Tag: Daniel Webster

May the Sun in His Course Visit No Land More Free, More Happy, More Lovely, Than This Our Own Country

Daniel Webster? Herbert Hoover? Apocryphal?

Dear Quote Investigator: Extraordinary care should be taken whenever one plans to etch a quotation into a granite monument. That is why I am asking you about the accuracy of the following patriotic statement attributed to U.S. statesman and orator Daniel Webster:

May the sun in his course visit no land more free, more happy, more lovely, than this our own country.

The proposed monument will be shaped like a sundial and will honor veterans. Would you please help check the veracity of Webster’s words?

Quote Investigator: On February 22, 1832, a celebration dinner was held for the centennial anniversary of the birth of U.S. Founding Father George Washington. Festivities were held in the city named after the famous first president, and Daniel Webster delivered the main oration. He hoped that the U.S. experiment in democratic self-governance would continue to thrive, and at the end of the speech he audaciously speculated about another commemoration by “disciples of Washington” that might occur one hundred years into the distant future. The optimistic address finished with a toast. Boldface added to excerpts by QI:[1] 1832 March 18, Newbern Spectator, The Dinner in Honor pf the Memory of Washington, Start Page 1, Quote Page 2, Column 1, New Bern, North Carolina. (Newspapers_com)

. . . so surely may they see, as we now see, the flag of the Union floating on the top of the Capitol; and then, as now, may the sun in his course visit no land more free, more happy, more lovely, than this our own Country.
Gentlemen, I propose—
“THE MEMORY OF GEORGE WASHINGTON.”

The text above was from a contemporaneous newspaper account published in the “Newbern Spectator” of New Bern, North Carolina on March 18, 1932. The same text also appeared in an 1832 book that recorded “Speeches and Other Proceedings at The Public Dinner in Honor of The Centennial Anniversary of Washington”.[2]1832, Speeches and Other Proceedings at The Public Dinner in Honor of The Centennial Anniversary of Washington, Held on February 22, 1932, Address by Daniel Webster, Start Page 3, Quote Page 11, … Continue reading

Here are additional selected citations in chronological order.

Continue reading May the Sun in His Course Visit No Land More Free, More Happy, More Lovely, Than This Our Own Country

References

References
↑1 1832 March 18, Newbern Spectator, The Dinner in Honor pf the Memory of Washington, Start Page 1, Quote Page 2, Column 1, New Bern, North Carolina. (Newspapers_com)
↑2 1832, Speeches and Other Proceedings at The Public Dinner in Honor of The Centennial Anniversary of Washington, Held on February 22, 1932, Address by Daniel Webster, Start Page 3, Quote Page 11, Printed at the Office of Jonathan Elliot, City of Washington. (Google Books Full View) link

Your Manuscript Is Good and Original, But What is Original Is Not Good; What Is Good Is Not Original

Samuel Johnson? Martin Sherlock? Johann Heinrich Voss? Gotthold Ephraim Lessing? Richard Brinsley Sheridan? Daniel Webster? Samuel Wilberforce

Dear Quote Investigator: The great lexicographer Dr. Samuel Johnson is credited with a famously devastating remark about a book he was evaluating:

Your manuscript is both good and original; but the part that is good is not original, and the part that is original is not good.

I have never found a source for this quotation in the writings of Johnson, and I have become skeptical about this attribution. Do you know if he wrote this?

Quote Investigator: No substantive evidence has emerged to support the ascription to Samuel Johnson. In this article QI will trace the evolution of this saying and closely related expressions which have been attributed to a variety of prominent individuals. The following four statements have distinct meanings, but they can be clustered together semantically and syntactically.

  • What is new is not good; and what is good is not new.
  • What is new is not true; and what is true is not new.
  • What is original is not good; what is good is not original.
  • What is new is not valuable; what is valuable is not new.

The earliest evidence known to QI of a member of this cluster appeared in 1781 and was written by Reverend Martin Sherlock who was reviewing a popular collection of didactic letters published in book form. Lord Chesterfield composed the letters and sent them to his son with the goal of teaching him to become a man of the world and a gentleman. Sherlock was highly critical:[1]1781, Letters on Several Subjects by The Rev. Martin Sherlock [Chaplain to the Right Honourable The Earl of Bristol], Volume 2, Letter XIV, Start Page 123, Quote Page 128 and 129, Printed for J. … Continue reading

His principles of politeness are unexceptionable; and ought to be adopted by all young men of fashion; but they are known to every child in France; and are almost all translated from French books. In general, throughout the work, what is new is not good; and what is good is not new.

This expression was similar to the one attributed to Samuel Johnson. The word “new” was used instead of “original”. Yet, this passage did not include the humorous prefatory phrase which would have labeled the work “both new and good” before deflating it.

In the 1790s a German version of the saying using “new” and “true” was published in a collection by the translator and poet Johann Heinrich Voss. This instance did include a prefatory phrase stating that the “book teaches many things new and true”:[2]1796, Gedichte, Johann Heinrich Voss, Volume 2, Section: Epigramme [Epigrams], (Standalone short saying titled “XVI: An mehrere Bücher” [16: Of several Books]), Quote Page 281, Frankfurt … Continue reading[3]2006, Brewer’s Famous Quotations, Edited by Nigel Rees, Section Harold MacMillan, Quote Page 305 and 306, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London. (Verified on paper) (This reference gives the following … Continue reading

Dein redseliges Buch lehrt mancherlei Neues und Wahres,
Wäre das Wahre nur neu, wäre das Neue nur wahr!

Here is an English translation:

Your garrulous book teaches many things new and true,
If only the true were new, if only the new were true!

In 1800 a reviewer in “The British Critic” lambasted a book using a version of the brickbat with “new” and “good”:[4]1800 June, The British Critic, Foreign Catalogue: France, Article 56: (Review of Book: Lycée, ou, Cours de littérature ancienne et moderne, Book Author: J. F. Laharpe [Jean-Francois de La Harp]), … Continue reading

In this part there are some good and some new things; but the good are not new, and the new are not good. Much time is employed in considering the opinion of the poet du Belloy, at present forgotten and of little consequence, who professed to prefer the French to the ancient languages.

Here are additional selected citations in chronological order.

Continue reading Your Manuscript Is Good and Original, But What is Original Is Not Good; What Is Good Is Not Original

References

References
↑1 1781, Letters on Several Subjects by The Rev. Martin Sherlock [Chaplain to the Right Honourable The Earl of Bristol], Volume 2, Letter XIV, Start Page 123, Quote Page 128 and 129, Printed for J. Nichols, T. Cadell, P. Elmsly, H. Payne and N. Conant, London. (Google Books full view) link
↑2 1796, Gedichte, Johann Heinrich Voss, Volume 2, Section: Epigramme [Epigrams], (Standalone short saying titled “XVI: An mehrere Bücher” [16: Of several Books]), Quote Page 281, Frankfurt und Leipzig. (Google Books full view) link
↑3 2006, Brewer’s Famous Quotations, Edited by Nigel Rees, Section Harold MacMillan, Quote Page 305 and 306, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London. (Verified on paper) (This reference gives the following citation for the J. H. Voss quotation: Vossischer Musenalmanach (1792; some references give a date of 1772 which appears to be inaccurate)
↑4 1800 June, The British Critic, Foreign Catalogue: France, Article 56: (Review of Book: Lycée, ou, Cours de littérature ancienne et moderne, Book Author: J. F. Laharpe [Jean-Francois de La Harp]), Start Page 695, Quote Page 696, Printed for F. and C. Rivington, London. (Google Books full view) link