necessary,

affairs of other people, Mr. Placid seems to have laid it down as a maxim, that every man is best qualified to manage his own affairs, and it is more difficult to obtain his opinion when than to prevent the other from interfering where he can only do mischief. Mr. Bluster, when he finds that he has made matters worse, declares with his usual violence that he "meant well," and "did all for the best;" while Mr. Placid means only to keep out of harm's way; and his infallible rule is, to escape blame by doing nothing. Mr. Bluster considers himself as personally concerned in every thing that happens, whether near or remote; and so extensive is his sympathy, that he enters into every man's concerns. Placid, on the contrary, knows exactly what belongs to himself, and never travels an inch out of his way to share either in the pain or pleasure of others. Bluster, while reading Gazette, seems to traverse the field of battle with all the indignation of a disappointed general, or with all the eagerness of a triumphant hero. Mr. Placid would bestow just as much attention on a page of the Whole Duty of Man, or the Pilgrim's Progress; and as to the resentment and indignation of his neighbour, he was never heard to pronounce the

Mr.

words rogue or rascal, unless they occurred in the course of reading. Mr. Placid finds fault with no man, but Mr. Bluster's life is a series of comminations.

The folly of extremes is exemplified in these characters, which are perhaps more common than is generally supposed; but it is evident that the preferable character must be compounded of something between both. Bluster, with many good qualities, is a torment to himself, and is in danger of committing errors of importance from excess of passion, while he disturbs the harmony of social life by fastidious dislikes. Placid, with equally good qualities, is likely to settle in that apathy of disposition which prevents the due exercise of the charities of human nature, and is a-kin to selfishness. He allows matters to become worse by not interposing his wisdom: while the other mars the natural progress of an event by ill-timed

intrusion.

How far we are so much concerned in what is passing around us as to interpose either in act or intention, must depend on more circumstances than can be collected together in a speculative essay. It is certain that the offices and duties of humanity are what no man can deny to be incumbent at all times and on all

occasions. It is no less true that what we see and hear of criminality or folly will excite in every good mind a certain degree of indignation; but there can be no occasion for ebullitions of passion, or for considering what has happened to others as having happened to ourselves. Indeed, as to all useful purposes, this is so contrary to our natures, that he who pretends to it may be considered as affecting more than he feels, and as counterfeiting a degree of suffering, which, if he did feel, would incapacitate him from what is more directly his duty.

It has been often said that man is prone to extremes; and in the case of the characters now sketched, we see a proneness to an unalterable extreme. But the more general error is that of going from one extreme to another, which is common with minds that are not formed upon sound principles. It is this which has not only occasioned much loose and fickle morality, but all those irregularities of feeling, which make friendship, humanity, and other virtues, depend on the humour of the moment, rather than on any solid source or foundation. With regard, however, to the more immediate subject of this paper, the regulation of the temper, it appears to be of essential importance

to steer between the extremes of passion and apathy. While we share amply and conscien→ tiously in the affairs which concern our bosoms and business," let us take care that we do not multiply the vexations of life, by an anxious care for that in which we are but remotely interested, or by repining that what is human should be imperfect.

THE PROJECTOR. No 82.

"Laudator temporis acti

Se puero, censor castigatorque minorum." HOR.

April 1808.

"TO THE AUTHOR OF THE PROJECTOR,

66

SIR,

"I HOPE I shall secure this letter a favourable reception in your Paper, when I announce myself as an Antiquary, one of a class of men to whom your friend Mr. Urban has ever extended his protection, and whose labours he has ever welcomed with a hearty

necessary

zeal. But it may be necessary to apprize your readers, Mr. Projector, that the objects of my researches come more immediately within your plan, than those in which my brother Antiquaries at Somerset-house are usually employed. It may be to inform your readers, that I am not about to introduce them into the keep of a castle, or the chapel of a cathedral. I have nothing to advance respecting battlements and buttresses, naves and chancels. I wish not to dip into the controversies that have been excited by the Goths and Grecians, the advocates of pointed or semicircular arches; I have no light to throw upon vaulted roofs, clustered pillars, transepts, door-cases, or choirs. I have no inclination to divert their attention from your favourite topicks of morals and manners, to the minutiæ of screens and stalls; perks and tabernacles; crypts and vaults; fonts, cloisters, spires, and steeples. I leave these matters, the importance of which I at the same time acknowledge, to men who have made those noble remains of antient grandeur their peculiar study-the Goughs and the Carters, the Lysonses and the Nicholses of our time; and I know not in whose hands they can be more safely reposed.

For

my part, Sir, I profess myself to be an