Doctor Johnson was capable of giving it; and that therefore, with deference to his superior judgment, they humbly requested he would at least take the trouble of revising it, and of making such alterations and additions as he should think proper upon a farther perusal. This part of the remonstrance Johnson received with good humour; and desired Sir Joshua, who presented it, to tell the gentlemen he would alter the epitaph in any manner they pleased, as to the sense of it. But then came the pinch of the mutiny. Langton, who was present when the remonstrance was drawn up, had not objected thus far; but to what now was added, he refused to give his name. But if we might venture to express our wishes, they would lead us to request that he 'would write the epitaph in English rather than in Latin, as we think that the memory of so eminent an English writer ought to be perpetuated in the language to which 'his works are likely to be so lasting an ornament, which we also know to have been the opinion of the late Doctor 'himself.' Langton was too sturdy a classic to assent to this. His scholarly sympathies had already invited and received, from Johnson, even a Greek lament for their common loss. The names circumscribed were those of Burke, Franklin (the translator of Sophocles), Chamier, Colman, Vachell (a friend of Sir Joshua's), Reynolds, Forbes (the Scotch baronet and biographer of Beattie), Barnard, Sheridan, Metcalfe (another great friend of Sir Joshua's, and a humane as well as active member of the house of commons), Gibbon, and Joseph Warton. 'I wonder,' exclaimed Johnson, when

he read this part of the remonstrance, and the names, 'that 'Joe Warton, a scholar by profession, should be such a fool. 'I should have thought Mund Burke, too, would have had more sense.' His formal answer was not less emphatic. He requested Reynolds at once to acquaint his fellow mutineers, that he would never consent to disgrace the walls of Westminster Abbey with an English inscription. The Latin was accordingly placed upon the marble, where it now remains.

OLIVARII GOLDSMITH

Poeta, Physici, Historici,
qui nullum fere scribendi genus
non tetigit,

nullum quod tetigit non ornavit :
sive risus essent movendi,
sive lacrymæ,

affectuum potens, at lenis dominator;
ingenio sublimis, vividus, versatilis ;
oratione grandis, nitidus, venustus :
hoc monumento memoriam coluit
Sodalium amor,
Amicorum fides,

Lectorum veneratio.

Natus Hiberniâ, Forneiæ Lonfordiensis

in loco cui nomen Pallas,

Nov xxix. MDCCXXXI.
Eblanæ literis institutus,

Objit Londini
Apr. iv. MDCCLXXIV.

While Goldsmith lay upon his death-bed, there was much discussion in London about the rights of authors. After two decisions in the courts of common law, which

declared an author's property to be perpetual in any work he might have written, the question had been brought upon appeal before the House of Lords, and the opinions of the judges taken. Five then declared their belief that, by the common law of England, the sole right of multiplying copies of any work was vested for ever in him, by the exercise of whose genius, faculties, or industry, such work had been produced; and that no enactment had yet been passed, of force to limit that estate in fee. Six, on the other hand, held that this perpetual property which undoubtedly existed at common law, had been reduced to a short term by an act passed in the reign of Queen Anne, and somewhat strangely entitled (if this were indeed its right construction) as for the encouragement of literature. Chief Justice Mansfield's opinion would have equalised these opposing judgments; but, though retaining it still as strongly as when it had decided the right in his own court, the highest tribunal of common law, he thought it becoming not then to repeat it. Lord Camden upon this moved and carried a reversal of Lord Mansfield's decision, by reversing the decree which had been founded upon it. The House of Lords thus declared the statute of Anne to have been a confiscation to the public use, after a certain brief term, of such rights of property in the fruits of his own labour and genius, as, up to the period of its enactment, an author had undoubtedly possessed.

Lord Camden glorified this result for the sake of literature itself. For he held that genius was not intended for

the benefit of the individual who possessed it, but for the universal benefit of the race; and believing Fame to be its sufficient reward, thought that all who deserved so divine a recompense, spurning delights and living laborious days, should scorn and reject every other. The real price which genius sets upon its labours, he fervently exclaimed, is Immortality; and posterity pays that. On the other hand, Mr. Justice Willes announced an opinion hardly less earnest in its tone, to the effect that he held it to be wise in every state to encourage men of letters, without precise regard to what the measure of their powers might be; and that the easiest and most equal way of doing it, was by securing to them the property of their own works. By that means, nobody contributed who was not willing; and though a good book might be run down, and a bad one cried up, for a time, yet sooner or later the reward would be fairly proportioned to the merit of the work. 'A writer's fame,' added this learned and upright judge, 'will not be the less, that he has bread; without being 'under the necessity, that he may get bread, of prostituting 'his pen to flattery or to party.'

The

Such interest as society showed in the discussion, went wholly with the majestic sentiments of Camden. 'very thought,' said Lord Chatham to Lord Shelburne, 'of coining literature into ready rhino! Why, it is as 'illiberal as it is illegal.' It is nevertheless probable that the reader who may have accompanied me through this narrative thus far, will think it not illiberal to put these

rival and opposing doctrines to the practical test of the Life and Death it has recorded. To that they are now left; with such illustrative comment from the nature and the claims of Goldsmith's writings, and the peculiarities of his character, as already I have amply supplied.

Let this alone be added. The debt which Lord Camden proclaimed due to genius (though, from his conduct on the only occasion when they met, he probably did not think it due to Goldsmith), has to this date been amply paid in the fame of the Vicar of Wakefield, the Citizen of the World, the Deserted Village, and the Traveller. Goldsmith died in the prime of his age and his powers, because his strength had been overtasked and his mind was ill at ease; but, by this, the world's enjoyment of what he left has been in no respect weakened or impaired. Nor was his lot upon the whole an unhappy one, for him or for us. Nature is vindicated in the sorrows of her favourite children; for a thousand enduring and elevating pleasures survive, to redeem their temporary sufferings. The acquisition of wealth, the purchase of tranquillity and worldly ease, so eagerly coveted and unscrupulously toiled for, are not themselves obtained without attendant losses; and not without much to soften the harshness of anxiety and poverty, to show what gains may be saved out of the greatest apparent disadvantage, and to render us all some solid assistance out of even his thriftless imprudent insolvent circumstances, had Goldsmith lived and died. He worthily did the work that was in him to do; proved himself in his garret a gentleman of nature;