when Gifford became the editor of Jonson, all these, as well as more modern men, were to be overthrown—Headley, A. Chalmers, Davies, Capell, Hurd, and others. While, as one of the late and principal offenders, Malone, then in his grave, became the primary object of abuse. The late eulogist of the living man became his reviler when dead. The terms “false, mean, base, malicious,” were liberally applied; and simple difference of opinion upon the literary merits of a writer who had lived two hundred years before, was thought sufficient to warrant language applicable only to the perpetrator of a serious moral offence. Such are some of the men who claim to be critics by profession. Habits of irresponsible abuse in anonymous criticism increase by indulgence. Native acerbity or vulgarity, thrust by accident or impudence into the chair of mere opinion, form examples not to imitate but to shun.
In reference to this gratuitous asperity, the younger Boswell justly writes:
