Indeed, Molière seems to have possessed all the essential requisites for excelling in genteel comedy; a pure taste, an acute perception of the ridiculous, the tone of elegant dialogue, and a wit, brilliant and untiring as Congreve's, but which, instead of wasting itself like his, in idle flashes of merriment, is uniformly directed with a moral or philosophical aim. This obvious didactic purpose, indeed, has been censured as inconsistent with the spirit of the drama; and as belonging rather to satire; but it secured to him an influence over the literature and the opinions of his own generation, which has been possessed by no other comic writer of the moderns.

He was the first to recall his countrymen from the vapid byperbole and puerile conceits of the ancient farces; and to instruct them in the maxim, which Boileau has since condensed into a memorable verse; that nothing is beautiful, but what is natural.' We have already spoken of the reformation which one of his early pieces effected in the admirers of the Hôtel de Rambouillet and its absurdities; and when this confederacy afterwards rallied under an affectation of science, as it had before done of letters, he again broke it with his admirable satire of the Femmes Savantes. We do not recollect any similar revolution effected by a single effort of genius, unless it be that brought about by the Baviad and Maviad. But Mr Gifford, in the Della-Cruscan school, but broke a butterfly upon the wheel,' in comparison with those enemies, formidable by rank and talent, whom Molière assailed. We have noticed, in its proper place, the influence which his writings had, in compelling the medical faculty of his day to lay aside the affected deportment, technical jargon, and other mummeries then in vogue, by means of the public derision to which he had deservedly exposed them. In the same manner, he so successfully ridiculed the miserable dialectics, pedantry, and intolerance of the schoolmen, in his diverting dialogues between Dr Marphurius and Dr Pancrace, that he is said to have completely defeated the serious efforts of the University for obtaining a confirmation of the decree of 1624; which had actually prohibited, under pain of death, the promulgation of any opinion contrary to the doctrines of Aristotle. The arrêt burlesque of his friend Boileau, at a later period, if we may trust the Menagiana, had a principal share in preventing a decree of the parliament against the philosophy of Des Cartes. It is difficult to estimate the influence of our poet's satire on the state of society in general;

and on those higher ranks, in particular, whose affectations and pretensions he assailed with such pertinacious hostility. If he did not reform them, however, he at least deprived them of their fascination and much of their mischievous influence, by holding them up to the contempt and laughter of the public. Sometimes, it must be admitted, though very rarely, in effecting this object, he so far transgressed the bounds of decorum, as to descend even to personalities.

From this view of the didactic purpose proposed by Molière in his comedies, it is obviously difficult to institute a comparison betwixt them, and those of our English dramatists, or rather of Shakspeare, who may be taken as their representative. The latter seems to have had no higher end in view than mere amusement; he took a leaf out of the great volume of human nature as he might find it; nor did he accommodate it to the illustration of any moral or literary theorem. The former, on the other hand, manifests such a direct preceptive purpose, as to give to some of his pieces the appearance of satires, rather than of comedies; argument takes place of action, and the pro and con of the matter are discussed with all the formality of a school exercise. This essentially diminishes the interest of some of his best plays; the Misanthrope and the Femmes Savantes, for example, which for this reason seem better fitted for the closet than the stage, and have long since ceased to be favorites with the public. This want of interest is, moreover, aggravated by the barrenness of action visible in many of Molière's comedies; where, indeed, he seems only to have sought an apology for bringing together his coteries of gentlemen and ladies, for the purpose of exhibiting their gladiatorial dexterity in conversation. Not so with the English dramatist, whose boundless invention crowds his scene with incidents, that hurry us along with breathless interest, but which sadly scandalize the lover of the unities.

In conformity with his general plan, too, Shakspeare brings before us every variety of situation, the court, the camp, and the cloister, the busy hum of populous cities, or the wild solitude of the forest,-presenting us with pictures of rich and romantic beauty, which could not fall within the scope of his rival, and allowing himself to indulge in the unbounded revelry of an imagination, which Molière did not possess. The latter, on the other hand, an attentive observer of man, as he is found in an over-refined state of society, in courts and crowded cap

itals, copied his minutest lineaments with a precision that gives to his most general sketches, the air almost of personal portraits; seasoning, moreover, his discourses with the shrewd hints and maxims of worldly policy. Shakspeare's genius led him rather to deal in bold touches, than in this nice delineation. He describes classes, rather than individuals; he touches the springs of the most intense passions. The daring of ambition, the craving of revenge, the deep tenderness of love, are all materials in his hands for comedy; and this gives to some of his admired pieces, his Merchant of Venice' and his 'Measure for Measure,' for example, a solemnity of coloring, that leaves them only to be distinguished from tragedy by their more fortunate termination. Molière, on the contrary, sedulously excludes from his plays whatever can impair their comic interest. And when, as he has done very rarely, he aims directly at vice, instead of folly, (in the Tartuffe, for instance) he studies to exhibit it under such ludicrous points of view, as shall excite the derision, rather than the indignation of his audience.

