e. _Ardeat qui vult incendere_, says the
virtuous Roman, whose eminent qualities of character, entitled him the
father of eloquence. Where is the enlightened nation, who would suffer, or
support the orator, poet, or philosopher, were each of these literary men
practically, and hypocritically polluting the temple of Virtue, the only
Divinity, dictating order to our society? And here, by enlightened nation,
I do not mean nations led by the furies of superstition, false religion,
or fanaticism, the shame of mankind. Though virtue is not the only
requisite faculty to form an eminent artist; still, like the sun in the
planetary system, unless it reflects upon every idea, and sentiments of
the man of letters, his ideas, and sentiments would remain without
animation.

Because not all the immortal writers had passed an unblemished life, shall
we say that virtue is not the essential mover in a man of letters? Yes:
Bacon, in some instances of his life, had been a mean wretch; but, because
Bacon was bribed in an evil hour, can we sustain that he had been a bad
man all his life? Though Bacon had not been always wise, his retirement,
repentence, accusation of himself, and studies, evidently prove he was not
a stranger to virtue. Still, had Bacon praised virtue at the very moment
he was unworthy of the Divinity to whom he burned incense before, or
after; such a speech, or writing, could impart neither colors, nor
animation to his abortive thoughts. "Virtue is like precious odors, most
fragrant, when they are incensed." And Bacon himself says: "For, he may
rely upon it, that he can no more transmit conviction, and sensation,
which he himself has not, at the time, sincerely felt, than he can convey
a clear title to property in which he himself has no right."

And why does the unbeliever respect the piety of a Fenelon, and a Fenelon,
the morals of an unbeliever? To those, who would be bribed in order to
imitate a Bacon, I have only to say, that baboons will never reach
immortality, when, instead of imitating Bacon's fine qualities, they
willingly embrace, rather, that wrong side of the writer, which suit best
their own rapacious propensities.

Every gentleman, who experienced the scourge of tyranny, will maintain,
that it is better to be poor in a free country, than to have a princely
state without a country. I say a gentleman: and those, who enjoy in their
selfish wealth, without feeling any sympathy towards numerous human
beings, st