From The Quarterly Review.
JONATHAN SWIFT.*

We know Swift as we know no other of those eminent men who have made

ence-a

career during which his correspondence is most scanty. If to this mass of autobiographical matter be added the innumerable passages in his public writings evidence which is of all evidence the least which elucidate his personal history, the

But if we owe much to the communi

the first four decades of the eighteenth
century memorable in literary history. A
mere glance at the materials to which his open to suspicion may be regarded as
biographers have had access will suffice ample even to superabundance.
to show that our information regarding cativeness of Swift himself, we owe much
him is of such a kind as to leave scarcely also to the communicativeness of his
anything to be desired. In the first place, friends. Seven years after his death ap-
we have his own voluminous correspond-
correspondence which is, from peared the famous "Letters" by John
a biographical point of view, of peculiar work excited among Swift's admirers is
Lord Orrery. The indignation which this
value. For as the majority of his letters
well known. The picture which Orrery
are addressed to intimate friends, and
drew of the dean was certainly not a
were intended only for the eyes of those
friends, they exhibit him at times when pleasing one, and he was accused of hav
the mask falls off, even from the most himself for the long and not very success-
ing malignantly endeavored to indemnify
guarded. They were, moreover, written
ful court be paid to Swift when alive by a
in all moods, without premeditation, with-
series of calumnious attacks upon him
out reserve, with the simple object of
unburdening his mind, in no case with when dead. We have not much respect
a view either to publication or to display. but we believe him to have been guiltless
for Orrery either as a writer or as a man,
"When I sit down to write a letter," he
used to say, "I never lean upon my
elbow
till I have finished it." Again, in the
journal to Esther Johnson, he has not
only left a minute record of his daily life
during a space of nearly three years,
but he has with unrestrained garrulity
given expression to whatever happened
at the moment to be passing through his
thoughts. Nor is this all. He appears,
like Johnson and Coleridge, to have found
an eccentric pleasure in communing with
himself on paper. Many of these solilo-
quies accident has preserved. They throw
the fullest light on his innermost thoughts
and feelings. They enable us to deter-
mine how far as a Churchman he was hon-
est, how far as a politician he was con.
sistent. His memoir of himself remains
unfortunately a fragment, but enough was
completed to illustrate that portion of his

1. The Works of Jonathan Swift, D.D., Dean of St. Patrick's, Dublin. Edited, with Notes and a Life of the Author, by Walter Scott, Esq. Eighteen volumes. Second edition. Edinburgh, 1824.

2. The History and Antiquities of the Collegiate and Cathedral Church of St. Patrick, near Dublin. Collected chiefly from sources of original record, by

William Monck Mason, Esq. Dublin, 1819.

3. The Life of Jonathan Swift. By John Forster.

Volume the First. London, 1875.

of

any

such intention. Careful study of the letters has satisfied us that they are

on the whole what they profess to be. Orrery was, as we learn from other sources,

no favorite with Swift. He saw him, therefore, not as he presented himself to the fascinated eye of friendship, but as he presented himself to the impartial eye membered too that he knew him only in of critical curiosity. It should be rehis decadence. Had Orrery's object been detraction, he would have withheld praise where praise was due, and when direct

censure was hazardous he would have resorted to misrepresentation. There is nothing of this spirit discernible. He fully admits the greatness, he fully admits the many virtues, of the man whose por

trait he has delineated in such harsh and

disagreeable colors. What he painted was what he saw, and what he saw were those features in Swift's character which Delany and Deane Swift have piously done their best to soften or conceal. The truth is, that the Swift of Orrery is the Swift of the "Voyage to the Houyhnhnms," and of the "Verses to the Legion Club." The letters of Orrery elicited two years afterwards the obser

