The Rolliad, in Two Parts. George Ellis

Should any one ask him in future—Who gave you that name? Sir Richard may fairly and truly reply, My Godfathers, &c. and quote the whole of the lower assembly, as coming under that description.

      MERLIN, led, as may easily be supposed, by sympathy of rank, talents, and character, now pointed his wand to another worthy baronet, hardly less worthy of distinction than the last personage himself, namely, Sir JOSEPH MAWBEY. Of him the author sets out with saying,

      Let this, ye wise, be ever understood,

       SIR JOSEPH is as witty as he’s good.—

      Here, for the first time, the annotators upon this immortal poem, find themselves compelled, in critical justice to own, that the author has not kept entire pace with the original which he has affected to imitate. The distich, of which the above is a parody, was composed by the worthy hero of this part of the ROLLIAD, the amiable Sir Joseph himself, and runs thus:

      Ye ladies, of your hearts beware:

       SIR JOSEPH’s false as he is fair.

      How kind, and how discreet a caution! This couplet, independent of its other merits, possesses a recommendation not frequently found in poetry, the transcendant ornament of Truth. How far, indeed, the falshood of this respectable individual has been displayed in his gallantries, it is not the province of sober criticism to enquire. We take up the assertion with a large comprehension, and with a stricter eye to general character—

      SIR JOSEPH’s false as he is fair.———

      Is it necessary to challenge, what no one will be absurd enough to give—a contradiction to so acknowledged a truth? Or is it necessary to state to the fashionable reader, that whatever may be the degree of Sir Joseph’s boasted falshood, it cannot surpass the fairness of his complexion? The position, therefore, is what logicians call convertible: nothing can equal his falshood but his fairness; nothing his fairness but his falshood.—Incomparable!

      Proceeding to a description of his eloquence, he says,

      A sty of pigs, though all at once it squeaks,

       Means not so much as MAWBEY when he speaks;

       And his’try says, he never yet had bred

       A pig with such a voice or such a head!

       Except, indeed, when he essays to joke;

       And then his wit is truly pig-in-poke.

      Describing Sir Joseph’s acquisitions as a scholar, the author adds,

      His various knowledge I will still maintain,

       He is indeed a knowing man in grain.

      Some commentators have invidiously suggested, that the last line of this couplet should be printed thus,

      He is indeed a knowing man-in grain:

      assigning as their reason, that the phrase in grain evidently alludes to bran, with which Sir Joseph’s little grunting commonwealth is supported; and for the discreet and prudent purchase of which our worthy baronet is famous.

      Our author concludes his description of this great senator with the following distich:

      Such adaptation ne’er was seen before,

       His trade a hog is, and his wit—a boar.

      It has been proposed to us to amend the spelling: of the last word, thus, bore; this improvement, however, as it was called, we reject as a calumny.

      Where the beauty of a passage is pre-eminently striking as above, we waste not criticism in useless efforts at emendation.

      The writer goes on. He tells you he cannot quit this history of wits, without saying something of another individual; whom, however, he describes as every way inferior to the two last-mentioned, but who, nevertheless, possesses some pretensions to a place in the ROLLIAD. The individual alluded to, is Mr. GEORGE SELWYN. The author describes him as a man possessed of

      A plenteous magazine of retail wit

       Vamp’d up at leisure for some future hit;

       Cut for suppos’d occasions, like the trade,

       Where old new things for every shape are made!

       To this assortment, well prepar’d at home,

       No human chance unfitted e’er can come;

       No accident, however strange or queer,

       But meets its ready well-kept comment here.

      —The wary beavers thus their stores increase,

       And spend their winter on their summer’s grease.

      The whole of the above description will doubtless remind the classic reader of the following beautiful passage in the Tusculan Questions of Cicero: Nescio quomodo inhæret in mentibus quasi sæculorum quoddam augurium futurorum—idque in maximis ingeniis altissimisque animis existit maxime et apparet facillime. This will easily account for the system of previous fabrication so well known as the character of Mr. Selwyn’s jokes. Speaking of an accident that befel this gentleman in the wars, our author proceeds thus:

      Of old, when men from fevers made escape,

       They sacrific’d a cock to ÆSCULAPE:

       Thus, Love’s hot fever now for ever o’er,

       The prey of amorous malady no more,

       SELWYN remembers what his tutor taught,

       That old examples ever should be sought!

       And, gaily grateful, to his surgeon cries,

       “I’ve given to you the Ancient Sacrifice.”

      The delicacy with which this historical incident is pourtrayed, would of itself have been sufficient to transmit our author’s merit to posterity: and with the above extract we shall finish the present number of our commentaries.

      [1] See No. III.

      [2] The Reverend Rowland Hill, brother of Sir Richard.

      * * * * *

       NUMBER XI.

      The next person among the adherents of the Minister, whom MERLIN now points out to the notice of ROLLO, is SIR SAMUEL HANNAY, Baronet, a name recollected with great gratitude in the House: for there are few Members in it to whom he has not been serviceable. This worthy character indeed has done more to disprove Martial’s famous assertion,

      Non cuicunque datum est habere nasum,

      than any individual upon record.

      The author proceeds—

      But why, my HANNAY, does the ling’ring Muse

       The tribute of a line to thee refuse?

       Say, what distinction most delights thine ear,

       Or Philo-Pill, or Philo-Minister? Oh! may’st thou none of all thy titles lack, Or Scot, or Statesman, Baronet or Quack; For what is due to him, whose constant view is Preventing private, or a public lues?

      Who, that read the above description, do not, during the first impression of it, suppose that they see the worthy Baronet once more the pride of front advertisements—once more dispensing disregard and oblivion amongst all his competitors; and making your Leakes, your Lockyers, and your Velnos,

      —Hide their diminish’d heads.—

      In the passages which immediately follow, the poet goes on to felicitate the community upon the probable advantages to be derived to them from the junction of this illustrious personage with our immaculate Minister. He divides his congratulations into two parts. He first considers the consequence of the union, as they may affect the body personal; and secondly, as they may concern the body politic. Upon the former subject, he says,

      This famous pair, in happy league combin’d,