It was in his fourth book, _Nicholas Nickleby_, that we find Dickens definitely deciding to write romance. Accordingly he introduces an impossibly good St. George, throws in a Princess and a Dragon half-way through for his benefit, and tries to make an orthodox novel. He succeeds, however, in making only a very poor imitation of one. Nicholas himself is a hopelessly badly-drawn character; and in fact nearly everywhere in the story that Dickens tries to be definitely romantic and orthodox he sinks below the level of the ha'penny novelette. In his next book, _The Old Curiosity Shop_ (1840), he almost abandons his good intentions formed with _Nicholas Nickleby_, and we return to the realm of sketches and sketchiness. He is progressing, however, in the use of forcible and restrained language. _Barnaby Rudge_ (1841) is splendid of its kind, the best bit of actual writing Dickens had yet done, though it is rather a series of brilliant pictures than an orthodox novel. The hero is an idiot, but nevertheless not so idiotic as was Nicholas Nickleby. In _Martin Chuzzlewit_ (1844) we get an attempt at romance. Martin is a hero a little more life-like than the much-abused Nicholas. In this book Dickens's powers of satire come out at their best in his pictures of American society, and his power of humorous characterization is also at its height in Pecksniff, Sairey Gamp, and many of the minor characters. The melodramatic side of Dickens's art unfortunately comes out unpleasantly strong in the description of old Chuzzlewit and his hopeful son, Jonas. At this point all Dickens's characteristic traits may be said to be fully developed. From this time, except in _David Copperfield_, which marks the culmination of his powers, and in the _Tale of Two Cities_, there is a distinct decline. _Dombey_ is in parts magnificent, but a sort of gloom hangs over most of the book, relieved only by such bright patches as Mr. Toots, Bunsby, and Susan Nipper. Major Bagstock is the most unpleasant of Dickens's humorous characters. In this novel Dickens trespassed on Thackeray's preserves with disastrous results. His attempted satire on fashionable society and fashionable marriages, in the Cleopatra-Edith-Carker episodes, should be compared with Thackeray's treatment of a similar subject in _The Newcomes_. Still, there is nothing crude about the style of _Dombey_; it has the strength and force of maturity. After _David Copperfield_, which is known and loved by every one, and which is the most purely natural and wholly lovable of Dickens's books, we get a series of what may be called splendid failures in _Bleak House, Little Dorrit, Hard Times, Our Mutual Friend_, and _Great Expectations_. They all contain magnificent patches, but they fail to impress one like the earlier books. It is some time now since I read _Bleak House_, and I must say I have very faint recollections of the greater part of it, whereas the earlier works are unforgettable.