vations of Delany. Few men were bet- | more. Indeed he produced a work which ter qualified to speak of Swift than De- still remains, with all its defects, the best lany. He had been on terms of intimacy complete biography of Swift in existence. with him for upwards of a quarter of a Scott had many advantages. His editocentury. He had been his companion in rial labors peculiarly fitted him for the business and recreation. He had been office of biographer, and those labors had acquainted with those who had known been greatly facilitated both by Hawkeshim from early youth. But Delany's ob- worth and Nichols, whose valuable ediject was eulogy, and for this due allow- tions of the dean's collected writings had ance must be made. He is, however, one appeared at intervals between 1784 and of those witnesses whose loquacity forms 1808. Scott's own distinguished position a perpetual corrective to their prejudice, in the world of letters gave, moreover, and his observations are so rich in remi- something of a national importance to his niscence and anecdote, that a shrewd read- work. All who could in any way assist er is in little danger of being misled. him eagerly proffered their services. EsOn the whole, we are inclined to think critoires were ransacked, family archives him the most trustworthy and valuable of explored. One gentleman placed at his all the original authorities. Delany's ob- disposal the correspondence between servations were succeeded, at an interval Swift and Miss Vanhomrigh; another of a year, by Deane Swift's essay. This lent him the memoranda of Dr. Lyons. is a very disappointing book, though, as Every year augmented his treasures, and the writer was the son-in-law of Mrs. on the completion of his task in 1814 he Whiteway, and had as a young man fre- could boast that he had been able to add quently conversed with Swift, what he upwards of a hundred letters, essays, and says of the dean's character and habits poems to those which had already seen is of importance, and we are moreover the light. In fine, had Scott made the indebted to him for many interesting par- best of his opportunities, had his inforticulars not preserved elsewhere. In mation been as accurate as it was comMrs. Pilkington and the compiler of the prehensive, and had his patience and "Swiftiana" we are not inclined to place industry been equal to his genius and litmuch confidence. Hawkesworth's me- erary skill, any other life of Swift would moir, which was published in 1755, and have been a mere work of supererogation. Johnson's life, which was published in But unhappily his biography of Swift is 1781, added little or nothing to what was marred by the same defects which marred already known. But in 1784 came out his biography of Dryden. It is essenthe memoir by Thomas Sheridan, not, of tially unthorough - the work of a man, course, the Thomas Sheridan who was of a very great man, who was conthe friend of Swift, but the son of Swift's tented with doing respectably what with friend. As Sheridan professed to have a little more trouble he might have done derived information from his father, and excellently. Hence, though he is always has on the authority of his father con- interesting and always instructive, he is tributed new biographical matter, his seldom altogether satisfactory. We doubt name stands high, much higher than it is very much whether any reader, after closentitled to stand, among Swift's biogra- ing Scott's memoir, would have any clear phers. impression of Swift's character. Indeed, to speak plainly, we doubt whether Scott had himself taken the trouble to form any clear conception of that character. But his most serious defect is his careless credulity. To the relative value of testi mony he appears to attach little importance. He places, for example, the same implicit confidence in statements which rest on no better authority than that of

Then came the era of original research. This may be said to date from Dr. Barrett's "Essay on the College Days of Swift," which appeared in 1808. A few years afterwards Scott undertook to embody in a comprehensive narrative the information which lay scattered through the publications to which we have just referred. He did this, and he did much

Theophilus Swift and the younger Sheri- publication of the pamphlet on the "Use

dan, as he places on statements which
rest on the authority of Swift's own inti-
mate associates. The result is, that what
is authentic and what is apocryphal are
so interwoven in his narrative, that it is
never possible to follow him without dis-
trust and suspicion.

of Irish Manufactures" and the controversy with Boulter.

Such were the principal works bearing on Swift which had, up to 1875, been given to the world. In that year appeared the first volume of a biography which would probably have superseded all that had preceded it, but which was unhappily destined to remain a fragment. Of Mr. Forster's enthusiasm and industry it would be superfluous to speak. His devotion to Swift resembles the devotion of Lipsius to Tacitus, and of Basil Montague and Mr. Spedding to Bacon. It amounted to a passion. To link his name with the name of a man whom he had persuaded himself to believe one of the monarchs of human-kind was, till the last hours of his life, his most cherished object. To zeal such as this we owe perhaps nine-tenths of what is best in biog raphy and history. But Mr. Forster's zeal was not always a source of strength. It led him, in the language of Shakespeare, to monster nothings, to attach undue im

While Scott was busy with Swift, another writer was similarly engaged. In 1819 Monck Mason published his "History and Antiquities of St. Patrick's Cathedral," a goodly quarto of some five hundred pages. More than half of this formidable volume is devoted to an elaborate biography of Swift. But Monck Mason's quarto never succeeded in gaining the ear of the world, and is now almost forgotten. Indeed it may be questioned whether even among professed students of our literature two in twenty are aware of its existence, still less of its rare merits. Nor is this difficult to account for. A more unreadable book was probably never written. It is arranged on that detestable method which originated, we believe, with Bayle; a method the distin-portance to the most trivial particulars. guishing feature of which is the combination of the greatest possible prolixity with the greatest possible confusion. The style is equally repulsive; it is at once harsh and diffuse, as dull as the style of Birch, and as cumbersome as the style of Hawkins. But if Monck Mason possesses none of the qualifications of an attractive writer, he possesses everything which constitutes an invaluable authority. The extent, the variety, the minuteness of his researches, his patience and acuteness in sifting evidence, his exact acquaintance with the writings of Swift himself, and with the writings of those who have in any way thrown light on Swift's public and private life, his accuracy, his conscientiousness, his impartiality, are above praise. But our obligations to this modest and laborious scholar extend still further. It was he who first proved, and proved in our opinion conclusively, that no marriage was ever solemnized between Swift and Esther Johnson. To him we owe the first full and satisfactory account of that long and important period in the dean's career, which extends between the

