arose of the late Lord Treasurer's restoration to his old authority. Prior reckoned upon a share in his patron's prosperity, though not entertaining the same opinion as the public of that statesman's character. He disbelieved the popular explanation of all Lord Oxford's conduct as ruled by the laws of a profound cunning. The apparent caution and astuteness he knew to be nothing but dilatoriness and indecision. At all events, the crisis passed by, and the supposed sagacity had no opportunity of being again found out.

Prior's regrets and longings, his querulousness at straitened means, and determination to enjoy to the full the pleasures within his reach, lasted till his death, which occurred shortly after this final disappointment. He left behind him the brief memory of a very everyday character, most remarkable for its contrast with the grandeur of the scenes in which he had figured as a principal agent. Both parties in turn trusted him as an active ally. He was the favourite, as a negotiator, of two sovereigns, one his own, the other an enemy. Notwithstanding this, he was no statesman. In the so-called golden age of our literature he ranked among eminent poets; he was confessedly the first to introduce that more polished rhythm, which Pope's 'Rape of the Lock' displays in its highest perfection; Pope, who disliked him for his quarrel with St. John, placed him along with Shakespeare, Spenser, and Dryden, among the eight "authorities for poetical language"; he was vindicated fiercely by the moral, devout, and natural Cowper, from Johnson's "rusty fusty" remarks on Henry and Emma; and he had the honour to furnish large stores of quotations to the tenacious memory of Scott; yet his claims to lofty poetic fame have been disallowed by the popular judgment of posterity, and his neatest love-odes are totally neglected. Without thought or passion, no writer can long keep his rank among poets; and Prior had neither. He was more regularly engaged in politics than Swift; some of his bon-mots, Hazlitt says, are the best that are recorded; but who would dream of comparing him with the author of the Drapier's Letters and Gulliver as a politician, or even as a

wit? In the unique social epoch of Queen Anne's reign, he occupies no place apart, no individual position among the many luminaries with whom he familiarly consorted. Scarcely an idea has been handed down to us of his demeanour and general appearance. He did, said, and wrote many things which are remembered; he himself is not. A nation did not mourn for him as for Cowley; and the grief of his other old friends was as well under control as Atterbury's, who was content to be kept away from his funeral by a cold. He had to remind posterity by a bequest for a sumptuous monument in the Abbey who he was, and what he had been.

IV.

TWO LEADERS OF SOCIETY AND

OF OPPOSITION.

HENRY ST. JOHN,

1678-1751.

WILLIAM PULTENEY,

1682-1764.