th side of this wall for some distance, but could find no trace of
any rough-hewn stone. Descending on the other side, I found in the
wall one, and only one, such stone. I should say the base was in the
wall. The stone itself leans outwards; so that, at the top, three of
its square faces can be seen; and two, if not three, of these faces
bear marks of being hammer-dressed. The distance from the stone to the
well is about 40 yards, and the height of the stone out of the ground
about 3 or 4 feet.

"The ascent from the well is a gentle one, not 'sheer'; nor does there
appear to be any hollow by which the shepherd could ascend. On the
western side of the road there is a wide plain, with a slight fall in
that direction."

"'Hart-Leap Well' is the tale for me; in matter as good as this
('Peter Bell'); in manner infinitely before it, in my poor judgment."

Charles Lamb to Wordsworth, May 1819. (See 'The Letters of Charles
Lamb', edited by Alfred Ainger, vol. ii. p. 20.)--Ed.

* * * * *

THE IDLE SHEPHERD-BOYS; OR, DUNGEON-GHYLL FORCE [A]

A PASTORAL

Composed 1800.--Published 1800

[Written at Town-end, Grasmere. I will only add a little monitory
anecdote concerning this subject. When Coleridge and Southey were
walking together upon the Fells, Southey observed that, if I wished to
be considered a faithful painter of rural manners, I ought not to have
said that my shepherd-boys trimmed their rustic hats as described in the
poem. Just as the words had passed his lips two boys appeared with the
very plant entwined round their hats. I have often wondered that
Southey, who rambled so much about the mountains, should have fallen
into this mistake, and I record it as a warning for others who, with far
less opportunity than my dear friend had of knowing what things are, and
far less sagacity, give way to presumptuous criticism, from which he was
free, though in this matter mistaken. In describing a tarn under
Helvellyn I say:

"There sometimes doth a leaping fish
Send through the tarn a lonely cheer."

This was branded by a critic of these days, in a review ascribed to Mrs.
Barbauld, as unnatural and absurd. I admire the genius of Mrs. Barbauld
and am certain that, had her education been favourable to imaginative
influences, no female of her day would have been more likely to
sympathise with that image, and to acknowledge the truth of the
s