final resting-place in the burial ground of the Temple Church. The grave is known, though no memorial indicates it to the pilgrim or the stranger. The idea of a monument in Westminster Abbey was the suggestion of Reynolds; and he selected the spot over the south door in Poets' Corner, where it was subsequently placed in the area of a pointed arch, between the monuments of Gay and the Duke of Argyll. It consisted of a medallion portrait and tablet. Nollekens was the sculptor, and two years after Goldsmith's death the inscription was written by Johnson. I send you the poor dear Doctor's epitaph,' he writes to Reynolds, with grief apparently as fresh as though their loss had been of yesterday. 'Read it first 'yourself; and if you then think it right, show it to the 'Club.' The principal members of the Club, with other friends, dined soon after at Reynolds's; and so many objections were started on its being read, that it was resolved to submit them to Johnson in the form of a round robin, such as sailors adopt at sea when a matter of grievance is started, and no one wishes to stand first or last in remonstrance with the captain. After stating the great pleasure with which the intended epitaph had been read, and the admiration it had created for its elegant composition and masterly style 'considered abstractedly,' this round robin, which was dictated by Burke, went on to say that its circumscribers were yet of opinion that the character of Goldsmith as a writer, particularly as a poet, was not perhaps delineated with all the exactness which Doctor Johnson was capable of giving it; and that therefore, with deference to his superior judgment, they humbly requested he would at least take the trouble of revising it, and of making such alterations and additions as he should think proper upon a farther perusal. This part of the remonstrance Johnson received with good humour; and desired Sir Joshua, who presented it, to tell the gentlemen he would alter the epitaph in any manner they pleased, as to the sense of it. But then came the pinch of the mutiny. Langton, who was present when the remonstrance was drawn up, had not objected thus far; but to what now was added, he refused to give his name. But if we might venture to express our wishes, they would lead us to request that he 'would write the epitaph in English rather than in Latin, 'as we think that the memory of so eminent an English 'writer ought to be perpetuated in the language to which 'his works are likely to be so lasting an ornament, which 'we also know to have been the opinion of the late Doctor 'himself. Langton was too sturdy a classic to assent to this. His scholarly sympathies had already invited and received, from Johnson, even a Greek lament for their common loss. The names circumscribed were those of Burke, Franklin (the translator of Sophocles), Chamier, Colman, Vachell (a friend of Sir Joshua's), Reynolds, Forbes (the Scotch baronet and biographer of Beattie), Barnard, Sheridan, Metcalfe (another great friend of Sir Joshua's, and a humane as well as active member of the house of commons), Gibbon, and Joseph Warton. 'I wonder,' exclaimed Johnson, when he read this part of the remonstrance, and the names, 'that 'Joe Warton, a scholar by profession, should be such a fool. 'I should have thought Mund Burke, too, would have had more sense.' His formal answer was not less emphatic. He requested Reynolds at once to acquaint his fellow mutineers, that he would never consent to disgrace the walls of Westminster Abbey with an English inscription. The Latin was accordingly placed upon the marble, where it now remains. OLIVARII GOLDSMITH Poeta, Physici, Historici, nullum quod tetigit non ornavit : affectuum potens, at lenis dominator; Amicorum fides, Lectorum veneratio. Natus Hiberniâ, Forneiæ Lonfordiensis in loco cui nomen Pallas, Nov xxix. MDCCXXXI. Eblanæ literis institutus, Objit Londini While Goldsmith lay upon his death-bed, there was much discussion in London about the rights of authors. After two decisions in the courts of common law, which declared an author's property to be perpetual in any work he might have written, the question had been brought upon appeal before the House of Lords, and the opinions of the judges taken. Five then declared their belief that, by the common law of England, the sole right of multiplying copies of any work was vested for ever in him, by the exercise of whose genius, faculties, or industry, such work had been produced; and that no enactment had yet been passed, of force to limit that estate in fee. Six, on the other hand, held that this perpetual property which undoubtedly existed at common law, had been reduced to a short term by an act passed in the reign of Queen Anne, and somewhat strangely entitled (if this were indeed its right construction) as for the encouragement of literature. Chief Justice Mansfield's opinion would have equalised these opposing judgments; but, though retaining it still as strongly as when it had decided the right in his own court, the highest tribunal of common law, he thought it becoming not then to repeat it. Lord Camden upon this moved and carried a reversal of Lord Mansfield's decision, by reversing the decree which had been founded upon it. The House of Lords thus declared the statute of Anne to have been a confiscation to the public use, after a certain brief term, of such rights of property in the fruits of his own labour and genius, as, up to the period of its enactment, an author had undoubtedly possessed. Lord Camden glorified this result for the sake of literature itself. For he held that genius was not intended for the benefit of the individual who possessed it, but for the universal benefit of the race; and believing Fame to be its sufficient reward, thought that all who deserved so divine a recompense, spurning delights and living laborious days, should scorn and reject every other. The real price which genius sets upon its labours, he fervently exclaimed, is Immortality; and posterity pays that. On the other hand, Mr. Justice Willes announced an opinion hardly less earnest in its tone, to the effect that he held it to be wise in every state to encourage men of letters, without precise regard to what the measure of their powers might be; and that the easiest and most equal way of doing it, was by securing to them the property of their own works. By that means, nobody contributed who was not willing; and though a good book might be run down, and a bad one cried up, for a time, yet sooner or later the reward would be fairly proportioned to the merit of the work. 'A writer's fame,' added this learned and upright judge, 'will not be the less, that he has bread; without being 'under the necessity, that he may get bread, of prostituting 'his pen to flattery or to party.' The Such interest as society showed in the discussion, went wholly with the majestic sentiments of Camden. 'very thought,' said Lord Chatham to Lord Shelburne, 'of coining literature into ready rhino! Why, it is as 'illiberal as it is illegal.' It is nevertheless probable that the reader who may have accompanied me through this narrative thus far, will think it not illiberal to put these |