tragedy in blank verse and insensibly often feil into this laboured style while writing her novel. It is interesting to compare the style of Camilla with that of her letters, written at the same time. Her letters are easy and natural, but in her novel she has been trying fine writing.
If, however, we consider the character-drawing we find the same power as displayed in the preceding novels. The character of the fop is even decidedly better drawn than that of his predecessors. Lovel in Evelina and Meadows in Cecilia are weakly portrayed in comparison with the f inished picture of Sir Sedley Clarendel. Though Macaulay's opinion that Madame d'Arblay has given us nothing but humours does not seem fair to her, we must admit that Meadows in Cecilia is not a finished character at all, but really a humour. He never opens his mouth but to express apathy and weariness of life. Sir Sedley Clarendel is a man of parts, who simply sacrifices his better self to his vanity, which makes him behave with extreme affectation in order to be considered a man of fashion. He cannot, however, always prevent his good qualities from getting the upperhand, as when he is surprised out of his apathy by the danger that ia threatening Camilla at Tunbridge Wells and he rushes forward to save her life. When afterwards he imagines that Camilla is in love with him, he behaves more naturally, too, at least when no company is near. Clarendel is a clever and agreeable young man, utterly spoilt by his own vanity. Of Meadows we know nothing at all, except his apathy, his weariness and his impudence.
The characters of the cheerful, thoughtless Camilla and the more serious Edgar Mandlebert are well-drawn, too, though the latter's extreme caution in choosing his beloved, due to the influence of his tutor, makes him rather a poor hero. It is more the weak plot than the portrayal of the characters which makes the book dif f kult reading. The long series of misapprehensions between Edgar and Camilla make it extremely tedious. We no longer find the gay,