HOR

HOR. Ars Poetica, l. 101.

Smith's peculiar merit does not lie in his having made sympathy the keystone of his system, for that is its cardinal defect, but it lies, as Stewart has justly stated, in his having availed himself of that principle to give a systematical view of all the principal doctrines and discussions embraced in the science of ethics, and in the beauty of his illustrations.

And considered in this point of view, the Theory of Moral Sentiments is a highly original work.

Having published the substance of so important a part of his lectures, Smith was enabled to make considerable retrenchments from the ethical part of his course, and to give a proportional extension to the disquisitions on jurisprudence and political economy. He had long been in the habit of embodying the results of his studies and investigations with respect to both these departments of political science, but particularly the latter, in his lectures. And it appears from a statement which he drew up in 1755, to vindicate his claims to certain political and literary opinions, that he had been in the habit of teaching from the time he obtained a chair in the University of Glasgow, and even when at Edinburgh, the same enlarged and liberal doctrines with respect to the freedom of industry, and the injurious influence of restraints and regulations, which he afterwards so fully established in the Wealth of Nations. His residence in a large commercial and manufacturing city, like Glasgow, gave him a considerable advantage in the prosecution of his favourite studies, by affording means of easily obtaining that correct practical information on many points, which cannot be found in books, and by enabling him to compare his theoretical doctrines with the experimental conclusions of his mercantile friends. Notwithstanding the alleged disinclination of men of business to listen to speculative opinions, and the opposition of his leading principles to the old maxims of trade, he was able, before leaving the university, to rank some eminent merchants among his proselytes.

The publication of the Theory of Moral Sentiments brought a vast accession of reputation to Smith; and placed him, in the estimation of all who were qualified to form an opinion on such a subject, in the first rank of moralists and of able and eloquent writers.

In 1762 the Senatus Academicus of the University of Glasgow unanimously conferred on him the honorary degree of Doctor of Laws,¹ in testimony, as it is expressed in the minutes of the meeting, of their respect for his universally acknowledged talents, and of the advantage that had resulted to the university from the ability with which he had for many years expounded the principles of jurisprudence. But the most important effect of his increasing celebrity, in so far at least as respected himself, was his receiving in 1763 an invitation from Mr Charles Townshend, who had married the widow of the Earl of Dalkeith, to attend her ladyship's son, the young Duke of Buccleuch, on his travels; and the advantageous terms that were offered, combined with his strong desire to visit the Continent, induced him to accept the offer, and to resign his chair at Glasgow. "With the connection which he was led to form in consequence of this change in his situation," says Stewart, "he had reason to be satisfied in an uncommon degree, and he always spoke of it with pleasure and gratitude. To the public it was not perhaps a change equally fortunate; as it interrupted that studious leisure for which nature seems to have destined him, and in which alone he

could have hoped to accomplish those literary projects which had flattered the ambition of his youthful genius."

Smith set out for France in company with his noble pupil in March 1764. They remained only a few days at Paris on their first visit to that capital, but proceeded to Toulouse, where they continued for about eighteen months. This being a considerable city, and at that time the seat of a parliament, the society in it may be presumed to have been a good deal superior to that of most country towns; and Smith no doubt availed himself of it, and of the leisure he then enjoyed, to perfect and extend his knowledge of the literature, internal policy, and state of France. He has told us that he was not disposed to place much confidence in the facts and reasonings of political arithmeticians; and it is evident from his rarely making statements on the authority of others, and from his occasionally referring to circumstances connected with Toulouse, Geneva, and other places which he visited, that he was chiefly indebted to his own observation and inquiries for his extensive information in regard to the institutions, habits, and condition of the French people.²

