thirteen pages) there are no less than thirty-three additional sneers, or faults, found with his opinions. He does not acknowledge in him one single solitary merit, except at page 191. In page 160, he nearly, if not quite, calls him a _fool_, and declares that _vanity_ is the passion to which he is constantly sacrificing.[56] It would be an insult to any one who has read Mr. Whateley's work, to endeavour to clear him from such a virulent and ill-founded attack. Neither Dr. Johnson, with all his deep learning, nor Mr. Whateley, with all the cultivated fancy of a rich scholastic mind, would either of them have been able to comprehend, or to understand, or even to make head or tail of the first half of Mr. George Mason's poem, with which he closes the above edition of his Essay. As he has been so caustically severe against Dr. Johnson, it cannot be ungenerous if one applies to the above part of his own poem, the language of a French critic on another subject:--"Le style en est dur, et scabreux. Il semble que l'auteur a ramassé les termes les plus extraordinaires pour se rendre inintelligible." Percy, Bishop of Dromore, in vol. x. page 602, of the British Critic, has given a critique of Mr. Mason's edition of Hoccleve, in which he chastises its injustice, arrogance, and ignorance. Mr. Mason has been more liberal in warmly praising Kent, and Shenstone, in acknowledging the great taste and elegance of Mr. Thomas Warton, when the latter notices Milton's line of _Bosom'd high in tufted trees,_ which picturesque remark of Mr. Warton's could not have been excelled even by the nice and critical pen of the late Sir U. Price; and when he informs us, in more than one instance, of the great Earl of Chatham's "turning his mind to the embellishment of rural nature."