compared with the surface of the glass, the greater is the splendour; or as in distillation, the less the quantity of spirit is that is extracted by the still, compared with the quantity of liquor from which the extraction is made, the greater is the strength; so, in exhibiting our sentiments by speech, the narrower the compass of words is wherein the thought is comprised, the more energetic is the expression. Accordingly, we shall find, that the very same sentiment, expressed diffusely, will be admitted barely to be just; expressed concisely, will be admired as spirited. To recur to examples: the famous answer returned by the Countess of Dorset to the letter of Sir Joseph Williamson, secretary of state to Charles the Second, nominating to her a member for the borough of Appleby, is an excellent illustration of this doctrine. "I have been bullied," says her ladyship, "by a usurper, I have been neglected by a court, but I will not be dictated to by a subject-your man sha'n't stand." If we consider the meaning, there is mention made here of two facts, which it was impossible that anybody of common sense, in this lady's circumstances, should not have observed, and of a resolution, in consequence of these, which it was natural for every person who had a resentment of bad usage to make. Whence, then, results the vivacity, the fire which is so manifest in the letter? Not from anything extraordinary in the matter, but purely from the laconism of the manner. An ordinary spirit would have employed as many pages to express the same thing as there are affirmations in this short letter. The epistle might in that case have been very sensible, and, withal, very dull, but would never have been thought worthy of being recorded as containing anything uncommon, or deserving a reader's notice. Of all our English poets, none hath more successfully studied conciseness, or rendered it more conducive to vivacity, than Pope. Take the following lines as one example of a thousand which might be produced from his writings: "See how the world its veterans rewards' A youth of frolics, an old age of cards; Fair to no purpose, artful to no end; A fop their passion, but their prize a sot; Nothing is more evident than that the same passage may through five successive lines is rather too much, as it gives an air of quaintness to the whole. Yet that there is a great degree of liveliness in the expression is undeniable. This excellence is not, I acknowledge, to be ascribed solely to the brevity. Somewhat is doubtless imputable both to the words themselves and to their arrangement; but the first mentioned is still the principal cause. The trope in the fifth line, their passion, for the object of their passion, conduceth to vivacity, not only as being a trope, but as rendering the expression briefer, and thereby more nervous. Even the omission of the substantive verb, of the conjunctions, and of the personal pronouns, contribute not a little to the same end. Such ellipses are not, indeed, to be adopted into prose, and may even abound too much in verse. This author, in particular, hath sometimes exceeded in this way, and hath sacrificed both perspicuity and a natural simplicity of expression to the ambition of saying a great deal in few words. But there is no beauty of style for which one may not pay too high a price: and if any price ought to be deemed too high, either of these certainly ought, especially perspicuity, because it is this which throws light on every other beauty. Propriety may sometimes be happily violated. An im proper expression may have a vivacity, which, if we should reduce the words to grammatical correctness, would be annihilated. Shakspeare abounds in such happy improprieties For instance, "And be these juggling fiends no more believed, That palter with us in a double sense, That keep the word of promise to our ear, And break it to our hope."* In another place, "It is a custom More honoured in the breach than the observance."† David's accusation of Joab, that he had shed the blood of war in peace, or what Solomon says of the virtuous woman, that she eateth not the bread of idleness, serve also to verify the same remark. Everybody understands these expressions; everybody that knows English perceives an impropriety in them, which it is perhaps impossible to mend without destroying their energy. But a beauty that is unperceivable * Macbeth. + Hamlet. 1 Kings, ii., 5. The Hebraism in each of these quotations from Scripture constitutes the peculiarity; and as the reasons are nearly equal with regard to all modern languages for either admitting or rejecting an Oriental idiom, the observation will equally affect other European tongues into which the Bible is translated. A scrupulous attention to the purity of the language into which the version is made must often hurt the energy of the expression. Saci, who in his translation hath been too solicitous to Frenchify the style of Scripture, hath made nonsense of the first passage, and (to say the least) is no beauty. Without perspicuity, words are not signsthey are empty sounds; speaking is beating the air, and the most fluent declaimer is but as a sounding brass and a tinkling cymbal. Yet there are a sort and a degree of obscurity which ought not to be considered as falling under this censure. I speak not of those sentences wherein more is meant than meets the ear, the literal meaning being intended purely to suggest a farther meaning, which the speaker had chiefly in view. I gave some examples in this way when on the subject of perspicuity, and showed that they are not to be regarded as exceptions from the rule. But what I here principally alluded to is a species of darkness, if I may call it so, resulting from an excess of vivacity and conciseness, which, to a certain degree, in some sorts of composition, is at least pardonable. In the ode, for instance, the enthusiastic fervour of the poet naturally carries him to overlook those minutenesses in language on which perspicuity very much depends. It is to abruptness of transition, boldness of figure, laconism of expression, the congenial issue of that frame of mind in which the piece is composed, that we owe entirely the "Thoughts that breathe and words that burn." Hence proceeds a character of the writing, which may not unhappily be expressed in the words of Milton, "dark with excessive light." I have compared vivacity produced by a happy conciseness to the splendour occasioned by concentring sunbeams into a little spot. Now if by means of this the light is rendered dazzling, it is no more a fit medium for viewing an object in than too weak a light would be. Though the causes be contrary, the