But whatever be the comparative merits of these great masters, each must be allowed to have attained complete success in his way. Comedy, in the hands of Shakspeare, exhibits to us man, not only as he is moved by the petty vanities of life, but by deep and tumultuous passion; in situations which it requires all the invention of the poet to devise, and the richest coloring of eloquence to depict. But if the object of comedy, as has been said, be to correct the follies of the age, by exposing them to ridicule,' who then has equalled Molière ?

ART. VII-A Discourse on the Genius and Character of the Rev. Horace Holley, LL. D. late President of Transylvania University, by CHARLES CALDWELL, M. D. Professor of the Institutes of Medicine and Clinical Practice in said University; with an Appendix, containing copious Notes, Biographical and Illustrative. Boston. 1828. Hilliard, Gray, Little, & Wilkins.

Ir is very frequently remarked, that the lives of literary men are barren of incident. That of president Holley was perhaps less so than the lives of literary men generally are, in this country; but it still furnishes no exception to the rule. The history of such men is necessarily a record of the exercise of intellectual power, in the various duties of the professional career, rarely varied by the occurrence of events of a novel and marked character. This circumstance, while it increases the difficulty of preparing a biographical account of their lives, filled with details of general interest, makes it still more the duty of those, who knew their worth, who enjoyed the benefit of their efforts, and witnessed the displays of their talent, to contribute, in every proper way, to the preservation of their memory. The man, who discharges faithfully the duties of the academical or of the spiritual instructer, and especially the man who discharges them, not only with fidelity, but with extraordinary skill and vigor, who brings to them the energies of a brilliant genius, and the fruits of mature studies, ought to rank among the greatest benefactors of his generation. But yet, from the very necessity of the case, his merit is not embodied (if we may so speak) in any series of striking actions or events, to which posterity can be referred, in proof of its extent and reality. A process precisely the reverse of that, which takes place in the lives of statesmen and heroes, and which gives to them the credit of much that is done by those about them, operates in the case of him, whose life is passed in forming the minds of others, and deprives him of much of the praise which is his due. The prince or the chief magistrate, whose administration has been signalized by important events, beneficial to the country, enjoys a distinguished place in history, and a full share of the glory of transactions, of which perhaps the larger portion of the credit really belongs to the subaltern agents. A military chief of necessity concentrates

upon himself the renown of victories, to which thousands may have contributed as much conduct and gallantry as himself. On the other hand, we are too apt to give to the pupil the whole of the credit, which is due in part to the master who formed his mind. The influence of intellect on intellect is too elevated, undefined, and ethereal to admit of a gross partition of the praise. The eloquent writer, the eloquent speaker, and the accomplished scholar receive the undivided applause of the community, which witnesses the display of their talents and acquisitions; and it is an afterthought and a tardy justice which go back and give credit to the aid, the counsel, and the discipline, which have perhaps contributed most essentially to these displays. It frequently happens, in the case of men whose eminence is purely intellectual, and who are not engaged in the academic career, that they exercise a powerful influence on society around them; that they contribute to raise and purify the standard of taste, to set other men on thinking and on acting, and are in reality the authors, in this way, of substantial improvement; that there is nevertheless not enough of visible action in their lives, to furnish the basis of any adequate memorial. They live in the hearts of their contemporaries. A grateful tradition of them goes down for a few generations. Some fine traits of their characters, and a few happy expressions, are repeated and recollected, and then all that they were is lost and forgotten. This has been the fortune of many excellent men in our own country, who, having written little or nothing of a permanent nature, have left nothing behind them, but a tradition, daily growing weaker, of characters and services, inestimable in their day and generation.

These considerations lead us to rejoice in every successful attempt, to commemorate an individual of merit, belonging to the class of society, in which life is unmarked by incident and adventure, but in which a full proportion of the actual service of the community is performed. They lead us to rejoice in the appearance of the present work, furnishing, as it does, a satisfactory, and, we trust, a permanent memorial of a man of rare talent, of uncommon mental vigor, and of brilliant accomplishments, exercised during a short but distinguished career. It appears to us well calculated to satisfy the curiosity, which the public naturally takes in the life of such a man. It presents his character and his various official relations in a light, which must be satisfactory and consoling to his friends.