The instances of her drollery are rather hinted by the Diarists for the benefit of those who had met her and could inhale the atmosphere at a word.  Drolleries, humours, reputed witticisms, are like odours of roast meats, past with the picking of the joint.  Idea is the only vital breath.  They have it rarely, or it eludes the chronicler.  To say of the great erratic and forsaken Lady A****, after she had accepted the consolations of Bacchus, that her name was properly signified in asterisks ’as she was now nightly an Ariadne in heaven through her God,’ sounds to us a roundabout, with wit somewhere and fun nowhere.  Sitting at the roast we might have thought differently.  Perry Wilkinson is not happier in citing her reply to his compliment on the reviewers’ unanimous eulogy of her humour and pathos:—­the ’merry clown and poor pantaloon demanded of us in every work of fiction,’ she says, lamenting the writer’s compulsion to go on producing them for applause until it is extremest age that knocks their knees.  We are informed by Lady Pennon of ’the most amusing description of the first impressions of a pretty English simpleton in Paris’; and here is an opportunity for ludicrous contrast of the French and English styles of pushing flatteries—­’piping to the charmed animal,’ as Mrs. Warwick terms it in another place:  but Lady Pennon was acquainted with the silly woman of the piece, and found her amusement in the ‘wonderful truth’ of that representation.

Diarists of amusing passages are under an obligation to paint us a realistic revival of the time, or we miss the relish.  The odour of the roast, and more, a slice of it is required, unless the humorous thing be preternaturally spirited to walk the earth as one immortal among a number less numerous than the mythic Gods.  ‘He gives good dinners,’ a candid old critic said, when asked how it was that he could praise a certain poet.  In an island of chills and fogs, coelum crebris imbribus ac nebulis foedum, the comic and other perceptions are dependent on the stirring of the gastric juices.  And such a revival by any of us would be impolitic, were it a possible attempt, before our systems shall have been fortified by philosophy.  Then may it be allowed to the Diarist simply to relate, and we can copy from him.

Then, ah! then, moreover, will the novelist’s Art, now neither blushless infant nor executive man, have attained its majority.  We can then be veraciously historical, honestly transcriptive.  Rose-pink and dirty drab will alike have passed away.  Philosophy is the foe of both, and their silly cancelling contest, perpetually renewed in a shuffle of extremes, as it always is where a phantasm falseness reigns, will no longer baffle the contemplation of natural flesh, smother no longer the soul issuing out of our incessant strife.  Philosophy bids us to see that we are not so pretty as rose-pink, not so repulsive as dirty drab; and that instead of everlastingly shifting those