And what would literature or art be without such associations?
Who can tell what we owe to the Mutual Admiration Society of which Shakspeare, and Ben Jonson, and Beaumont and Fletcher were members?
Or to that of which Addison and Steele formed the centre, and which gave us the Spectator?
Or to that where Johnson, and Goldsmith, and Burke, and Reynolds, and Beauclerk, and Boswell, most admiring among all admirers, met together?
Was there any great harm in the fact that the Irvings and Paulding wrote in company?
or any unpardonable cabal in the literary union of Verplanck and Bryant and Sands, and as many more as they chose to associate with them?
The poor creature does not know what he is talking about, when he abuses this noblest of institutions.

Let him inspect its mysteries through the knot-hole he has secured, but not use that orifice as a medium for his popgun.

Such a society is the crown of a literary metropolis; if a town has not material for it, and spirit and good feeling enough to organize it, it is a mere caravansary, fit for a man of genius to lodge in, but not to live in.

Foolish people hate and dread and envy such an association of men of varied powers and influence, because it is lofty, serene, impregnable, and, by the necessity of the case, exclusive.

Wise ones are prouder of the title M.S.