Nothing that Swift did or said was in his estimation too unimportant to be chronicled. He pounced with ludicrous avidity on matter which was not merely worthless in itself, but of no value in its bearings on Swift. The fact that a document had never before appeared in print was, in his eyes, a sufficient justification for its appearing in his pages. The fact that preceding biographers had in any portion of their narrative been concise, is the signal for Mr. Forster to become preposterously diffuse. We need scarcely say that a biographer can never be too full when he is treating of anything which has reference to what is in his hero distinctive and peculiar. But there are many things in which great men and little men must necessarily act alike. There is much in the constitution even of the most exalted personages which is common to all mankind. On these points a judicious biographer will be least communicative; but on these points Mr. Forster dilates at insufferable length. That Swift played at cards and made bad puns may possibly be worth recording, but what man on earth

of unutterable misery. Now the facts of Swift's life are, as we have already stated, matters of certain knowledge. In estimating his character a critic has at no point to resort to conjecture; his appeal lies to authentic evidence. That evidence, which is voluminous, few have leisure to survey; but that evidence we have thought it our duty to survey; and our scrutiny has satisfied us that the popular picture of Swift has not even the merit of being a caricature, but that it is a mere reckless daub, produced pretty much in the same way as Protogenes is said to have produced the foam on the mouth of his wearied hound.

cares to know the exact cards he held, or the exact bad puns he made? We have no wish to detract from the merits of Mr. Forster's book, but we are assuredly guilty of no injustice to him when we say that, had he paid more attention to the art of suppression and selection, it would have been better for the world and better for Swift's fame. But this is not the only blemish in his work. It is animated throughout by an unpleasantly polemical spirit. He appears to have regarded the biographers who preceded him as jealous lovers regard rivals. He is continually going out of his way to exalt himself and to depreciate them. Here we have a digression on the incompetence of Deane In the first place, nothing is more cerSwift, there a sneer at Orrery. Now he tain than that Swift's life, from the time pauses to carp at Delany; at another he appears on the stage of history to the time he wearies us with an account of the time he ceased to be a responsible being, deficiencies of Sheridan. He must him- was a long course of active benevolence. self have admitted that his own original While still a struggling priest, more than contributions to Swift's biography were one-tenth of what he expended he exas a drop in the river, compared with pended in charity. As his fortune inthose of Scott and Monck Mason, and yet creased, his generosity grew with it. Scott rarely appears in his pages, except When his political services gave him inin a disadvantageous light, and to Monck fluence, his first thought was for his Mason's work, though he draws largely friends. * on it, he studiously refrains from acknowl- greve, Gay, Rowe, Friend, Ambrose Philedging the slightest obligation. But let us not be misunderstood. Mr. Forster's fragment is a solid and valuable addition to the literature of Swift. If he has added nothing of importance to what was known before, he has scrutinized with microscopic minuteness all that was known; he has thus accurately distinguished between what was fiction and what was fact. He has confirmed and illustrated what was established; he has forever set at rest what was doubtful; and he has rendered it impossible for even the suspicion of error to attach itself to any portion of Swift's early history. But it is time to turn from the biographers to the dean himself.

The popular notion about Swift, simply stated, we take to be this: that he was a gloomy and ferocious misanthrope, with a heart of stone and a tongue of poison; that if not exactly a libertine, he revelled in impurity and filth; that he was an apostate in politics, a sceptic in religion, and a tyrant in private life; that he wrought the ruin of two women who passionately loved him, and that he paid the penalty for his inhumanity and selfishness by an old age

The only allusion which Mr. Forster makes to Monck Mason's work is, we believe, in a few words on page 36: "The well-informed historian of St. Patrick's Cathedral, Mr. Monck Mason, makes the following

statement in his elaborate chapter on Swift."

To his recommendation, Con

ips, and Steele, owed remunerative offices.
"You never come to us," said Boling.
broke, on one occasion, half angrily,
"without bringing some Whig in your
sleeve." He obtained for King, who had
libelled and insulted him, a post which
relieved that facetious writer from the
pressure of want.
His kindness to young
Harrison and poor Diaper would alone
suffice to prove the goodness of his heart.
He made the fortune of Barber. He
went out of his way to serve Parnell and
Berkeley. How greatly Pope profited
from his zealous friendship, Pope has
himself acknowledged. He was never
known to turn a deaf ear to sorrow or
poverty; nay, it is notorious that he de-
nied himself the common comforts of life
that he might relieve the necessities of
the paupers of Dublin. His correspond-
ence teems with proofs of his kindness
and charity. At one time we find him
pleading for an old soldier, at another
time, when almost too ill to hold the pen,
for a poor parson; here he is soliciting
subscriptions for a volume of poems, there
he is stating the case of a persecuted
patriot. His large-hearted philanthropy
extended itself in all directions. He was
the first who drew attention to the inade-
quacy of religious instruction in London,
and suggested the remedy. He organized
a club for the relief of distressed men of