manner, like talent-born with a person; now genteel manners can be acquired. For proofs of what I advance I ask the reader to go to the next party he may chance to be invited to, and he will there meet, a hundred persons who possess genteel manners, and perhaps about one who possesses insinuating manners. How comes this discrepancy it may be asked? I answer by saying, that to be insinuating, requires talent-graceful figure-sweet voice-great gentility—and a slight touch of the warm and playful" Charles," of the brilliant Sheridan. Now these are qualities that are not always combined; and unless my observations deceive me, I remark that this character is to be seen in more natural perfection in the sister kingdom than in England. The Englishman is constitutionally dull; the Irishman constitutionally cheerful.

I perceive I am somewhat digressing, but I do so for the purpose of making myself more clear to the reader. The intuitive mind of Shakespeare then knew the advantage of insinuation in manner, and accordingly I bring up as proofs of it, the entire words of Romeo to Juliet; the addresses (the touches are slight but masterly) of Hamlet to the interesting Ophelia; the manly and warrior like, but soft and tender wooings of the Moor to

Desdemona; and reciprocally, the soft and insinuating appeals of the gentle bride to her Lord, to have the disgraced favourite restored; the pleadings of Isabella to the lustful Angelo; all these (and many more) might be adduced to show how Shakespeare knew this trait of character; and he accordingly has put into the mouths of those personages, the very sweetest music that the English language could possibly afford. This again is another proof of the versatility of his genius. He not only wrote in the tragical and comical, but (and it is a most difficult one) in the amatory style of poetry. The play I am now speaking of is the most eloquent instance of it. I here remark that since the death of this divine bard, there have been but two poets that have completely succeeded in this amatory styleByron and Moore. The first unites nerve along with voluptuousness-the second, antithesis along with brilliancy. It might remain a question for the genuine critic (I regret to say a very rare character) to decide, which style would be best suited to lyrical and amatory poetry. It is in song poetry that Moore, pre-eminently and dazzlingly stands before every other writer since the days of the Greek Anacreon. In this respect I cannot help owning that the songs of Shakespeare fade before those of

this living Anacreon; and here I am greatly reminded of a similarity in style between some of the songs of Moore's great admirer (Byron) and the Dirge in the last act of Romeo and Juliet. If the critic looks attentively at both, he will find a striking similarity.

Were I to proceed further with these characters, I perceive I should be led on to an immeasurable length. It was my intention to have separated them and spoken of them in the order in which they appear in the title page, thus making distinct notices of each; but I found them so twined together that I could not well disjoin them; besides, in this age of divorces, it would be quite a serious thing, and matter for legal (if not critical inquiry) were I to separate Mrs. Romeo from her faithful and constant spouse. The only thing therefore which I shall further remark, is, that the next best drawn character in the play is Mercutio; and the fourth, the loquacious nurse.

I now enter on more difficult ground-Hamlet. This is the most original of the characters created by the first of dramatic writers. A quick eye may perceive some shades of similarity in others of his characters. In this to this, there are none. Neither has Shakespeare himself, nor any

succeeding author attempted any imitation. It stands alone, unrivalled, and majestic-unimitated and inimitable.

He who performs Hamlet must be a critic-a gentleman a scholar, and a good actor. He must possess a graceful figure, not a fine figure— he must have a sweet voice not a strong voice-he must be gifted with insinuating manners, not genteel manners-he must be a fluent and sweet declaimer, and not a turgid and studied one-he must possess the most exquisite judgment, and along with all these requisites, his acting (for he has half a dozen characters to assume) must be ALL NATURE. These are difficult and appalling obstacles; but I unhesitatingly assert that without all these, "the Prince of Denmark" cannot be effectively and completely personated; and with them, the character is perfectly and easily accomplished.

Speaking of the acting of this character would easily lead me to dilate on the topic; I reserve this however for the last pages, and shall proceed with this difficult and inimitable creation.

It strikes me that a good deal of judgment can often be perceived in the introduction of a character, either on the stage, in a poem, or in a

novel. I could adduce a great many instances of this nice trait in bringing in a leading character to the notice of the reader. There is scarcely any novel by that first novel writer of the day-Sir W. Scott, which has not this peculiarity, when he wishes to bring among his other subordinate personages, some leading favourite. There is some touch, some trait, some preparation, which goes as a forerunner to this favoured person, and then his reply or his speech invariably stamps, and as it were, lets you in (often in a line) to the character of the person.

Hamlet

There is an instance of this before me. is introduced along with the king, queen, and lords and ladies of the court, but he remains silent and thoughtful-wrapped up in his lonely and lordly musings on the event which has so lately taken place, and which presses so on his memory. This is a retired but a striking touch of character. Further-he heeds not the glare and the show of the court-the flourish of trumpets and the pageantry that is passing round him; but lost in his reflections he does not speak, until spoken to. Then mark the depth and the pith of his two first replies-the first spoken so, as to be heard, and not to be heard. (The actor