds to Mr. Gilchrist; whom he charges with "slang" and
"slander," besides a small subsidiary indictment of "abuse,
ignorance, malice," and so forth. Mr. Gilchrist has, indeed, shown
some anger; but it is an honest indignation, which rises up in
defence of the illustrious dead. It is a generous rage which
interposes between our ashes and their disturbers. Th