of old letters, like that in the Gallery at Wotton, may come to light.  From that precious deposit a housemaid—­blotted for ever be her name from memory’s page—­was purloining sheets of yellow paper, with antiquated writing on them, to light her fires with, when the late William Upcott came to the rescue, and saved Evelyn’s ‘Diary’ for a grateful world.  It is just possible that such a discovery may again be made, and that the doings of George Villiers, or the exile life of Wharton, or the inmost thoughts of other Wits and Beaux may be made to appear in clearer lights than heretofore; but it is much more likely that the popular opinions about these witty, worthless men are substantially true.

All that has been collected, therefore, to form this work—­and, as in the ‘Queens of Society,’ every known source has been consulted—­assumes a sterling value as being collected; and, should hereafter fresh materials be disinterred from any old library closet in the homes of some one descendant of our heroes, advantage will be gladly taken to improve, correct, and complete the lives.

One thing must, in justice, be said:  if they have been written freely, fearlessly, they have been written without passion or prejudice.  The writers, though not quite of the stamp of persons who would never have ‘dared to address’ any of the subjects of their biography, ’save with courtesy and obeisance,’ have no wish to ‘trample on the graves’ of such very amusing personages as the ‘Wits and Beaux of Society.’  They have even been lenient to their memory, hailing every good trait gladly, and pointing out with no unsparing hand redeeming virtues; and it cannot certainly be said, in this instance, that the good has been ’interred with the bones’ of the personages herein described, although the evil men do, ‘will live after them.’

But whilst a biographer is bound to give the fair as well as the dark side of his subject, he has still to remember that biography is a trust, and that it should not be an eulogium.  It is his duty to reflect that in many instances it must be regarded even as a warning.

The moral conclusions of these lives of ‘Wits and Beaux’ are, it is admitted, just:  vice is censured; folly rebuked; ungentlemanly conduct, even in a beau of the highest polish, exposed; irreligion finds no toleration under gentle names—­heartlessness no palliation from its being the way of the world.  There is here no separate code allowed for men who live in the world, and for those who live out of it.  The task of pourtraying such characters as the ‘Wits and Beaux of Society’ is a responsible one, and does not involve the mere attempt to amuse, or the mere desire to abuse, but requires truth and discrimination; as embracing just or unjust views of such characters, it may do much harm or much good.  Nevertheless, in spite of these obvious considerations there do exist worthy persons, even in the present day, so unreasonable as to take offence at the revival of old stories anent their defunct grandfathers, though those very stories were circulated by accredited writers employed by the families themselves.  Some individuals are scandalized when a man who was habitually drunk, is called a drunkard; and ears polite cannot bear the application of plain names to well-known delinquencies.