hands to undertake. We want, indeed, a Richelieu to commence such a
work. For I am persuaded were there such a genius in our kingdom to
lead the way, there would not want capacities who could carry on the
work to a glory equal to all that has gone before them. The English
tongue is a subject not at all less worthy the labour of such a
society than the French, and capable of a much greater perfection.
The learned among the French will own that the comprehensiveness of
expression is a glory in which the English tongue not only equals
but excels its neighbours; Rapin, St. Evremont, and the most eminent
French authors have acknowledged it. And my lord Roscommon, who is
allowed to be a good judge of English, because he wrote it as
exactly as any ever did, expresses what I mean in these lines:-


"For who did ever in French authors see
The comprehensive English energy?
The weighty bullion of one sterling line,
Drawn to French wire would through whole pages shine."


"And if our neighbours will yield us, as their greatest critic has
done, the preference for sublimity and nobleness of style, we will
willingly quit all pretensions to their insignificant gaiety."

It is great pity that a subject so noble should not have some as
noble to attempt it. And for a method, what greater can be set
before us than the academy of Paris? Which, to give the French
their due, stands foremost among all the great attempts in the
learned part of the world.