POLITICAL VERSE.

MR. SAINTSBURY'S volume of "Political Verse," just published by Percival and Co., raises a very curious question in the history of literature. How comes it that the present age is well-nigh barren of political verse-writers, and that the few followers of Canning and Praed to be found in this generation have practically no effect upon politics ? People are as keen about politics as ever ; we have plenty of subjects for the satirist, both in the issues at stake and in the politicians of the hour; and there are far more men who can read and understand than there were a hundred years ago. Yet, in spite of all this, no poet could now lampoon a Minister out of office as Canning did Addington. If a satirist with 'the fancy of Moore, the force of the singers of the Anti-Jacobin, and the humour of Peter Pinder, were to arise to-day, and were to attempt to make some particular statesman—say, Sir William Harcourt—impossible, he would simply waste words. Mr. Saintsbury attempts an explanation of this phenomenon in his introduction; but we cannot say that we think it convincing. He says that political verse flourished a hundred years ago, and does not flourish now, for the following reasons :—" The reading public was not incon- siderable in numbers, but it was not unmanageably large. It was spread with some evenness all over England. It was not subdivided by any minor fads and parties, but was, on the whole, either frankly Whig or frankly Tory. It had great political power, being, as a rule, conter- minous with the not widely-separated limits of the fran- chise. It had all been educated very much in the same way, understood the same allusions, caught the same innuen- does. (It has sometimes been contended, and I own that it is my opinion, that the so-called spread of education has diluted the strength and liveliness as much as it has enlarged the volume of the national intelligence.) Again, there was little foreign news ; nor was the attention distracted by multifarious domestic details in such newspapers as there were. A thing might take weeks or months to penetrate, where it now arrives in a day; but it was certain of an attentive audience wherever it did penetrate, instead of being forgotten almost before it is read. The author even of an epigram on a subject of public interest knew that sooner or later almost everybody who read and thought in Great Britain would hear of it, enjoy it, or be annoyed by it." This is all very well ; but how does Mr. Saintsbury explain the fact that there is far more purely political writing now than there was a hundred years ago ? The flightiness and lack of attention in the reader, which he notes as characteristic of modern times, ought to have hit the political leader before it hit the epigram ; yet we find the first- named form of political exposition in full vigour. If readers were all butterflies, as he asserts, they would surely prefer to flutter about satires than leading articles. We expect that the reason why political verse has died is exactly the reverse of that given by Mr. Saintsbury. It is because people have grown more serious, not because they have grown more frivolous, that tt ere is no demand for political verse. Men expect arguments and facts and figures when the theme is politics, and feel, as the Senior Wrangler did about "Paradise Lost," that satires and epigrams "prove nothing." It is sad that this should be so, for the world loses thereby much laughter; but, after all, is it not on the whole more creditable to the democracy than Mr. Saintsbury will allow ? It is by no means certain that the smartest verse-makers will be on the right side. Yet when the world is greatly swayed by political verse, it may make a serious difference who manages to catch and keep the ablest satirists. It is all very well to say,—

" As London is to Paddington,

So is Pitt to Addington ;" but we cannot doubt that a generation on which such jeu.r d'esprit have little or no effect, is more likely to come to a

sound understanding of things political than one which accepts a jingle as a self-evident proposition. In this par- ticular case, Canning was no doubt right, but he might have been wrong, and yet by getting the laugh on his side, he would have done a great deal to make the worse appear the better cause. Political verse is quite as likely to be wrong as right, and therefore it is a distinct sign of improvement in politics that its influence has been reduced to a minimum. If men's prin- ciples and actions are to be condemned, let them be proved evil, not merely laughed out of court. That is the feeling of

bourgeois England, and though we may sigh as lovers of good literature, we cannot, if we obey our reason, refrain from

admitting the justice and good sense of the sentiment.

But though we may rejoice that political verse has ceased to be a motive-force in our public life, there is no reason why we should not enjoy the political verse of former generations. We are heartily glad, therefore, that Mr. Saintsbury has put together his pretty little volume of selections. The selector cannot, of course, please all tastes ; but making allowance for in- dividual preferences, we cannot altogether praise the judicious- ness of Mr. Saintsbury's choice. He has in several instances put in what he ought to have left out, and left out what he ought to have put in. For example, he ought, since he professes to make his selection representative of various periods in our history, to have quoted some of the political verse of the later Middle Ages. Though there are few longer political poems belonging to this epoch suitable for Mr. Saintsbury's purpose, he might have quoted some of those couplets which, to borrow a phrase from Bacon, " flew abroad like darts " and stirred men's minds. For example, there is the famous couplet which " condensed the levelling doctrines of John Ball : "-

" When Adam delved and Eve span, Who was then the gentleman?"

Surely this, and the verses in which " Jack the Miller," " Jack the Carter," and " Jack Trueman " fanned the peasant revolt

into flame, would have been better worth having than Skelton's tiresome rigmarole on Cardinal Wolsey. The riddling couplet,-

" The rat, the cat, and Lovel our dog, Rule all England under the hog,"

which once had so wide an influence, might also have been in- cluded. Another serious fault is Mr. Saintsbury's failure to give us anything from Pope. He says, " Pope was utterly unprovided with a political head," and so leaves him out of

his book. The man who so judiciously bolstered up the character of Godolphin and did so much to wreck that of ' Marlborough, cannot, however, be dismissed in this airy way.

Where is abler political verse than that which describes Godolphin F- " Who would not praise Patritio's high desert, His hand unstained, his uncorrupted heart, His comprehensive head ! All interests weighed, All Europe saved, yet Britain not betrayed. —He thanks you rot, his pride is in picquet, Newmarket fame, and judgment at a bet."