After leaving Toulouse, Smith and his noble pupil proceeded to Geneva, where they resided two months. They returned to Paris at Christmas, 1765, and remained there for nearly a year. During the whole of this period, Smith lived on an intimate footing with the best society in that city, to which his friendship with Hume greatly facilitated his introduction. Turgot, afterwards comptroller-general of finance, D'Alembert, Helvetius, Marmontel, the Abbé Morellet,³ the Duke of la Rochefoucault, Count Sarsfield, Buffon, the Baron D'Holbach, Madame Riccoboni, Mademoiselle de L'Espinasse, &c., were of the number of his acquaintances; and some of them he continued ever after to reckon among his friends. He was also on familiar terms with Quesnay, the author of the economical theory; and there is every reason to think that he derived considerable advantage from his intercourse with that able and excellent person, than whom none was better qualified to strike out original and ingenious views. So sensible, indeed, was Smith of his merits as a man and a philosopher, that he intended, had he not been prevented by Quesnay's death, to have left a lasting testimony of the high place which he held in his estimation by dedicating to him the Wealth of Nations.

In October 1766, the Duke of Buccleuch, accompanied by Smith, returned to London. The latter soon after removed to his old residence at Kirkcaldy, where he remained, with little interruption, for about ten years, habitually occupied in study, and in the elaboration of his great work. This, however, was not a task but a labour of love, labor ipse voluptas. In a letter to Hume, written in 1767, he says, "My business here is study, in which I have been deeply engaged for about a month past. My amusements are, long and solitary walks by the sea-side. You may judge how I spend my time. I feel myself, however, extremely happy, comfortable, and contented. I never was, perhaps, more so in my life. You will give me great comfort by

Smith, Adam. writing to me now and then, and letting me know what is passing among my friends in London." And so, with a few short intervals, he went on, till, in 1776, an era that will be for ever memorable in the history of political philosophy, the Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations was given to the world. We have elsewhere examined most part of the leading theories and conclusions advanced in this famous work. (See Introduction to Article POLITICAL ECONOMY.) At present, it is enough to observe, that despite its imperfections in a scientific point of view, the objections that have been made, and not without justice, to its arrangement, and the many changes that have taken place since its publication in the policy and condition of nations, its celebrity is in no degree diminished. It is not in truth a book for one country or one age, but for all countries and all ages; and will always be regarded as a noble monument of profound thinking, various learning, and persevering research, applied to purposes of the highest interest and importance.

Little needs be said in regard to the originality of the theories advanced by Smith. We have shown, in the article referred to, that some of the most important doctrines embodied in the Wealth of Nations, had been distinctly announced, and that traces, more or less faint, of the remainder may be found in various works published previously to its appearance. But this has little or nothing to do with the peculiar merits of Smith; and in no respect invalidates his claim to be considered as the real founder of the science of political economy. Some of its disjecta membra had, indeed, been discovered, with indications of the others. But their importance, whether in a practical or scientific point of view, and their dependence on each other, were all but wholly unknown. They formed an undigested mass, without order or any sort of rational connection; what was sound and true being frequently (as in the theory of the economists) closely linked to what was false and contradictory. Smith was the enchanter who educated out of this chaos—

"E tenebris tantis tam clarum extollere lumen
Qui primus potuisti, inlustrans commoda vite."

And in such complicated and difficult subjects, a higher degree of merit belongs to the party who first establishes the truth of a new doctrine, and traces its consequences and limitations, than to him who may previously have stumbled upon it by accident, and dismissed it as if it were valueless. He did not, like the greater number of his predecessors, build his conclusions on metaphysical abstractions, or on the partial and distorted statements of interested or prejudiced parties, but on a careful review and analysis of the more prominent circumstances connected with the progress of society from antiquity down to his own times. And none will be surprised that, in taking, for the first time, so wide a survey, he sometimes overlooked a principle, or was deceived in regard to its influence or operation, and that, in consequence, some parts of his book are defective or erroneous. This, however, is but rarely the case. He had none of that impetuous rashness which, while it satisfies itself with hasty and superficial investigations, pushes with unhesitating confidence every theory, however narrow or ill-founded, to an extreme. On the contrary, he was slow and circumspect. And

