which belonged to his character. He had no wit, nor indeed more than the commonest knowledge of any thing; neither conversation, nor agreeableness. But he made a profit of his dullness, by making it assume the character of reserve, which humbugged "the general," who thought themselves in the third heaven if invited to his balls; and even there his major-domo would have acted his part quite as well as himself.

I resolved to bring this whole subject, Lord Aand all, before my sagacious Mentor.

"I believe," said Mr. Fothergill, after I had opened myself to him, "that no ingenuous youth of any mind, or sense of independence, but has been at one time or other affected in the same way as yourself; and the impression is more or less forcible, and lasts a longer or shorter time, according to the temperament, sanguine or phlegmatic, of the patient.” "Patient!" cried I.

"Yes! for is not this a mental disease? Does it not for the most part proceed from both pride and weakness in the complainant? and are not both these diseases ?"

"If you make that out, yes.'

66

Why, what but pride or weakness in yourself could make you feel them an annoyance in another ? For I suppose, I need not ask you whether the usurpation you complain of is not pride and weakness ?” "Certainly; and it is, as such, absolutely contempt

ible."

"Then, I think, we need go no further; for why should you be annoyed with what you think absolutely contemptible ?"

This was a hit; but I did not want the subject to be so let off; I wanted a little more of the details of the demonstration which I was sure this keen ob. server knew well how to furnish; and I told him I was not satisfied.

"Why," said he, "here is a demonstration, or rather illustration, ready to our hands;" and he pointed to a peacock (we were in Maudlin Walk) which was strutting in the meadows close by; his tail spread, all over eyes and spangles, sparkling in the sun, the most complete, puffed-up coxcomb that could be seen.

"Now, what would you say to yourself," continued Fothergill, "if you could be angry at that fool for giving himself such airs. See how he struts by you, absolutely bursting with disdain; yet you are unmoved, except it be to laugh."

"The comparison is not just," said I, "for the peacock is not a man.”

"No; but a man may be a peacock."

Another hit, for so I felt it, and was silent.

"Now, when you are most annoyed," proceeded he, "by the usurpation you complain of, you have only to fancy a truth-that the gentleman and lady usurpers are peacocks, and you may laugh at them as you do at this self-sufficient fowl."

"Very good," I returned; "but pray tell me how it is, that common dunghill fowls sometimes become peacocks too, and though they have little or no tails, are allowed to spread themselves to the sun, and strut in company with those beautiful birds, to the great an

noyance of their modest fellow dunghills, whom they treat as if they had never known them."

"Your metaphor," returned Fothergill," is rather elaborate and 'long drawn out,' though it has not much of 'linked sweetness.' But if you mean to ask how men of no birth, or distingnished connexions, and not remarkable for any shining abilities, genius, or powers of usefulness, come to be enlisted in the ranks of fashion, I, who am of no fashion myself, am little able to tell, particularly since, as far as I have observed, there are various steps in this ladder of ambition."

66

"Pray enlighten me by mentioning them."

"Why, first, a most determined intrepidity of assurance, or (we may as well call it by its right name) immovable impudence, but directed by tact. Next, great suppleness, amounting to toadyism, though adroitly concealed. Thirdly, if not first, a most lavish expense in every possible way that can contribute to the amusement of the real sovereigns of the kingdom of fashion. Lastly (though that is a dangerous venture, and often fails), a most daring assumption of the envied crown, and a most impenetrable self-confidence in maintaining possession. This has been known to succeed in the instance of one or two great and original geniuses, but has most frequently been attended with the fate of the artist in Rasselas,' who attempted to fly, but failed, and was laughed at.”

66

Laughed at, I suppose," observed I, “not for the attempt, but the failure. But what if he succeed? Have I not reason to complain of the inequality of

mankind, that has put it in the power of a set of men, whom you yourself call fools, to exclude me from the power of "

"Being a fool too," interrupted Fothergill, in his tranchant manner.

"If they were all fools," returned I, rallying, "there would be little difficulty; but some of them have the character of men of talents, and are distinguished in society."

"Not the less fools, quoad our question," returned my opponent, " if they are what you say, and in so far, not the less to be laughed at, whatever their rank. But pray observe, that I am not myself such a fool as to run into a common-place, vulgar, unjust, and silly rhapsody against persons of real fashion, who must always be also persons of real distinction. I know my place, and, knowing it, respect my superiors in rank and power, and acknowledge them as such. It is only against persons so inferior in mind as to be content to play the lion among asses, and plume themselves on mere fortuitous advantages which depend not on themselves; it is these, or their upstart copyists, against whom I point my shafts. The last, ashamed of their origin, think to conceal it by false grandeur, and, above all, by an affected contempt for those whom they have left behind. These are absolutely below notice; and, in regard to those who have better claims on our respect, if they forfeit them, be assured it is only your own cowardice, or at least a cowardly sense of inferiority, that makes it troublesome to you."

"Aye! but if I am really inferior?"

"Inferior in what? Grant that you are so in birth, fortune, and even in talents, if you will-must there not be inequality wherever there is man?-but till you can show that inequality in these points produces inequality in happiness, or the care of heaven, you can show no real superiority in their possessors."

"With you, then, servant and master are equal?” "In my view of it-that is, as regards happiness, respectability, and the care of heaven-yes! As relative terms-that is, as regards command and obedience-no!"

"Is the servant, then, as respectable as his master ?" "In those feelings of respect, caused by the sense of power, no.-In deference for a man perfect in his duty (if he is so), in that state of life to which it has pleased God to call him, indubitably yes.-At any rate, even in the case of master and servant, if the master plume himself on his relative superiority, he is a fool, and even the servant may laugh at him, though in his sleeve. Do you think Æsop did not often laugh at Xanthus, or Epictetus at Epaphroditus ? Suppose these two masters had been peacocks, or exclusives, would not these slaves, who were so much their superiors in sense, have despised them ?"

"Yes; but I am supposing men not inferior in sense, but really gifted, and well-bred.”

"You suppose a contradiction; for no man of sense will despise a person not despicable; and no really well-bred man would make another, though