expression. He added that Butler had well illustrated the principle on which they went, where he compares their endeavours to those of the archer who draws his arrow to the head whether his object be a swan or a goose. The plays, poems, and other productions that issued from the press from the time of the Restoration to the reign of Queen Anne, fully confirm this remark.
A previous application on this subject had been made to Lord Hailes of the Court of Session in Scotland—eminent for historical and biographical research—for such materials as he possessed. But no facts on the subject could be supplied. He had once formed similar projects, but found—alas! what man of letters does not find?—that life and health are too limited for their completion. His reply however is worth transcribing. It is dated October 1791; is introduced by Malone into his memoranda evidently for future use of some description; but being copied by another hand is in a few places illegible.
It would give me great pleasure, sir, to be able to aid you in any of your literary plans. But I am afraid that my assistance can go but a little way. I have hardly looked into Pope these twenty years past, having been immersed in business and in prose.
Pope was not a conscientious satirist. When an incident did not suit his purpose, he mended it. Of this there is a remarkable example in a publication called Opinions of the Duchess Dowager of Marlborough, where the poet converts an elegant bequest into a capricious lavishing of money. I am apt to believe that “If where I am going I could serve you, sir,” is a true story perverted with still more malevolence. The late Lord Elibank told me, but I do not vouch the authority, that the dying man who would not leave a favourite
