This page has been fully proofread once and needs a second look.

One word as the book itself. It comes to us as a Sanskrit
Anthology, purporting to bring much that is admirable, and
nothing that is not admirable, in Sanskrit verse. That it
faithfully reflects the taste and manners of the times need not
be doubted. What judgment must pass on the Hindu Muse ?
Is Sarasvati justified of these her children?
 
Writing of Subandhu, Fitz Edward Hall has said that to
real tenderness, or sensibility, or to any but mere animal
attachment, he is no less completely an alien than if he
belonged to another species than that of man. "In short, "
he adds, "it is nothing beyond the voucher of the severest
verity to rank him, with his fellow Asiatics, be it in their
highest estate, as no better, at the very best, than a specious
savage."
 
Subandhu and his fellow Asiatics are here to speak for
themselves. On such an issue we need not inquire how far
the indelicacy of Hindu erse, to which Hall is referring, is
merely "not in accordance with modern manners," and how
far it is bad in itself. It is enough to ask the reader if he finds
it difficult to recognise, in the verses that follow, the "touch
of nature.
 
No. 1043.
 
This thought is as a death, that cannot choose
But weep to have that which it fears to lose,
 
"When you are away I long for you; when you are with
me I fear to lose you; I have no joy either in your presence or
your absence".
 
No. 1014.
 
Where beauty moves and wit delights,
And signs of kindness bind me;
There, oh there, where'er I go
I leave my heart behind me.
 
"Remember me, love. Ah, that I cannot do the heart
remembers, and you have stolen mine."