28 SEPTEMBER 1861, Page 18

Teta to till iktar.

London, 27th September, 1861. Sin,—In your last week's number was a review of the poem The Prophet Enoch, which the author would not have noticed had it. not contained certain misrepre- sentations of fact, which be would fain believe were unintentional.

1. The author is represented as classing Lord Byron's poetry among the causes of the decline of the art. It was scarcely possible to have pronounced a higher eulogium on the genius of that great poet than is to be found in the preface to Enoch. The abuse which, towards the close of his career, he made of his great powers, is assigned as one of the causes of the decay of poetry.

2. The author is described as consulting Dr. Windischmann on the merits of his poem, though be was unacquainted with the English language. That dis- tinguished philosopher, who had made the primitive world a special subject of investigation, was consulted not on the diction and metre of the poem, but on its plan and its materials.

8. The epithet "hairy" applied to the prophet Elias, is characterized as novel and profane. It is the very word used in Scripture. (See IL Kings i. 8.) 4. The poet is represented as making Enoch fly from the Devil. If the critic looks again to the work, he will see that it is from armed bands of Cainites sent by Juba, the prophet and his family are made to flee. This is not the place to follow the critic in his verbal criticisms, which are almost all inaccurate, nor in his general estimate of the poem, which is quite contrary to the judgment pronounced by many of the ablest journals of the smpite I remain, Sir,

Your most obedient servant, THS, AUTHOR OF THE " YHOEBST &loot."