A fimple writer has no marks of art in his expreffion; it appears the very language of nature. We fee not the writer and his labor, but the man in his own natural character. He may be rich in expreffion; he may be full of figures and of fancy; but thefe flow from him without effort; and he feems to write in this manner, not because he has ftudied it, but because it is the mode of expreffion most natural to him. With this character of style a certain degree of negligence is not inconfiftent; for too accurate an attention to words is foreign to it. Simplicity of style, like fimplicity of manners, fhows a mans fentiments and turn of mind without difguife. A more ftudied and artificial mode of writing, however beautiful, has always this disadvantage, that it exhibits an author in form, like a man at court, where fplendor of dress and the ceremonial of behaviour conceal thofe peculiarities, which distinguish one man from another. But reading an author of fimplicity is like converfing with a person of rank at home and with ease, where we fee his natural manners and his real character.

With regard to fimplicity in general we may observe, that the antient original writers are always most eminent for it. This proceeds from a very obvious caufe; they wrote from the dictates of genius, and were not formed upon the labors and writings of others.

Of affectation, which is oppofed to fimplicity of style,

we have a remarkable example in Lord Shaftesbury. Though an author of confiderable merit, he expreffes nothing with fimplicity. He feems to have thought it vulgar and beneath the dignity of a man of quality, to fpeak like other men. Hence he is ever in bufkins ; full of circumlocutions and artificial elegance. In every fentence we fee marks of labor and art; nothing of that eafe, which expreffes a fentiment coming natural and warm from the heart. He abounds with figures and ornament of every kind; is fometimes happy in them; but his fondnefs for them is too vifible; and, having once feized fome metaphor or allufion, that pleafed him, he knows not how to part with it. He poffeffed delicacy and refinement of tafte in a degree, that may be called exceffive and fickly; but he had little warmth of paffion; and the coldness of his character fuggefted that artificial and ftately manner, which appears in his writings. No author is more dangerous to the tribe of imitators, than Shaftesbury; who amid feveral very confiderable blemishes has many dazzling and impofing.

beauties.

It is very poffible however for an author to write with fimplicity, and yet without beauty. He may be free from affectation, and not have merit. Beautiful fimplicity fuppofes an author to poffefs real genius; and to write with folidity, purity, and brilliancy of imagination. In this cafe the fimplicity of his manner is the

crowning ornament; it heightens every other beauty it is the dress of nature, without which all beauties are imperfect. But, if mere abfence of affectation were fufficient to constitute beauty of ftyle; weak and dull writers might often lay claim to it. A diftinction therefore must be made between that fimplicity, which accompanies true genius and is entirely compatible with every proper ornament of style, and that, which is the effect of carelessness.

Another character of ftyle, different from thofe already mentioned, is vehemence. This always implies ftrength; and is not in any refpect incompatible with fimplicity. It is distinguished by a peculiar ardor } it is the language of a man, whofe imagination and paffions are glowing and impetuous ;/ who, neglecting inferior graces, pours himself forth with the rapidity and fullness of a torrent. This belongs to the higher kinds of oratory; and is rather expected from a man, who is speaking, than from one, who is writing in his closet. Demofthenes is the most full and perfect example of this kind of ftyle.

Having explained the different characters of style, we fhall conclude our obfervations with a few directions for attaining a good style in general.

The first direction is, ftudy clear ideas of the fubject, on which you are to write or speak. What we conceive clearly and feel ftrongly, we naturally ex

prefs with clearnefs and strength. We should therefore think closely on the subject, till we have attained a full and distinct view of the matter, which we are to clothe in words; till we become warm and interested in it then, and then only, fhall we find expreffion begin to flow.

Secondly, to the acquifition of a good style frequeney of compofing is indispensably neceffary. But it is not every kind of compofing, that will improve ftyle. By a careless and hafty habit of writing a bad style will be acquired; more trouble will afterward be necessary to unlearn faults, then to become acquainted with the rudiments of compofition. In the beginning, therefore we ought to write flowly and with much care. Facil ity and speed are the fruit of practice. We must be cautious however, not to retard the course of thought, nor cool the ardor of imagination, by pausing too long on every word. On certain occafions a glow of com. pofition must be kept up, if we hope to express ourselves happily, though at the expenfe of fome inaccuracies. A more fevere examination must be the work of correction. What we have written, fhould be laid by fome time, till the ardor of compofition be paft; till partiality for our expreffions be weakened, and the expreffions themselves be forgotten; and then, reviewing our work with a cool and critical eye, as if it were the performance of another, we fhall difcover many imperfections, which at firft cfcaped us.

Thirdly, acquaintance with the ftyle of the beft authors is peculiarly requifite. Hence a juft tafte will be formed, and a copious fund of words fupplied on every fubject. No exercise perhaps will be found more useful for acquiring a proper style, than tranflating fome paffage from an eminent author into our own words. Thus to take, for instance, a page of one of Addison's Spectators, and read it attentively two or three times, till we are in full poffeffion of the thoughts, it contains; then to lay afide the book; to endeavour to write out the paffage from memory as well, as we can; and then to compare, what we have written, with the style of the author. Such an exercise will fhew us our defects; will teach us to correct them; and from the variety of expreffion, which it will exhibit, will conduct us to that, which is most beautiful.

Fourthly, caution must be used againft fervile imitation of any author whatever. Defire of imitating hampers genius; and generally produces ftiffness of expreffion. They, who follow an author closely, commonly copy his faults as well, as his beauties.. No one will ever become a good writer or fpeaker, who has not fome confidence in his own genius. We ought carefully to avoid using any author's peculiar phrases, and of tran fcribing paffages from him. Such a habit will be fatal to all genuine compofition. It is much better to have fomething of our own, though of moderate beauty, than