A Defence of dramatick poetry being a review of Mr. Collier's View of the immorality and profaneness of the stage.

THE Ingenious Mr. Collier in cal∣ling his Learned Treatise, A short View of the Immorality and Pro∣faneness of the English Stage, &c. has not given it a Title that fully reaches the Subject, and the great Design of that La∣borious piece of Oratory: For in his whole Discourse, which he divides into six Chap∣ters; In the First he confronts the present Stage, by setting forth the general Inno∣cence and Modesty of the Ancient Greek and Latin Dramatick Poetry; and in the Four next Chapters de descends to a View of the English Theatres, where he Seats himself down, and very Magisterially sits Censor and Judge upon several particular Dramatick Offenders and Offences, in some, and only some, of our late Plays.

Hitherto, the Title Page seems to carry the Contents of the Book, as if his present Work in hand were only a Christian Corre∣ction of Abuses and Corruption, viz. Pro∣faneness and Immorality crept into the Stage. But in his last Chapter, he plainly tells us, his Design is not Reformation, but Eradica∣tion: For here he throws by the Pruning Hook, and takes up the Axe.

In due prevention therefore against so dangerous a Weapon, in so angry a Hand, we'll endeavour first to Guard the Root; and afterwards we'll joyn with him, and give him free leave to Lop off as many of the Luxurious Branches, as shall not be found worth saving.

To begin therefore with some Exami∣nation of that Last Chapter, which he En∣titles, The Opinion of Paganism, of the Church, and State, concerning the STAGE, here likewise we'll set out first from Home, viz. in the Opinion of the English State, &c.

Here, says our Author, I shall come down to our own Constitution, and I find by 39th of Eliz. chap. 4. and 1 Iac. chap. 7th.

That all Common Players of Interludes, counterfeit Egyp∣tians, &c. shall be taken adjudged and deem'd Rogues, Uaga∣bonds, and Sturdy Beggars, and shall sustain all Pains and Punishments, as by this Act is in that behalf appointed.

The Penalties are Infamous to the last degree, and Capital too, unless they give over. 'Tis true, the First Act, viz. 39th of Eliz. excepts those Players which belong

to a Baron or other Person of higher De∣gree, and are Authorized to Play under the Hand and Seal of Arms of such Baron or Personage.

But in the latter Statute this Privilege of Licensing is taken away, and all of them are expresly brought under the Pe∣nalty without distinction.

'Tis true in this last Act, as he says, the Barons Privilege of Licensing Players was taken away; but this Author, that reads no farther than what wright or wrong serves his own Turn, and quotes Authority but by Halves, forgets that that Act of the Ist. of Iac. was but a Temporary Act, to hold in force but that Sessions of Parliament. But this small Trip we'll forgive him.

But for a little more Light into this 39th. of Eliz. by way of Context to explain the Cause. The Clause against Players begins thus. Be it Enacted that all Persons calling themselves Scholars, going about beg∣ging; all Seafaring Men, pretending Losses of their Ships or Goods on the Sea, going about the Country beg∣ging; All idle Persons going a∣bout in any Country, either beg∣ging

or using any subtle Craft, or unlawful Games or Plays, or feigning themselves to have knowledge in Physiognomy, Palmistry, or other like Crafty Science, or such like Fantasti∣cal Imaginations: All Persons that be, or utter themselves to be Proctors, Procurors, Patent∣gatherers, Collectors for Goals, Prisons or Hospitals, &c.

This Law, 'tis plain, is particularly Le∣vel'd against a sort of People that have no settled Habitation, Rovers up and down the Country, and therefore called Vagabonds. But what's all this to the Establishment of our Publick Theatres? Besides, why are all Offenders in this Act thus stigmatiz'd and punish'd as Rouges, but for the practi∣sing Frauds and Cheats upon the People?