What, again, could be more effective than the deadly blows struck against Marlborough in the magnificent lines which

describe the great soldier as " infamous for plundered pro- vinces," and after dwelling on his want of a son to succeed to his riches and honours, end by the terrible malediction

" Madness and lust,' God says, 'be ye his heirs " ?

Nor was Pope's genius for political verse confined to invec- tive. His epigram on " The Balance of Power" is one of the neatest in the language:—

"See Europe balanced, Neither side prevails, For nothing's left In either of the scales."

Another mistake, in our opinion, is the omission of any of Milton's political sonnets. Though not satirical, they are perfectly fitted for inclusion. Readers will also be surprised to find that there is nothing from Dr. Johnson in Mr. Saints- bury's volume. Considering the effect produced by Johnson's invective against Spain, and the force of the lines them- selves, this is a very serious error of judgment. Let our readers judge whether the following lines, intended to hound Walpole into war with Spain, are not worth inclusion "Ah ! what avails it that, from slavery far, I drew the breath of life in English air ; Was early taught a Briton's right to prize And lisp the tale of Henry's victories ?

• - - Has Heaven reserved, in pity to the poor, No pathless waste or undiscovered shore ? No secret island in the boundless main, No peaceful desert yet unclaimed by Spain Quick, let us rise, the happy seats explore, And bear Oppression's insolence no more."

Mr. Saintsbury cannot well urge that fragments of verse are excluded from the scope of his selection, for on several occa- sions he has given portions of poems. We must continue our bill of complaint by asking why one of the bitterest pieces of political verse in the language—Gray's lines on Lord Holland—are omitted. We have only space to quote the first stanza, but this is enough to show that, whatever else was left out, Gray's verses should have gone in :—

" Old, and abandoned by each venal friend,

Here Holland formed the pious resolution To smuggle a few years, and strive to mend A broken character and constitution."

Of Byron's verse Mr. Saintsbury quotes several specimens, but fails to give the best examples. He should not have left out the lines on the Princess Charlotte weeping because her father abused the Whigs. Not only is the poem's intrinsic merit very

great, but it had a considerable political effect. The stanza,— "Weep, daughter of a Royal Line, A sire's disgrace, a realm's decay. Ah ! happy if each tear of thine

Could wash a father's fault away !"

was distinctly one of the sayings that " fly abroad like darts." Coming nearer our own day, we must protest against the exclusion of any part of the late Lord Lytton's satire, " The New Timon." The lines on O'Connell have, no doubt, often been quoted, but that is no reason against their appearance in a volume which contains "The Needy Knife-Grinder."

We must, however, end the unpleasant task of noticing Mr. Saintsbury's sins of omission, in order to acknowledge some of his virtues of commission.

Mr. Saintsbury gives us, for example, " Lilli Burlero,"—the song by means of which Lord Wharton boasted he had sung a monarch out of three Kingdoms. The version he quotes is that to be found in the collection known as " The State Poems." Our readers will, however, remember that it is more than probable that the true words have been lost. Dr. Johnson believed them to have perished irretrievably. The first verse of the song as given by Mr. Saintsbury will show Its quality. A native Irishman is supposed to be speaking :—

" Ho, brother Teague, dost hear de Decree, Liili Burlero Bullena—la,

Dat we shall have a new Debity, Lilli Burlero Bullena—la, Lero Zero, Lero Zero, litliburlero bullena —la,

Lero Zero," &c.

Mr. Saintsbury has performed the task of selecting from the Anti-Jacobin well, and deserves the thanks of his readers for quoting the inimitable parody of Whitbread's speeches. Our readers will pardon us if we indulge in the delight of transcription:— I'm like Archimedes for science and skill, I'm like a young Prince going straight up a hill ; I'm like (with respect to the fair be it said)—

I'm like a young lady just bringing to bed.

If you ask why the 11th of June I remember Much better than April, or May, or November, On that day, my Lords, with truth I assure ye,

My sainted progenitor set up his brewery;

On that day in the morn he began brewing beer, On that day, too, commenc'd his connubial career; On that day he receiv'd and he issued his bills ; On that day he clear'd out all the cash from his tills ; On that day he died, having finished his summing, And the angels all cried, 'Here's old Whitbread a-coming.' So that day still I hail with a smile and a sigh,

For his Beer with an e and his Bier with an i ;

And still on that day in the hottest of weather

The whole Whitbread family dine all together.

So long as the beams of his house shall support The roof which o'ershades this respectable Court Where Hastings was tried for oppressing the Hindoos ; So long as that sun shall shine in at those windows, My name shall shine bright as my ancestor's shines, Mine recorded in journals, his blazon'd on signs."

With one more quotation we must leave the subject of political verse. Mr. Saintsbury's selection from Moore, though it omits the terrific lines on George III. which begin,— "No, not for the wealth of all those that despise thee, Though that would make Europe's whole opulence mine,"

is, on the whole, judicious. It contains, at any rate, the admirable attack on the ballot, " The Song of the Box." In case any of our readers may not be familiar with this delicious piece of verse, we may quote its three best stanzas :-

" Time was, when free speech was the life-breath of freedom— So thought once the Seldens, the Hampdens, the Lockes ; But mute be our troops, when to ambueh we lead 'em,

For 'Mum' is the word with us Knights of the Box.

. . . ..... . . . And oh, when at last, even this greatest of Gr—tes Must bend to the Power that at every door knocks, May he drop in the urn like his own ' silent votes,' And the tomb of his rest be a large Ballot-Box.

While long at his shrine, both from country and city, Shall pilgrims triennially gather in flocks,

And sing, while they whimper, th' appropriate ditty, 'Oh breathe not his name, let it sleep—in the Box.'"