Burke. Burke possessed and had sedulously sharpened that eye which sees all things, actions, and events, in relation to the laws which determine their existence and circumscribe their possibility. He referred habitually to principles he was a scientific statesman, and therefore a Seer. For every principle contains in itself the germs of a prophecy; and, as the prophetic power is the essential privilege of science, so the fulfilment of its oracles supplies the outward, and (to men in general) the only test, of its claim to the title. There is not one word I would add or withdraw from this, scarcely one which I would substitute. I can read Burke, and apply everything not merely temporary to the present most fearful condition of our country. I cannot conceive a time or a state of things in which the writings of Burke will not have the highest value. Shakspere and Sneerers. Observe the fine humanity of Shakspere in that his sneerers are all worthless villains. Too cunning to attach value to self-praise, and unable to obtain approval from those whom they are compelled to respect, they propitiate their own self-love by disparaging and lowering others. Wordsworth all Man. Of all the men I ever knew, Wordsworth has the least femineity in his mind. He is all man. He is a man of whom it might have been said,—" It is good for him to be alone." Domestication. I have shown in the Biographia Literaria the great evil of too entire domestication. My after-experience would confirm, nay, even extend, this. I incline to think that, unless the husband is abroad the whole day, and therefore only a partaker of his wife's social parties, that in the 340 ADDITIONAL TABLE TALK. choice of their associates they should be independent. To exclude all that a woman or a man might wish to exclude from his or her help-mate's society, might leave the rest of little value, and lead to mutual discomfort. The Turkish method is good: they have no difference of opinion in that fine country; but, as our own habits and customs are different, we should seek to make arrangements in harmony with them; and this I think may be accomplished. Why insist upon a married pair-paired not matchedagreeing in the choice of their visitors? The less the independence of married people, especially that of man, is trenched upon, the better chance of happiness for both. Are there any men to whom the wife has a dislike ?—why should she be annoyed with their presence? Are there women amongst his wife's acquaintance who to him are ungenial ? why force them upon the husband's distaste or dislike ? I have known permanent aversions, and, what is the same thing, permanent alienations, proceed from this cause, all which might have been avoided by each of the parties simply agreeing to see their own friends without the presence or intervention of the other. In the one case the range of the more kindly sympathies may appear to be circumscribed, in the other, dislike is quickly ripened into aversion. ΟΜΝΙΑΝΑ, IN INTRODUCTORY NOTE. N 1812 Longmans issued two small volumes of miscellaneous scraps of criticism and the like, entitled "Omniana, or Horae Otiosiores." The work was anonymous, and had not a word of preface. In the table of contents many of the articles were marked with an asterisk, which the following note explained:-"The articles marked thus are by a different writer." The book was the joint production of Coleridge and Southey. We find from a letter of Southey that he was contemplating the publication of a series of fragments, to appear in the Athenæum, and under the title of "Omniana, -as early as 1806. Again, Jan. 21, 1810, we read,—“ From the overflowings of my notes and notanda I am putting together some volumes of Omniana.' On Feb. 5, 1811, he writes:-"I urged Coleridge to double the intended number of Omniana volumes, merely for the sake of making him do something for his family: this requiring, literally, no other trouble than either cutting out of his commonplace books what has for years been accumulating there, or marking the passage off for a transcriber. He promised to add two volumes, and has contributed one sheet, which, I dare say, unless he soon returns to Cumberland,' will be all." Then the volumes were published. The same year, on Nov. 5, 1812, Southey writes again:-"I have desired Longman to send you a book of shreds and patches, the work of many idle hours of that sort of laborious idleness 1 Which he never did. |