Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 37.djvu/62

 issue bore the date of 1812. All the impressions were anonymous, and the writer was long unknown. Dawson Turner, who possessed letters addressed to the unknown author, with the answers of Mathias, which are now No. 22976 of the Addit. MSS. in the British Museum, wrote that the authorship ‘was scarcely made a secret by the family after Mathias went to Italy’ (Notes and Queries, 1st ser. iii. 276). Rumour asserted that he was aided in the composition by Bishop W. L. Mansel [q. v.], while Gilbert Wakefield, says Rogers, ‘used to say he was certain that Rennell and Glynn assisted in it’ (Table Talk of Samuel Rogers, p. 135), but these suggestions can now be dismissed from consideration. The poem contained some slashing lines scattered among a mass of affected criticism, and as its sole idea was to ridicule those trading on literature, it soon proved wanting in life. George Steevens called it ‘a peg to hang the notes on,’ and these were often of portentous length, though Rogers thought them ‘rather piquant.’ De Quincey, in his ‘Essay on Parr,’ speaks of it as marred by ‘much licence of tongue, much mean and impotent spite, and by a systematic pedantry without parallel in literature,’ and he might have added, by the shameless puffing of his own works by Mathias. Cobbett, who shared many of his prejudices, called it a ‘matchless poem,’ but Dr. Wolcot dubbed him ‘that miserable imp Mathias.’ Among the writers most severely satirised were Payne Knight, Parr, Godwin, ‘Monk’ Lewis, and Joseph Warton for his edition of Pope's ‘Works;’ but Mathias was often obliged to soften or to expunge his criticisms. In Parr's ‘Works’ (viii. 59–82) are several eulogistic letters subsequently addressed to him by Mathias.

A satire of such recklessness naturally provoked attacks. Among them were: 1. ‘The Egotist, or Sacred Scroll. A Familiar Dialogue between the Author of the “Pursuits of Literature” and Octavius,’ 1798. 2. ‘The Progress of Satire, an Essay in Verse. With Notes containing Remarks on the “Pursuits of Literature,”’ 2nd ed. 1798. Supplement, with ‘Remarks on the Pursuer of Literature's Defence,’ 1799. Anonymous, but by William Boscawen. 3. ‘Impartial Strictures on the “Pursuits of Literature,” and particularly a Vindication of the Romance of “The Monk,”’ 1798. 4. ‘The Sphinx's Head Broken, or a Poetical Epistle with Notes to Thomas James M*th**s, by Andrew Œdipus, an injured Author,’ 1798. 5. ‘The Literary Census, a Satirical Poem, with Notes, including Free and Candid Strictures on the “Pursuits of Literature.” By Thomas Dutton,’ 1798. 6. ‘Remarks on the “Pursuits of Literature,”’ Cambridge, 1798. Anonymous, by John Mainwaring. This provoked from Mathias ‘A Letter to the Author of “Remarks,” &c., which purported to be written by “A Country Gentleman, formerly of the University of Cambridge.”’ 7. ‘An Examination of the Merits and Tendency of the “Pursuits of Literature,”’ by W. Burdon, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, 1799. Nearly the whole of these works censured the malignity and partiality of the criticisms of Mathias, and some of them reflected on his personal appearance. He was small and swarthy, with a face like that of Sir Francis Burdett.

Satire always had charms for Mathias. So early as 1780 he published anonymously ‘An Heroic Address in Prose to the Rev. Richard Watson [afterwards Bishop Watson] on his late Discourse to the Clergy of the Archdeaconry of Ely,’ in which Watson had expressed the hope of supplying some day a ‘more exact survey of the deserts of Arabia and Tartary,’ and ‘An Heroic Epistle [in verse] to the Rev. Richard Watson,’ which passed into two editions and provoked ‘An Answer to the Heroic Epistle.’ The success of the ‘Pursuits of Literature’ tempted him into politics. He attacked Sheridan with great coarseness in ‘The Political Dramatist’ in November 1795 [anon.], 1796; a second edition of which came out in 1796, with a postscript in prose, also published separately, of ‘Remarks on the Declaration of the Whig Club, 23 Jan. 1796.’ The curious correspondence between the Earl and Countess of Jersey and Dr. Randolph on the missing letters of the Prince of Wales drew from him ‘An Equestrian Epistle in Verse to the Earl of Jersey’ [anon.], 1796, and ‘An Epistle in Verse to Dr. Randolph’ [anon.], 1796; also issued as ‘A Pair of Epistles in Verse’ [anon.], 1796, with ‘An Appendix to the Pair of Epistles’ [anon.], 1796. The presence in England of the ‘numerous emigrant French priests and others of the Church of Rome’ caused him to write a foolish ‘Letter to the Marquis of Buckingham. By a Layman,’ 1796. The tories were praised and Fox with his whig followers condemned in ‘An Imperial Epistle from Kien Long, Emperor of China, to George III in 1794;’ 2nd edit. 1796; 4th edit. 1798. In 1797 he ventured upon ‘An Address to Mr. Pitt on some parts of his Administration’ [anon.], 1797; and in 1799 there appeared four editions, also anonymous, of ‘The Shade of Alexander Pope on the Banks of the Thames. A Satirical Poem on the Residence of Henry Grattan at Twickenham.’ This occasioned ‘A Vindication of Pope and Grattan from the Attack of an Anonymous Defamer. By W.