effects are in this respect the hath greatly enervated the second. The first he renders in such a manner as implies that Joab had killed Abner and Amasa oftener than once. Ayant repandu leur sang” (le sang d'Abner et d'Amasa) “durant la paix, comme il avoit fait durant la guerre." A terrible man this Joab, "And thrice he routed all his foes, and thrice he slew the slain." The other passage he renders "Elle n'a point mangé son pain dans l'oisiveté." The meaning is very indistinctly expressed here. Can a sluggard be said to be idle when eating? or does the most industrious disposition require that in the time of eating one should be employed in something else? Such a translation as this is too free to exhibit the style of the original, too literal to express the sense, and, therefore, is unlucky enough to hit neither. Diodati hath succeeded better in both. The last he renders literally as we do, and the first in this manner: "Spandendo in tempo di pace, il sangue che si spande in battaglia." This clearly enough exhibits the sense, and is sufficiently literal. The meaning of the other passage, stripped of the idiom, and expressed in plain English, is neither more nor less than this: "She eateth not the bread which she hath not earned." In many cases it may be difficult to say whether propriety or energy snould have the pref erence. I think it safer in every dubious case to secure the former. *Book ii., chap. viii., sect. ii. same Objects in both are seen indistinctly. But the cases to which this observation is applicable are extremely few. Indeed, the concise manner in any form is not alike adapted to every subject. There are some subjects which it particularly suits. For example, the dignity and authority of the perceptive style receives no small lustre from brevity. In the following words of Michael to Adam, how many important lessons are couched in two lines? 'Nor love thy life, nor hate; but what thou liv'st, Live well; how long or short, permit to Heaven."* The aphoristic style, and the proverbial, receive likewise considerable strength from the laconic manner. Indeed, these two styles differ from each other only as the one conveys the discoveries in science, and the other the maxims of common life. In Swift's detached thoughts we find a few specimens of this manner. "The power of fortune is confessed by the miserable; the happy ascribe all their success to merit”—“ Every man desires to live long; but no man would be old"—" A nice man is a man of nasty ideas"-" The sluggard," saith Solomon, "hideth his hand in his bosom; it grieveth him to bring it to his mouth"-" The desire of the slothful killeth him, for his hands refuse to labour"-" A fool," says the son of Sirach, "travaileth with a word, as a woman in labour of a child." It is indeed true, that a great degree of conciseness is scarcely attainable unless the style be figurative; but it is also true, that the vivacity of the expression is not to be attributed solely to the figure, but partly to the brevity occasioned by the figure. But though the combination of the figurative with the concise is very common, it is not necessary. This will appear from some of the examples already given, wherein, though we discover a happy comprehension of a great deal of meaning in little compass, there is neither.trope nor figure; nor, indeed, is there either of these in the picture that Swift gives of himself, where he says, "I am too proud to be vain," in which simplicity, perspicuity, and vivacity are all happily united. An inferior writer, in attempting to delineate fully the same character, would have employed many sentences, and not have said near so much. Farther, the writer on politics often avails himself of a sententious conciseness, which adds no little energy to the sentiments he unfolds. Of the successful application of brevity in this way, we have an excellent model in the Spirit of Laws. It hath no bad effect, if used sparingly, even in narrative.|| Paradise Lost. + Proverbs, xxvi., 15. Eccles., xxi., 11. The veni, vidi, vici of Cæsar derives hence its principal beauty; I came, I saw, I conquered, is not equal. So small a circumstance as the repetition of the pronoun, without which the sentence in our language would appear maimed, takes much from its vivacity and force. On the other hand, the kinds of writing which are less sus. ceptible of this ornament are the descriptive, the pathetic, the declamatory, especially the last. It is, besides, much more suitable in writing than in speaking. A reader has the command of his time; he may read fast or slow, as he finds convenient; he can peruse a sentence a second time when necessary, or lay down the book and think. But if, in haranguing to the people, you comprise a great deal in few words, the hearer must have uncommon quickness of apprehension to catch your meaning, before you have put it out of his power by engaging his attention to something else. In such orations, therefore, it is particularly unseasonable; and by consequence, it is, in all kinds of writing addressed to the people, more or less so, as they partake more or less of popular declamation. SECTION II. THE PRINCIPAL OFFENCES AGAINST BREVITY CONSIDERED. Bur though this energetic brevity is not adapted alike to every subjcct, we ought on every subject to avoid its contrary, a languid redundancy of words. It is sometimes proper to be copious, but never to be verbose. I shall, therefore, now consider some of the principal faults against that quality of style of which I have been treating. PART I. Tautology. The first I shall take notice of is the tautology, which is either a repetition of the same sense in different words, or a representation of anything as the cause, condition, or consequence of itself. Of the first, which is also the least, take the following example from Addison : "The dawn is overcast-the morning lours; And-heavily in clouds brings on the day."* Here the same thought is represented thrice in different words. Of the last kind I shall produce a specimen from Swift. "I look upon it as my duty, so far as God hath enabled me, and as long as I keep within the bounds of truth, of duty, and of decency." It would be strange indeed that any man should think it his duty to transgress the bounds of duty. Another example from the same hand you have in the words which follow: "So it is, that I must be forced to get home, partly by stealth and partly by force."‡ "How many are there," says Bolingbroke, "by whom these tidings of good news were never heard?" This is tidings of tidings, or news of news. "Never did Atticus succeed better * Cato. Letter to Mr. Sheridan. † Letter to Lord Littleton. § Ph. Fr., 38. |