Nay, this Act chiefly strikes not at the Professions of the Offenders here mention'd, but the Abuse or Corruption of them, as in the Scholar, Seaman, Proctor, Procuror, Patent-gatherer or Collector, as well those as are really so, as those that utter them∣selves such. The Mendicant Scholar, for Instance, as a Scandal to Learning, the U∣niversities,

nay, perhaps the Church it self; the Seaman as an Impostor, viz. with his pretended Losses; the Proctor as a Fomen∣tor of Litigious Suits among the People, &c. the Patent-gatherer under the Mask of Pub∣lick charity, Collecting the Mony into his own Pocket, not only to the Abuse of the Country, but to the very Scandal of the Government, when the most Pious Royal Acts of Grace shall be thus fraudulently perverted, to the carrying on so notorious a Cheat: And therefore the Patent-gatherer or Collector Unlicens'd was thus branded, &c. And undobtedly 'twas much upon the same scandalous Account, that the Un∣licens'd Players of Interludes are here herded among all those Rascally Companions: For why should not the Government, with all Reason, surmize an equal Danger to the Pub∣lick, from such Unqualify'd Players, and accordingly provide against them, as being Persons who under no Warrant of Authority, nor Honourable Patron to vouch for their Integrity, might be as justly suspected of Ro∣guery, Cheating or Pilfering, as any other of their Brethren in Iniquity, mention'd in the Act? Nor can this particular Brand up∣on the Offenders, here mentioned, bear any shadow of Construction to Asperse, Taint or Scandalize, the Profession of Playing it self, and the Publick Theatres supported by

Royal Patents, &c. any more than the same Brand upon the Scholar, the Proctor, the Colle∣ctor, &c. under the formentioned Corruption, should be interpreted a Reflection upon Reli∣gion, Law, Learning or Charity. Nor are His Majesty's Servants, the present Authorized Actors, any more concerned at the Common mistaken Cry of Fools from starting this Statute against them; than any honest Rea∣der of the Ingenious Mr. Collier, with a Ta∣lent of Common Sense, ought to be convin∣ced, That this Opinion of the State concern∣ing the Stage, here Quoted, makes any thing for his Cause.

About the Year 1580. there was a Peti∣tion made to Queen Elizabeth for suppres∣sing of Play-houses. 'Tis somewhat re∣markable, and therfore I shall describe some part of the Relation.

Many Godly Citizens, and other well disposed Gentlemen of London, considering that Play∣houses, and Dicing-houses, were Traps for Young Gentlemen and others, and perceiving the many Inconveniencies and great Damage that would ensue upon the long-suffering of the same, not only to particular Persons, but to the whole City; and that it would be a great Disparagement to the Governours, and a Disho∣nour to the Government of this Honourable Ci∣ty, if they should any longer continue, acquaint∣ed some Pious Magistrates therewith, desiring

them to take some Course for the Suppression of Common Play-houses, Dicing-houses, &c. with∣in the City of London and Liberties thereof, who thereupon made humble Suit to Queen Eli∣zabeth, and her Privy-Council, and obtain'd Leave of her Majesty to thrust the Players out of the City, and to pull down all Play-houses and Dicing-houses within their Liberties; which ac∣cordingly was effected. And the Play-houses in Grace-Church-Street, &c. were quite put down and suppress'd. Rawlidge his Monster lately found out, &c. p. 2, 3, 4.

The Name of this Author that Mr. Colli∣er has here Quoted, being utterly a Stranger to all the great Scholars in Title-page Learn∣ing through St. Paul's Church-yard or Lit∣tle Britain, I am sorry I am so much in the Dark, that neither Stow, Baker, Cambden, nor Holinshed, make any mention of this Revolution in or about the Year 1580, viz. this Abdication of the Publick Play-houses by Queen Elizbeth; however not to dispute the Veracity of an Affirmative in Verbo Sa∣cerdotis, but take it as an Orthodox Record, I cannot but stand a little amaz'd to think what wondrous State-opinion he has here discover'd.

First, 'tis here observable that the fore∣mention'd Grievances alleged against Play∣houses, were so far from a publick Censur of the State, that they were only a private Com∣plaint

of some Godly Citizens, &c. who therewith acquainted some Magistrates, (the Magistrates themselves were not the first Complainants.) The Foundation of, and Arguments against this Grievance, was on∣ly on the score of Inconvenience and Damage, that their Continuance and Sufferance on that Account would be a Dishonour to the Government of the City, not of the State nor Church: For her were no Suggestions either of Immorality, Lewdness, Corruption of Man∣ners or Vanity, or any Religious charge a∣gainst them, as Godly Men as the Complai∣nants are here presented; whilst on the con∣trary the whole Accusation against them, and the whole Godly Fear was founded expresly on no other danger, then the entrapping the Youth of the City, whether Gentle or Sim∣ple, whether Gentlemens Sons or Citizens Pretences or Servants, undoubtedly to the squandering away their Parents or Masters Money; and therefore, if too long suffer'd, a publick Inconvenience or Damage would ensue to the whole City. Hereupon these Complainants Petition'd the Magistracy, and the Magistracy the Queen; and her Gracious Royal Grant was this, That that Eye-sore, a Play-house in Grace-Church-Street, in the Heart of the Metropolis, should be supprest, and the Players thrust out of the City of Lon∣don, and possibly banish'd as far as to Westmin∣ster.

