CHAP, ill.] OVERTURES FROM SMOLLETT AND NEWBERY.
at all times not a little of the Pickle in him, and Newbery
much of the Mr. Trip ; but there was a genial good-hearted-
ness in both, which makes it natural and pleasant to have to
single out these two men, as the first active friends and
patrons of the author of the unsuccessful Bee. Their offers
were of course accepted; and it seems to imply something,
however slight, of a worldly advance in connection with
them, that, in the month which followed, the luckless Bee
was issued in the independent form of a small half-crown
volume by Mr. "Wilkie, and Kemick received instructions
from Mr. Ralph Griffiths to treat it in the Monthly Review
" with the greatest candour toward an unsuccessful Author."*
The 1st of January, 1760, saw the first venture launched.
It was published for sixpence, "embellished with curious
" copperplates," and entitled " The British Magazine, or
" Monthly Repository for Gentlemen and Ladies. By
" T. Smollett, M.D., and others." It was dedicated with
much fervour to Mr. Pitt; and Mr. Pitt's interest (greatly to
the spleen of Horace Walpole, who thinks the matter worthy
of mention in his Memoirs of George the Second}} enabled
Smollett to put it forth with a royal license, granted in con-
sideration of the fact that Doctor Smollett had "represented
"to his Majesty that he has been at great labour and
" expense in writing original pieces himself, and engaging
* Monthly Revimo, xxii. 42, January 1760. A specimen of the candour is
worth quoting. "We do not mean" (after saying that experience had, no doubt,
proved the justice of the author's anticipations of failure, as well as of his belief that
nobody but himself would regret it) " to insinuate that his lucubrations are so void
" of merit as not to deserve the public attention. On the contrary, we must
'' confess ourselves to have found no inconsiderable entertainment in their perusal.
" His stile is not the worst, and his manner is agreeable enough, in our opinion,
'' however it may have failed of exciting universal admiration. The truth is, most
" of his subjects are already sufficiently worn-out, and his observations frequently
" trite and common."
f iii. 259, 261. It follows an allusion to the abusive portrait of Lord Lyttelton
in Roderick Random, "a novel of which sort he published two or three."