Boswell's Life of Johnson, how unfair Croker's treatment of Miss Burney was. It should not be regrettcd, however, that Croker's review was ever written, for it called forth an answer from the Edinburgh Review in which periodical Macaulay wrote his well known essay on Madame d'Arblay. Though it contains some slight mistakes, such as the savage. gloom of Mr. Crisp's seclusion and the revision of Cecilia by Dr. Johnson, the review is on the whole excellent. Macaulay defends Miss Burney against the accusation of vanity:
"It would not have been surprising if such success had turned even a strong head and corrupted even a generous and affectionate nature. But in the Diaru we can find no tracé of any feeling inconsistent with a truly modest and amiable disposition. There is, indeed, abundant proof that Frances enjoyed with an intense, though a troubled, joy, the honours which her genius had won; but it is equally dear that her happiness sprang from the happiness of het father, her sister, and her dear Daddy Crisp. While flattered by the great, the opulent, the learned, while followed along the Steyne at Brighton and the Pantiles at Tunbridge Wells by the gaze of admiring crowds, her heart seems to have been still with the little domestic circle in St. Martin's Street. If she recorded with minute diligence all the compliments, delicate and coarse, whkh she heard wherever she turned, she recorded them for the eyes of two or three persons who had loved her from infancy, who had loved her in obscurity, and to whom her fame gave the purest and most exquisite delight. Nothing can be more unjust than to confound these outpourings of a kind heart, sure of perfect sympathy, with the egotkm of a bluestocking who prates to all who come near her about her own novel or her own volume of sonnets."1
Mr, Shuckburgh said of the Diary: "Madame d'Arblay's
1 Edinburgh Review, Jan. 1843.