without seeking to establish new doctrines, was influenced by a sincere desire to trace and discover the natural and sound principles of public economy, however obscured by sophistry or encumbered by error, and to exhibit what he believed would be found to be their practical working, if allowed to come into free operation. In pursuing his laborious inquiries, his caution and his unequalled sagacity never forsook him. And the real wonder is, that a work involving so many abstruse researches and conflicting considerations as that of Smith, should have so few blemishes, and be so nearly perfect as we find it to be. It contains a greater number of useful and readily available truths than are to be found in any other publication; and it pointed out and smoothed the path by following which subsequent inquirers have been able to perfect much which its author left incomplete, to rectify the mistakes into which he fell, and to make many new and important discoveries. Whether, indeed, we refer to the soundness of its leading doctrines, the liberality and universal applicability of its practical conclusions, or the powerful and beneficial influence it has had on the progress of economical science, and on the policy and conduct of nations, the Wealth of Nations must be placed in the foremost rank of those works which have helped to liberalise, enlighten, and enrich mankind.

By showing that the real and lasting interests of nations are always best promoted by cultivating a fair and friendly intercourse with their neighbours, and that the jealousies and fears that were formerly entertained of the advance of others in wealth and civilisation, are as unfounded as they are malevolent and base, the Wealth of Nations has contributed, in no ordinary degree, to weaken national antipathies, and to lessen the chances of war. Its influence in this respect has been well illustrated by Mr Buckle, who does not hesitate to affirm, that "Adam Smith contributed more, by the publication of this single work, towards the happiness of man, than has been effected by the united abilities of all the statesmen and legislators of whom history has preserved an authentic account."

Hume, who was then labouring under his last illness, addressed a congratulatory letter to Smith on the publication of the Wealth of Nations. And it is a curious fact, that he pointed out in that letter what is the principal defect of the work, viz., the erroneous view which it gives of the nature and causes of rent. He says, "I cannot think that the rent of farms makes any part of the price of produce." It is not known whether Hume had directly arrived at this conclusion, or had derived it at second hand, from the writings or conversation of Dr Anderson,² by whom it had been already established. But it is singular, seeing that his attention had been directed to the subject by one he so greatly esteemed, that Smith did not submit his statements in regard to rent to a more searching and careful analysis. Had he done this, he would most probably have adopted the views of Anderson and Hume, and materially improved his work.³

Smith survived the publication of the Wealth of Nations fifteen years. He had the satisfaction to see it translated into all the languages of Europe; to hear his opinions quoted in the House of Commons; to be consulted by the minister; and to observe that the principles he had expounded

were beginning to produce a material change in the public opinion, and in the councils of this and other countries. And he must have enjoyed the full conviction that the progress of events would ensure their ultimate triumph, by showing that they were productive of signal advantage, not only to the general mass of mankind, but to the inhabitants of every country which should have good sense enough to adopt them.

Hume died soon after the Wealth of Nations made its appearance. Smith, with whom he had lived on the most intimate terms, was most solicitous in his attentions to his illustrious friend during his illness; and gave an interesting account of the circumstances connected with his death, and a sketch of his character, in a letter addressed to Mr. Strahan, of London, which was soon after published as a supplement to Hume's autobiography. In it he says that he considered that his deceased friend "had approached as nearly to the idea of a perfectly wise and virtuous man, as, perhaps, the nature of human frailty will permit." This unqualified eulogium having given offence to many who dissented from Hume's opinions in regard to religion, was much found fault with. Dr. Horne, bishop of Norwich, the most distinguished of those by whom it was censured, attacked Smith, in an anonymous pamphlet, with considerable asperity; and unwarrantably ascribed to him, for he had no sure grounds to go upon, the same sceptical tenets that had been entertained by Hume.¹ But he took no notice of this effusion; and wisely declined entering upon a controversy which could have no useful result.²

Smith resided principally in London during the two years immediately subsequent to the publication of the Wealth of Nations, enjoying the society of some of the most distinguished persons in the metropolis. In his conversation, though never in his writings, his judgments of men and things were often precipitate, dogmatical, and erroneous. But he was always ready, on being better informed, to review and amend his inconsiderate decisions.³ And his friends, while they not unfrequently dissented from his opinions, were pleased with his straightforwardness, want of pretension, and intellectual ability.

