"Kenilworth." The personages were many of them historical, though
idealized; the occurrences were many of them such as the record
authenticated; the localities were drawn largely from nature. The story
betrays marks of haste or carelessness in some portions, though others
are elaborately studied. His preface shows that the reception of his
first book had made him timid and sensitive about the fate of the second,
and explains and excuses what might be found fault with, to disarm the
criticism he had some reason to fear.

That old watch-dog of our American literature, "The North American
Review," always ready with lambent phrases in stately "Articles" for
native talent of a certain pretension, and wagging its appendix of
"Critical Notices" kindly at the advent of humbler merit, treated "Merry-
Mount" with the distinction implied in a review of nearly twenty pages.
This was a great contrast to the brief and slighting notice of "Morton's
Hope." The reviewer thinks the author's descriptive power wholly exceeds
his conception of character and invention of circumstances.

"He dwells, perhaps, too long and fondly upon his imagination of the
landscape as it was before the stillness of the forest had been
broken by the axe of the settler; but the picture is so finely
drawn, with so much beauty of language and purity of sentiment, that
we cannot blame him for lingering upon the scene. . . . The
story is not managed with much skill, but it has variety enough of
incident and character, and is told with so much liveliness that few
will be inclined to lay it down before reaching the conclusion. .
. . The writer certainly needs practice in elaborating the details
of a consistent and interesting novel; but in many respects he is
well qualified for the task, and we shall be glad to meet him again
on the half-historical ground he has chosen. His present work,