The Wits and Beaux of Society | Page 8

and Beaux of Society' is a
responsible one, and does not involve the mere attempt to amuse, or the
mere desire to abuse, but requires truth and discrimination; as
embracing just or unjust views of such characters, it may do much
harm or much good. Nevertheless, in spite of these obvious
considerations there do exist worthy persons, even in the present day,
so unreasonable as to take offence at the revival of old stories anent
their defunct grandfathers, though those very stories were circulated by
accredited writers employed by the families themselves. Some
individuals are scandalized when a man who was habitually drunk, is
called a drunkard; and ears polite cannot bear the application of plain
names to well-known delinquencies.
There is something foolish, but respectably foolish, in this wish to shut

out light which has been streaming for years over these old tombs and
memories. The flowers that are cast on such graves cannot, however,
cause us to forget the corruption within and underneath. In
consideration, nevertheless, of a pardonable weakness, all expressions
that can give pain, or which have been said to give pain, have been, in
this Second Edition, omitted; and whenever a mis-statement has crept
in, care has been taken to amend the error.

PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION.
The success of the 'Queens of Society' will have pioneered the way for
the 'Wits and Beaux:' with whom, during the holiday time of their lives,
these fair ladies were so greatly associated. The 'Queens,' whether all
wits or not, must have been the cause of wit in others; their influence
over dandyism is notorious: their power to make or mar a man of
fashion, almost historical. So far, a chronicle of the sayings and doings
of the 'Wits' is worthy to serve as a pendant to that of the 'Queens:'
happy would it be for society if the annals of the former could more
closely resemble the biography of the latter. But it may not be so: men
are subject to temptations, to failures, to delinquencies, to calamities, of
which women can scarcely dream, and which they can only lament and
pity.
Our 'Wits,' too--to separate them from the 'Beaux'--were men who often
took an active part in the stirring events of their day: they assumed to
be statesmen, though, too frequently, they were only politicians. They
were brave and loyal: indeed, in the time of the Stuarts, all the Wits
were Cavaliers, as well as the Beaux. One hears of no repartee among
Cromwell's followers; no dash, no merriment, in Fairfax's staff;
eloquence, indeed, but no wit in the Parliamentarians; and, in truth, in
the second Charles's time, the king might have headed the lists of the
Wits himself--such a capital man as his Majesty is known to have been
for a wet evening or a dull Sunday; such a famous teller of a
story--such a perfect diner-out: no wonder that in his reign we had
George Villiers, second Duke of Buckingham of that family, 'mankind's
epitome,' who had every pretension to every accomplishment combined

in himself. No wonder we could attract De Grammont and Saint
Evremond to our court; and own, somewhat to our discredit be it
allowed, Rochester and Beau Fielding. Every reign has had its wits, but
those in Charles's time were so numerous as to distinguish the era by an
especial brilliancy. Nor let it be supposed that these annals do not
contain a moral application. They show how little the sparkling
attributes herein pourtrayed conferred happiness; how far more the rare,
though certainly real touches of genuine feeling and strong affection,
which appear here and there even in the lives of the most thoughtless
'Wits and Beaux,' elevate the character in youth, or console the spirit in
age. They prove how wise has been that change in society which now
repudiates the 'Wit' as a distinct class; and requires general intelligences
as a compensation for lost repartees, or long obsolete practical jokes.
'Men are not all evil:' so in the life of George Villiers, we find him
kind-hearted, and free from hypocrisy. His old servants--and the fact
speaks in extenuation of one of our wildest Wits and Beaux--loved him
faithfully. De Grammont, we all own, has little to redeem him except
his good-nature: Rochester's latest days were almost hallowed by his
penitence. Chesterfield is saved by his kindness to the Irish, and his
affection for his son. Horace Walpole had human affections, though a
most inhuman pen: and Wharton was famous for his good-humour.
The periods most abounding in the Wit and the Beau have, of course,
been those most exempt from wars, and rumours of wars. The
Restoration; the early period of the Augustan age; the commencement
of the Hanoverian dynasty,--have all been enlivened by Wits and Beaux,
who came