the sort of conversation daily to be heard,-- and not in public places only, but in private families; and not only from the giddiness of empty young men, but from men of mature years and of a more sober caste."*

This gallantry, so unworthy the age, should be permitted to die its natural death.(→) In their own demeanour must men set the example of rebuking its spirit; this would go a long way towards weeding it forth altogether :

"Where none are beaux, 'tis vain to be a belle!"

What ceremonious and insulting nonsense is it, to show a marked preference to either sex. "We should do nothing," as Rousseau says, 66 we should lay it down as an inviolable rule, to do nothing unreasonable; now no good reason can be given why we should treat one sex with more respect than the other, except, indeed, that they may deserve it less."+ Let them have all kindness, zealous and even respectful; Scripture itself enjoins us "to give honour to the woman as the weaker vessel.” It is not, however, said, 'Give greater honour.' All homage paid

* Duties of Women. + Treatise on Education.

to the sex, merely as such,-more especially when individual claims to it are wanting, is, to say the best of it, but unthinking and ill-advised ro

mance.

§ 4.-It is from Poetry, and the stores of Fiction, that this false worship of women, termed 'Gallantry,' deserves much of its artificial existence. (5)

66

Poetry," says Burke, "is the art of substantiating shadows, and of lending existence to nothing." And as another powerful writer has observed, "those who deal in fiction, of course appeal to the evidence of the poets.'

If fools have sometimes become 'Cymons' or poets from the influence of the fair sex, far more frequently have poets become fools! The whole tribe of sonneteers, upwards and downwards, feign an adoration they never felt, (for few of them, as it appears, were ever in love; and all their tales, about other men seeking death like blind puppies for the love of mortal woman, are but roguish fictions). They imagined, that they were compelled to a ditty,-that they were not freemen

* Junius.

of their company unless occasionally in the melting mood. So Shakspeare tells us, "Never durst poet touch a pen to write

Until his ink were temper'd with Love's sighs."

Shakspeare's own sonnets are among the best of their kind; but, as a writer of the present day judiciously observes,-" when he is most eloquent, we recognize only his assumption of a fictitious character, borrowed in moments of thoughtless accordance with the capricious rhodomontade of the times." To the same effect writes Mackenzie:-"Shakspeare was not so happy in his delineations of love and tenderness, as of the other passions, because the majesty of his genius could not stoop to such refinements."

What really incredible things have the poetic sponsors of the sex in all ages promised and vowed in their name! The soi-disant poets of this age are not behind in flattering women with a vain worship; they hold forth a picture of the female empire, built only upon shadowy excellencies; a false enthusiasm which very often leads them to sacrifice the other sex,-"as if woman could ever be of porcelain, while man * Campbell.

of common earthenware."*

The sex has been

extolled with every sickening exaggeration that invention would permit, till at length common sense and truth are quite put aside for fulsome poetics. (7)

66

66

Woman has never yet seen herself reflected in aught but the flattering fictions of poetry, or the ephemeral productions of mere writers of imagination; yet this class of authors are by no means exclusively endowed above others with kindly or indulgent feelings. Brilliancy of imagination is no proof of warmth in the heart." The poets have, in fact, little advanced the cause of true and honourable love. Conjugal love," honestly declares Burns, (8) "is a passion I highly venerate; but somehow it does not make such a figure in poetry as that other species of the passion,- where love is liberty, and nature law."" The obligation to amorous ditties arose with Petrarch, the prince of sonneteers and the Apollo of sentiment; but, it is questionable, if eloquence would have inspired that great man (at least in a poetical shape), had Laura been his wife. Even Ovid made love like a rake; nor * Autobiography of an Opium-Eater.

is the seducing Anacreon the most refined among amatory poets.

§ 5. We shall devote a section, invidious though it may seem, for the purpose of opening female eyes a little more to the real truth. Writers, in the higher walks of literature, have perhaps erred in the other extreme. They have been sometimes too unsparing on the errors and foibles of women. This may be at once imagined from the tone of the following passages in our British Essayists :

"One would naturally expect to meet with unqualified applause among writers who treat of the female character; we find, however, that this is not the case, and that women are often treated in books with the most sovereign contempt by the most elegant writers."

"The graver sort of men are continually throwing out sarcastic hints, if not open invectives, against their countrywomen."+

The following were authors of direct satires upon women:-Boileau, Simonides, Butler, and Pope: Churchill, Hall, and Donne,-these latter + The World.

* Lounger.