In 1778 he was appointed, through the spontaneous application of his old pupil and friend, the Duke of Buccleuch, a commissioner of customs for Scotland.⁴ In consequence, he removed to Edinburgh, where he continued afterwards to reside, possessed of an income more than equal to his wants, and in the society of his most esteemed friends. He was accompanied to his new residence by his mother, then in extreme old age, and by his cousin, Miss

Douglas, who superintended the domestic arrangements and economy of his family.

But though highly creditable to the nobleman by whose intervention it was procured, his appointment to the customs⁵ was little in harmony with the tastes of Smith, while it seriously interrupted or terminated those pursuits in which he might have continued to render invaluable services. The philosopher who had, for the first time, fully explored and laid open the true sources of national wealth and prosperity, deserved a different if not a higher reward. There were thousands of persons who could have performed the duties of a commissioner of customs quite as well as Smith, or perhaps better; but there was not one, besides himself, who could give that "account of the general principles of law and government, and of the different revolutions they have undergone in the different ages and periods of society,"⁶ which it was his intention to give. And he would most probably have fulfilled this intention had not the well-earned bounty of the public been clogged by the performance of petty routine duties which engrossed the greater part of his time, and left him little or no leisure for study.

Smith paid several visits to London after his appointment to the customs. And we are told by Mr. Paterson that on the last of these occasions he dined at Wimbledon with Mr. Dundas, afterwards Lord Melville, and that Mr. Pitt, Lord Grenville, and Mr. Addington were of the party. Smith happening to come late, the company had already sat down to dinner. On his entering the room, they stood up; and when he begged of them to be seated, they answered, "No, we must stand till you are seated, for we are your scholars!" This was a flattering compliment; and in so far true, that the distinguished guests, Mr. Pitt and Lord Grenville, were really what they professed to be, pupils of Smith.

We may, perhaps, be permitted farther to observe, that in the matter now referred to, or in his general, though not very intimate acquaintance with economical subjects, Mr. Pitt had a material advantage over his great rival, Mr. Fox. The latter admitted that he had never read the Wealth of Nations, and that "there was something in those subjects which passed his comprehension."⁷ But, however well-founded it might be, no parliamentary leader would now venture to make such a confession. To his ignorance of the sound principles of national intercourse, we may, perhaps, mainly ascribe the determined opposition made by Fox to Pitt's proposals for modifying and in part rescinding the restrictions, which a jealous and short-sighted policy

Smith, Adam, had imposed on the trade with Ireland, and to the comparatively liberal commercial treaty negotiated with France in 1786. But there can be no doubt that party considerations had also a good deal to do with these discreditable displays. The reader will not be surprised to learn that this conduct on the part of Fox greatly lessened the high estimation in which he had been previously held by Smith.

In 1787 Smith was elected Lord Rector of the University of Glasgow. On this occasion he addressed a letter to that learned body, which strikingly evinces the high sense he felt of this honour, and his regard for those from whom it emanated. "No perferment," says he, "could have given me so much real satisfaction. No man can owe greater obligations to a society than I do to the University of Glasgow. They educated me; they sent me to Oxford. Soon after my return to Scotland, they elected me one of their own members; and afterwards preferred me to another office, to which the abilities and virtues of the never-to-be-forgotten Dr Hutcheson had given a superior degree of illustration. The period of thirteen years, which I spent as a member of that society, I remember as by far the most useful, and therefore as by far the happiest and most honourable, period of my life; and now, after three-and-twenty years' absence, to be remembered in so very agreeable a manner by my old friends and protectors, gives me a heart-felt joy which I cannot easily express to you."

