« AnteriorContinuar »
Said, -Here is madam Reason too,
Aveva per dispetto
D'anonnciarla negletto ;
Dice; e fra sè poi ride.
Pensoso abbassa i guardi, And said,—Too late the lady came;
Poi dice Amore: è tardi; "T is best she make another call.
Che passi un' altra volta.
LA BELLEZZA IN LIBERTA. Unthinking Beauty loud complains,
Gemeva la Bellezza That love has loaded her with chains ; D'Amor fra le catene avvinta e opOld Time, who sees her twist and writhe,
pressa ; Soon cuts her fetters with his scythe; Il Tempo le si appressa, Proud of her liberty and grace,
E colla falce le divide e spezza; The nymph Love meets and quick accosts; A lei, ch'esulta allor lieta e felice, Holding a niirror to her face,
Di nuovo Amor si accosta; Behold, he cries, what freedom costs. Le presenta uno specchio, e poi le
Guarda la libertà quanto ti costa. LOVE TURNED PAINTER.
AMORE PITTORE. One day, dear Sarah, with surprise,
Un dì sorpreso, o Fille, I marked young love in busy mood; Vidi Amor fanciulletto, His bandage stripped from off his eyes, Che, squarciata la benda alle pupille, Before a frame he painting stood :
Pingeva attento innanzi al cavalletto: But when I came a step more near
Ma quando mi appressai To view the youthful limner's art,
Al Pittore novello, Judge of my wonder and my fear;
Doppiamente sorpreso rimirai, His pencil was a pointed dart,
Che un dardo era il pennello, The canvass my poor naked heart ;
La tela era il mio core, Where, lo! thy lovely traits appear
E la tua imago dipingeva Amore.
THE SOUL OF SONG.
Where lives the Soul of song ?
Follows it on the path,
But where uncultured plains
in silent showers;
THE PROCLAMATION OF SALADINE.
Fui et nihil amplius.
The wars of Saladine are ended;
Now tired of war, with havock sated,
:-a little while hence He goes to count its awful cost.
It was stated in a New York Paper a short time since that the Moon was nearer the Earth at the present time than it has been for 500 years previous. The following lines were suggested by the fact.
Mild Queen of light and loveliness,
Westminster Review for April, 1825. The first article in this number treats of the “ Law of Libel and Liberty of the Press.” It contains much ingenious reasoning which our limits will not permit us to analyze, in support of the following positions, which the reviewers, in conclusion, consider as fully established :
" That the law of England, as delivered by its authorized interpreters, the judges, however earnestly the saine judges may occasionally disavow this doctrine, prohibits all unfavourable representation with respect to institutions, and with respect to the government and its acts: and, consequently, that if any freedom of discussion is permitted to exist, it is only because it cannot be repressed; the reason why it cannot be repressed, being, the dread of public opinion.”
The greater part of the reasoning of course relates to public libels. The following extract exhibits the opinion of the reviewers concerning private libels.
“ In most law books, if we look for a definition of libel, we find nothing but a fiction. Libel is punishable, we are there told, because it tends to provoke a breach of the peace. The person libelled, may, out of resentment, commit the crime of assault against his accuser; it is fit, therefore, that the law should extend its protecting shield over the libeller, and save him from the chance of a broken head, by inflictiug upon him a year's imprisonment. A tweak by the nose, according to this doctrine, should be more criminal than any libel, for it is certainly far more likely to provoke the species of retaliation alluded to. Miserable as this fiction is, it has served as a foundation to lawyers for building up the excellent law maxim, the greater the truth, the greater the libel.' A bad man, it is alleged, is more easily provoked than a good man! and a true accusation, being usually more cutting than a false one, exposes the accuser to a greater hazard of being knocked down!
« « One might almost as reasonably contend,' says Mr Mence, that it ought to be criminal in point of law for any person to carry money about him, lest it should tempt some scoundrel to pick his pocket or knock his brains out. The punishment in such a case, as the law now stands, would fall upon the thief, instead of the templer. And the peace would be at least as well secured, and the interests of morality much better consulted, in cases of alleged libel, by punishing not the man who exposes vice and holds it up to deserved infamy; but the man whose vicious conduct is exposed, and who to his crimes has added the farther crime of braving the disgrace, and committing violence upon the person who may justly and meritoriously have exposed him.'
“The reader may be curious to learn for what purpose this ludicrous fiction was invented. The purpose was to render libel a penal offence, instead of being merely a civil injury. Had it been classed among private offences, under the head of injuries to reputation, it would have been necessary to prove, in the first place, that an injury had really