BAP- IT'3 DAVID GAERICK.

Painfully reveal the temper in which it was written ; but it 1759.
^et unquestionable that the feeling which pervades the msi

fi-v-J. ^ •*•

I'act, as weU as the pamphlet of Mr. Kalph, was now
scorning general with the literary class, and tended greatly
embitter the successes of Ganick's later life. In c

con-

^ ection with it, at the same time, a regret will always arise,
Remembering the differences of a Goldsmith and a Ealph,
at the lively irritable actor should have been indiscriini-
^ate in the resentments it provoked, and unable, in any
^stance, to conceive a better actuating motive than the
^J his prosperity had excited. Thomas Davies tells us,
at when, somewhere about the time of his connection with
e -See, Goldsmith sought to obtain, what a struggling man
etters was thought to have some claim to, the vacant
^cretaryshlp of the Society of Arts, Garrick made answer
0 a personal application for Ms vote, that Mr. Goldsmith
Caving « taken pains to deprive himself of his assistance by
^ aii unprovoked attack upon his management of the theatre
^ in his Present State of Learning" it was "impossible he
could lay claim to any recommendation from him."*
K avies adds, that " Goldsmith, instead of making an
C! aP°logy for his conduct, either from misinformation or
„ ^SGo:aeeption, bluntly replied, ' In truth he had spoken
« r-jT8 ^^^ and believed ^at he said was very right/
116 manager dismissed him with civility."
he manager might with wisdom have done more. The
unt reply, in a generous man's interpretation, should at least
lave blunted the fancied wrong. It is painful to think that
ne«her of these famous men, whose cheerful gaieties of
6art were the natural bonds of a mutual sympathy and fast
a ^an should throughout their lives have wholly lost the

* Davies's Life of Cfarrick, ii. 149.61, 188, &c.