His constitution, which had at no time been robust, began early to give way; and his decline was accelerated by the grief which he felt on account of the death of his mother, in 1784, and of Miss Douglas, in 1788. He survived the latter only about two years, having died on the 17th July 1790. His last illness, which was occasioned by a chronic obstruction of the bowels, was both tedious and painful. He bore it with the greatest fortitude; and had all the consolation that could be derived from the attention of his friends, and from their sympathy and that of his fellow-citizens.

In a letter written by Mr Smellie, to a friend in London, about three weeks before Smith's death, we find the following statement:—"Poor Smith! We must soon lose him; and the moment in which he departs will give a heartfelt pang to thousands. His spirits are flat, and I am afraid the exertions he sometimes makes to please his friends do him no good. His intellects, as well as his senses, are clear and distinct. He wishes to be cheerful, but Nature is omnipotent. His body is extremely emaciated, because his stomach cannot admit of sufficient nourishment; but, like a man, he is perfectly patient and resigned."

Smith was no speculative moralist, no pseudo-liberal, no eulogist of virtues which he failed to practise. He had the utmost contempt, which he never hesitated to express in the most decided manner, for whatever was insincere, mean, or malignant. His integrity and truthfulness were unimpeached and unimpeachable. Unsuspecting and warm in his affections, he was most anxious, on all occasions, to promote the interests of his friends; and his generosity was limited only by his means. He was in the habit of allotting a considerable part of his income to offices of secret charity. Stewart mentions that he had been made acquainted with some very affecting instances of his beneficence. "They

were all," he observes, "on a scale much beyond what might have been expected from his fortune; and were accompanied with circumstances equally honourable to the delicacy of his feelings and the liberality of his heart." This was no doubt the cause that the property which he left at his death was not such as might have been expected from his income, and the moderate, though gentlemanlike, scale of his household expenditure.

Smith was deeply versed in the history and philosophy of antiquity. His acquaintance with English, French, and Italian literature was, also, intimate and critical; and it might be said of him, as it was said of his countryman Buchanan, that he was omni liberali eruditione non leviter tinctus, sed penitus imbutus. He had a strong relish for the beauties of poetry, Homer, Virgil, Tasso, and Ariosto, being among his chief favourites. But his studies and speculations were directed more to what was useful and important, than to what was elegant and entertaining. And he looked with a scrutinising eye into the history of the rise, progress, and decline of nations, and of the revolutions of art, science, and taste, that he might thence deduce the principles and practical results embodied in his works. He never separated the honestum from the utile. And his principles and theories were valuable only in his estimation as they contributed to promote the freedom, the virtue, and the wellbeing of mankind.

He acquired an extensive,² well-selected, and valuable collection of books, which he prized very highly, in most departments of philosophy, literature, and science. It was bequeathed, along with his other property, to his cousin, David Douglas, Esq., who eventually became a judge of the Court of Session in Scotland, under the courtesy title of Lord Reston. At the death of the latter, the library was equally divided between his two daughters and co-heiresses, and is still in their possession.³

Notwithstanding the apparent flow and artlessness of his style, and his great experience in composition, Smith stated, not long before his death, that he continued to compose as slowly, and with as great difficulty, as at first. He did not write with his own hand, but generally walked up and down his apartment, dictating to an amanuensis,⁴ a habit which may in part, perhaps, account for that repetition and diffuseness of style which is so observable in both his works, but especially in the Wealth of Nations. He regarded the works of Middleton as affording the best specimens of English composition; and he was accustomed to recommend the careful study of his Life of Cicero to all who wished to write easily, perspicuously, and in correct English.

