66 Blinking Sam," when he could see no farther than the revolution prophesied in the following lines : "But who the coming changes can presage, Perhaps (for who can guess th' effects of chance?) I have thus endeavoured to account for the conduct of the managers, in a matter which appears to have been misunderstood in its effects, although I agree with those who complain of its origin. I have discovered, without much research, a design in all this, which does not float on the surface; and I have explained it, however unpleasant that explanation may be to some performers. It is, on the part of the managers, an appeal to the town, to quicken the efforts of those who appear to have been remiss in their duty. It is an experiment, to try whether the places of those who cannot be softened by salaries and benefits, may be advantageously filled by those to whom salaries and benefits are unknown. The trial, however, is but begun; and one dog only has been formally engaged. Who can tell how many of that species may yet be made substitutes for the best of our authors and actors? and, when dogs shall be exhausted, who shall fix bounds to the performances of cats, of monkies, and of baboons? Or, what sublimity of feeling, and what closeness of attention, can the present drama produce, compared to the hopes and fears of an audience, when they shall be treated with the novel spectacle of real tigers prowling for real prey, or the more extraordinary appearance of a real lion sparing a real virgin? THE PROJECTOR. N° 28. "Sæpe et multum hoc mecum cogitavi, boníve an mali plus attulerit hominibus et civitatibus COPIA DICICERO. CENDI." February 1804. FROM the few words I have selected as the motto of this paper, it appears that Cicero, the most eloquent of the Roman Orators, and of whose eloquence we are in possession of a much larger proportion than of any antient orator, often perplexed himself with the question, Whether the faculty of Speech had done most good or evil? In what manner he determined this question, or whether he determined it at all, we cannot now ascertain: but as he was a lawyer, and much employed in very important and intricate causes, he undoubtedly knew enough both of the evil and good of speech, to qualify him for the discussion. Our countryman LOCKE expresses the same doubt in, I think, the third book of his celebrated Essay on the Human Understanding, "He that shall well consider the errors and obscurity, the mistakes and confusion, that is spread in the world by an ill use of words, will find reason to doubt, whether language, as it has been employed, has contributed more to the improvement or hindrance of knowledge among mankind.” Mr. Locke, like Cicero, here insinuates his doubt, without resolving it, although he unquestionably knew enough of the good and evil of metaphysical disputes to be a very proper judge of the matter. It may be, perhaps, reckoned strange that Cicero should suggest a doubt which could not be resolved in the space of eighteen centuries after his death; Mr. Locke, we see, takes it up, looks at it, and lays it down again. I strongly suspect Cicero was afraid to enter upon a decision which might be fatal to the gentlemen of the Law; and perhaps Locke was unwilling to interrupt the career of Metaphysicians, to whose theories he had given a new currency. Such is the imperfection of human nature, and the mixture of private interests with public professions, that in the writings of the most celebrated of mankind, we meet with something that, to use a city phrase, "smells of the shop." up I would not, however, have my readers imagine from this introduction, that I am about to discuss a question which two such men left unresolved. On the contrary, I hope it will ever remain in the same state, to be taken occasionally, as I have taken it up, for the meditation of a few minutes, but never to be submitted to the discussion of "Cool Considerations"-" Doubts in Answer to Cool Considerations" 66 -"Reply to Doubts in Answer to Cool Considerations"-"A Letter to the Author of Cool Considerations"-" Hints to the Author of the Letter"-" Veritas' Objections to the Cool Considerations"- -"Philalethes' Rejoinder to Veritas' Objections”—“The Dog in the Manger, addressed to Philalethes” -"The Cat-in-pan, a Reply to Veritas”“Three Bones for the Dog to pick, by Cynicus"-" A Crust to Cynicus in return for his Bones"—or any of those engaging titles, and catching artifices, by which controversies are prolonged, and paper-makers enriched. Much less would I have it submitted to any our Debating Societies, nor even to the wisdom of a certain great Assembly, lest, after having enjoyed the use of speech from their infancy, mankind should be convinced that they had been better without it. of The object, on the other hand, of this paper is to suggest, that, should it be attempted, this question can never be satisfactorily discussed, without a previous inquiry into the history of Speech. Of such an inquiry I can find no traces in any authors antient or modern. Some have treated, indeed, of the origin of speech; but that, even when cleared up to universal satisfaction, will not answer the present purpose. My Project is, to trace its history from the earliest ages to the present time, with the same accuracy and display of antiquarian learning that may be found in works which trace the history of civil or ecclesiastic institutions, or of buildings, cities, &c. I |