tages which they ſeek.'—True! my male readers will probably exclaim; but let them, before they draw any concluſion, recollect that this was not written originally as deſcriptive of women, but of the rich. In Dr. Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiments, I have found a general character of people of rank and fortune, that, in my opinion, might with the greateſt propriety be applied to the female ſex. I refer the ſagacious reader to the whole compariſon; but muſt be allowed to quote a paſſage to enforce an argument that I mean to inſiſt on, as the one moſt concluſive againſt a ſexual character. For if, excepting warriors, no great men, of any denomination, have ever appeared amongſt the nobility, may it not be fairly inferred that their local ſituation ſwallowed up the man, and produced a character ſimilar to that of women, who are localized, if I may be allowed the word, by the rank they are placed in, by courteſy? Women, commonly called Ladies, are not to be contradicted in company, are not allowed to exert any manual ſtrength; and from them the negative virtues only are expected, when any virtues are expected, patience, docility, good-humour, and flexibility; virtues incompatible with any vigorous exertion of intellect. Beſides, by living more with each other, and being ſeldom abſolutely alone, they are more under the influence of ſentiments than paſſions. Solitude and reflection are neceſſary to give to wiſhes the force of paſſions, and to enable the imagination to enlarge the object, and make it the moſt deſirable. The ſame may be ſaid of the rich; they do not ſufficiently deal in general ideas, collected by impaſſioned thinking,