The want of notes, and the fewness of references to authorities, may be mentioned as a peculiarity of Smith's writings; and one in which they differ very widely from those of his contemporaries, Hume and Robertson, especially the latter. Stewart says, that "Smith considered every species of note as a blemish or imperfection, indicating either an idle accumulation of superfluous particulars, or a want of skill and comprehension in the general design."⁵ Although, however, it must be admitted that Robertson in his Histories of Charles V. and America, has embodied in notes a large amount of interesting matter which might have been advantageously incorporated with the text, Smith has cer-

tainly carried the opposite practice to an extreme. It is impossible, indeed, to lay down any precise rules on a subject of this sort, or to say positively when notes or references had better be made or omitted. But their total or nearly total omission seems to be quite as objectionable as their excess. At all events, there does not appear to be much room for doubting that the arrangement of the Wealth of Nations would have gained materially in clearness and simplicity, had the author adopted, in part at least, the plan of Robertson, and thrown some of the numerous digressions by which the thread of the investigation is interrupted into the form of notes or supplementary chapters. And there are many occasions when a reference to the facts or authorities on which an argument is founded would have given it additional strength, and been satisfactory to the reader.

Smith had early resolved that such only of his manuscripts as were, in his own estimation, fit for publication should ever see the light. And the resolution to which he had thus unfortunately come was carried into effect a few days before his death, when all his papers were committed to the flames, excepting parts of essays, intended to illustrate the principles that lead and direct philosophical inquiries, which he left to his friends to publish or not as they thought proper. The contents of the manuscripts that were destroyed are not exactly known; but they certainly comprised the course of lectures on rhetoric and belles lettres delivered at Edinburgh in 1748, and the lectures on jurisprudence and natural religion, which formed a most important part of the course of moral philosophy delivered at Glasgow. The loss of the latter must ever be a subject of deep regret, and is, in truth, one of the most serious which philosophy has to deplore. We are ignorant of the motives which determined Smith to enforce their destruction. Stewart surmises that it was not so much on account of any apprehended injury to his literary reputation from the publication of such unfinished works, as from an anxiety lest the progress of truth should be retarded by the statement of doctrines of which the proofs were not fully developed; but this is doubtful.

The following observations on the private character and habits of Smith proceed from the pen of Dugald Stewart, who knew him well, and who was the last survivor of that galaxy of illustrious men who shed, during the latter portion of last century, so imperishable a glory over the literature of Scotland. "The more delicate and characteristic features of his mind," Stewart observes, "it is perhaps impossible to trace. That there were many peculiarities, both in his manners and in his intellectual habits, was manifest to the most superficial observer; but although, to those who knew him, these peculiarities detracted nothing from the respect which his abilities commanded; and, although to his intimate friends they added an inexpressible charm to his conversation, while they displayed, in the most interesting light, the artless simplicity of his heart, yet it would require a very skilful pencil to present them to the public eye. He was certainly not fitted for the general commerce of the world, or for the business of active life. The comprehensive speculations with which he had been occupied from his youth, and the variety of ma-

terials which his own invention continually supplied to his thoughts, rendered him habitually inattentive to familiar objects, and to common occurrences; and he frequently exhibited instances of absence, which had scarcely been surpassed by the fancy of La Bruyere.¹ Even in company he was apt to be engrossed with his studies; and appeared at times, by the motion of his lips, as well as by his looks and gestures, to be in the fervour of composition. I have often, however, been struck, at the distance of years, with his accurate memory of the most trifling particulars; and am inclined to believe, from this and some other circumstances, that he possessed a power, not perhaps uncommon among absent men, of recollecting, in consequence of subsequent efforts of reflection, many occurrences which, at the time when they happened, did not seem to have sensibly attracted his notice.

"To the defect now mentioned it was probably owing, in part, that he did not fall in easily with the common dialogue of conversation, and that he was somewhat apt to convey his own ideas in the form of a lecture. When he did so, however, it never proceeded from a wish to engross the discourse, or to gratify his vanity. His own inclination disposed him so strongly to enjoy in silence the gaiety of those around him, that his friends were often led to concoct little schemes, in order to engage him in the discussions most likely to interest him. Nor do I think I shall be accused of going too far when I say, that he was scarcely ever known to start a new topic himself, or to appear unprepared upon those topics that were introduced by others. Indeed, his conversation was never more amusing than when he gave a loose to his genius upon the very few branches of knowledge of which he only possessed the outlines.²

"The opinions he formed of men, upon slight acquaintance, were frequently erroneous; but the tendency of his nature inclined him much more to blind partiality than to ill-founded prejudice. The enlarged views of human affairs, on which his mind habitually dwelt, left him neither time nor inclination to study, in detail, the uninteresting peculiarities of ordinary characters; and accordingly, though intimately acquainted with the capacities of the intellect and the workings of the heart, and accustomed in his theories to mark, with the most delicate hand, the nicest shades, both of genius and of the passions, yet, in judging of individuals, it sometimes happened that his estimates were, in a surprising degree, wide of the truth.

"The opinions, too, which in the thoughtlessness and confidence of his social hours he was accustomed to hazard on books, and on questions of speculation, were not uniformly such as might have been expected from the superiority of his understanding, and the singular consistency of his philosophical principles. They were liable to be influenced by accidental circumstances, and by the humour of the moment; and, when retailed by those who only saw him occasionally, suggested false and contradictory ideas of his real sentiments. On these, however, as on most other occasions, there was always much truth, as well as ingenuity in his remarks; and if the different opinions which, at different times, he pronounced upon the same subject had been all combined together, so as to modify and limit

each other, they would probably have afforded materials for a decision, equally comprehensive and just. But, in the society of his friends, he had no disposition to form those qualified conclusions that we admire in his writings; and he generally contented himself with a bold and masterly sketch of the object, from the first point of view in which his temper or his fancy presented it. Something of the same kind might be remarked when he attempted, in the flow of his spirits, to delineate those characters which, from long intimacy, he might have been supposed to understand thoroughly. The picture was always lively and expressive, and commonly bore a strong and amusing resemblance to the original, when viewed under one particular aspect; but seldom, perhaps, conveyed a just and complete conception of it in all its dimensions and proportions. In a word, it was the fault of his unpremeditated judgment to be too systematical and too much in extremes.

"But, in whatever way these trifling peculiarities in his manners may be explained, there can be no doubt that they were intimately connected with the genuine artlessness of his mind. In this amiable quality he often recalled to his friends the accounts that were given of good La Fontaine; a quality which in him derived a peculiar grace from the singularity of its combination with those powers of reason and of eloquence, which, in his political and moral writings, have long engaged the admiration of Europe.

"In his external form and appearance there was nothing uncommon. When perfectly at ease, and when warmed with conversation, his gestures were animated, and not ungraceful; and, in the society of those he loved, his features were often brightened with a smile of inexpressible benignity. In the company of strangers his tendency to absence, and perhaps still more his consciousness of this tendency, rendered his manner somewhat embarrassed—an effect which was probably not a little heightened by those speculative ideas of propriety which his recluse habits tended at once to perfect in his conception, and to diminish his power of realising. He never sat for his picture; but the medallion of Tassie conveys an exact idea of his profile, and of the general expression of his countenance."¹

Thus far Stewart. Smellie says, "In his deportment, when walking, there were some singularities. His head had a gentle motion from side to side; and his body, at every step, had a kind of rolling or vermicular motion, as if he meant to alter his direction, or even to turn back. In the street, or elsewhere, he always carried his cane on his shoulder as a soldier does his musket. These may be considered as slight shades, but, in a picture, slight shades are often highly characteristic." (Lives, p. 296.)

We may further add, that Smith was about the middle size, well made, and stout, though not fat or corpulent. His countenance, which was manly and agreeable, inclined more to the Saxon than the Celtic caste, and was well lighted up by his large, expressive, grey eyes. His disposition was social in the extreme, especially in his own house, and in the company of his early friends. His Sunday suppers were long celebrated in Edinburgh circles.

