To  this  oracle,  I  think,  we  may  oppose  an  argument  of
considerable  weight,  as  drawn  from  the  general  perception
of  an  affinity,  between  one  sound,  and  one  sense,  in  com-
positions, both  ancient,  and  modern.
In  all  ages,  and  countries,  men  of  an  accurate  ear,  and  a
fine   taste, — whether  learned,  or  illiterate, — have  acknow-


363

kdged,  and   felt,  such  an  affinity,  in  the  works  of  their
poets,  and  orators.
It  must,  in  truth,  be  perceived,  in  fact,  by  those  who  deny
it  in  theory.
Of  this  correspondence, — the  most  admired,  and  sagacious
critics  upon  Homer,  Virgil,  Miltoji,  and  many  others,
furnish  us  with  copious  examples.  Tliey  all  acknowledge
it,  as  a  source  of  beauty,  and  of  energy,  in  the  works  of  these
masters, — though  few  of  them  have  carried  their  speculations
so  far,  as  to  develop  the  element,  or  principle,  from  which
it  arises.
It  cannot  be  ascribed,  implicitly,  or  entirely,  to  an  arti-
ficial arrangement  of  daclyls,  and  spojidees ;  for  it  will
frequently  burst  upon  us,  in  the  midst  of  a  line,  consisting
of  pure  Iambics.  It  is  perceived  in  prose  compositions,
and  in  single  words.  It  must,  therefore,  be  rooted  in  the
powers  of  the  letters, — in  the  choice  of  elementary  sounds,
which  have  some  peculiarity  of  relation  to  the  intended
idea.  And,  if  a  combination  of  sounds,  possesses  a  de-
scriptive energy,  the  elements,  and  principles  of  descrip-
tion must  exist,  in  the  individual  sounds.  A  multiplica-
tion of  mere  cyphers,  never  can  produce  an  efficient
sum.
The  perception  of  such  relations,  is  not  an  artificial  sense,
resulting  from  the  labours  of  critics,  and  of  rhetoricians.
