I have as yet read very few articles in the Edinburgh Review, having lent it to a sick countess, who only wished to read it, because a few copies only had arrived in London.
I like very much the review of Davy, think the review of Espriella much too severe, and am extremely vexed by the review of Hoyle’s Exodus. The levities it contains will, I am sure, give very great offence; and they are ponderous and vulgar, as well as indiscreet. Such sort of things destroy all the good effect which the liberality and knowledge of the Edinburgh Review are calculated to produce, and give to fools as great a power over you as you have over them. Besides the general regret I feel from errors of this nature, I cannot help feeling that they press harder upon me than upon anybody; by giving to the Review a character which makes it perilous to a clergyman, in particular, to be concerned in it. I am sure you will excuse me for expressing my feelings upon this subject, and I know that you have friendship enough for me, to be more upon your guard in future against a style of
MEMOIR OF THE REV. SYDNEY SMITH. | 43 |
I am glad you like the Methodists. Of the Scotch market you are a better judge than I am, but you may depend upon it, it will give great satisfaction here; I mean, of course, the nature of the attack, not the manner in which it is executed. All attacks upon the Methodists are very popular with steady men of very moderate understanding; the description of men among whom the bitterest enemies of the Edinburgh Review are to be found.
I do not understand what you mean by “levity of quotations.” I attack these men because they have foolish notions of religion. The more absurd the passage, the more necessary it should be displayed—the more urgent the reason for making the attack at all.
I am thinking of writing a sheet this time about the missions to India and elsewhere; in short, a sort of expose of the present state of Protestant missions. God bless you!