The following is a list of the published works of Smith:—

1. Two articles in the Edinburgh Review for 1755, being (1) a Review of "Johnson's English Dictionary;" and (2) "A Letter to the Editors."

2. Theory of Moral Sentiments. The first edition of this work was published in 8vo, early in 1759. The sixth edition was published a short time before the author's death. It contains several additions, most of which were executed during his last illness.

3. Considerations concerning the first Formation of Languages, and the different Genius of Original and Compounded Languages.

This essay was originally subjoined to the first edition of the Moral Sentiments. It is an ingenious and pretty successful attempt to explain the formation and progress of language, by means of that species of investigation to which Dugald Stewart has given the appropriate name of Theoretical or Conjectural History; and which consists in endeavouring to trace the progress and vicissitudes of any art or science, partly from such historical facts as have reference to it, and, where facts are wanting, from inferences derived from considering what would be the most natural and probable conduct of mankind under the circumstances supposed.

4. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. The first edition was published at London in 1776, in two volumes 4to. The fourth edition, which was the last published by the author, appeared, in three vols. 8vo, in 1786.

5. His posthumous works, or those which he exempted from the general destruction of his manuscripts, and which were published by his friends, Doctors Black and Hutton. These gentlemen, in an advertisement prefixed to the publication, state that, when the papers which Dr Smith had left in their hands were examined, "the greater number appeared to be parts of a plan he had once formed for giving a connected history of the liberal sciences and elegant arts." "It is long," they add, "since he found it necessary to abandon that plan, as far too extensive; and these parts of it lay beside him neglected until his death. The reader will find in them that happy connection, that full and accurate expression, and that clear illustration, which are conspicuous in the rest of his works; and though it is difficult to add much to the great fame he so justly acquired by his other writings, these will be read with satisfaction and pleasure." The papers in question comprise:—I. Fragments of a great work "On the Principles which lead and direct Philosophical Inquiries, illustrated—(1) by the History of Astronomy; (2) by the History of the Ancient Physics; and (3) by the History of the Ancient Logics and Metaphysics." II. An essay entitled, "Of the Nature of that Imitation which takes place in what are called the Imitative Arts." III. A short tract, "Of the Affinity between certain English and Italian Verses." IV. A disquisition, "Of the External Senses."

Of the historical dissertations, the first only, on the History of Astronomy, seems to be nearly complete. They are all written on the plan of the dissertation on the Formation of Languages, being partly theoretical, and partly founded on fact. In the essay on the History of Astronomy, after premising some speculations with respect to the effects of unexpectedness and surprise, and of wonder and novelty, the author proceeds to give a brief outline of the different astronomical systems, from the earliest ages down to that of Newton.

The fragments that remain of the other two historical essays are much less complete, and do not possess the interest of the latter.

Smith contends, in the essay on the Imitative Arts, that the pleasure derived from them depends principally upon the difficulty of the imitation, or, as he has expressed it, "upon our wonder at seeing an object of one kind represent so well an object of a very different kind, and upon our admiration of the art which surmounts so happily that disparity which nature had established between them." On this principle he explained the preference so generally

given in tragedy to blank verse over prose; and Stewart mentions that, for the same reason, he was inclined to prefer rhyme in tragedy to blank verse, and that he extended the same principle to comedy;¹ and even went so far as to regret that the graphic delineations of real life and manners, exhibited on the English stage, had not been subjected to the fetters of rhyme, and executed in the manner of the French. But these conclusions were entirely consistent with his general views as to taste in composition. He was a firm adherent of the classical school. The principal tragedies of Corneille, Racine, and Voltaire, the comedies of Moliere, and the verses of Boileau, Pope, and Gray, had, in his estimation, reached the highest degree of excellence.

The short essay, Of the Affinity between certain English and Italian Verses, is curious rather than valuable. It however, illustrates the variety of the author's literary pursuits.

The disquisition with respect to the External Senses is of considerable extent; and is a valuable contribution to the science of which it treats. (J. R. M.)