And what makes the whole Grievance (without Ralleay) very remarkable, Here are Play-houses and Dicing-houses, both joyn'd in one Sentence of City Excommunication, the Dicing-houses of the two, so much the more dangerous Inhabitants within the Walls, That the Youth of the City, viz. Sons, Servants, Prentices or Cash-keepers, from so fatal a Temptation and Snare, might be truly Trapt into the Loss of those Extrava∣gant Sums, perhaps purloin'd or embezell'd from Parents or Masters, to a very dangerous Consequene to the whole City indeed; whilst on the other side, the small Figure, the Low-priz'd Play-houses made in those Days, rendred them so little Threatners of any such Capital Danger; that both Dice∣house and Play-house are here Sentenced to Banishment together, the one for Suspicion of Robbery, and the other of Petty Larceny.

Now these two Authorities being all he says upon that Head, viz. The Opinion of the State concerning the Stage, I have Quoted them verbatim at full length, that the Rea∣der may guess the strength of this Learned Argumentator, by this first Sample we have given of him.

Ex pede Herculem.

But to match him with an Opinion of the State concerning the Stage, out of Stow's

Chronicle, Anno 1583. not above three Years after the said Abidication.

Stow 23d Eliz. Comedians and Stage-players of former Time, were very poor and ignorant in respect of these in this Time; but being now grown very skilful and exquisite Actors for all Matters, they were entertain'd into the Service of divers Great Lords, out of which Companies there were Twelve of the Best chosen, at the request of Sir Francis Walsingham, they were Sworn the Queens Servants, and were allow'd Wages, and Live∣ry's, as Grooms of the Chamber, and until that Year 1583, the Queen had no Players. Amongst those Twelve Players were Two rare Men, viz. Thomas Wilson for a quick, delicate, refin'd extemporal Wit, and Richard Tareletion, for a wonderous plentiful, pleasant, extemporal Wit. He was the wonder of his Time. He ly∣eth Buried in Shoreditch.

Now from this Authority of Mr. Stow, which we may venture to call Authentick, it looks a little odly, that this Chronicle should take such particular notice of the Ex∣alted Court Favours, that smiled upon these Darling of the Stage, and be so silent upon the Calamity of the other Excluded City Members of the same Fraternity. Methinks the pulling down of Houses, and Banishing the whole publick City-diversion, but just three Years before, shou'd have made as

loud an Alarum at this Court Preserment to their Younger Brothers, and certainly deserved as large a Page in this History, at least for the Queen's Honour: For it looks like a little piece of Injustice to that Glorious Memory, to let any part of publick Refor∣mation, such as the suppression of Vice, as Dice-houses and Play-houses, (and such our Author here designs it) perform'd by that Illustrious Princess, lye untransmitted to Po∣sterity. But when Play-houses and Dice-houses are so suspiciously joyn'd together by this unknown Author, what if these Play-houses should prove but Gaming-houses at last? is looks very shrewdly that way, all Circum∣stances consider'd. But this I only surmize; besides, it looks like misdoubting the Ingeni∣ous Mr. Collier's Testimony, and so I'll ra∣ther give him his Point.

However, as I am ready to do him Ju∣stice as to his Quotations, I hope he will do the like by mine, and allow me at least this Triumph to the Stage, That the Pious Queen had a better Opinion of Players than Mr. Collier's Godly Citizens, when she did them the Honour of Entertaining them as her Menials in her Livery, and under her own Roof. But perhaps that Princess design'd to make a Reformation in the Stage, as well as the Church; and therefore was resolv'd to redeem the Stage-players from their Original

State of Infamy and Slavery, Quoted pag. 241. where he tells you, That the Romans refused the Jus Civitatis to Players, seiz'd their Freedom, and made them perfectly Foreign to the Govenment, which St. Augustine was pleas'd to commend 'em for. And afterwards page 256. The whole Tribe of them was thrown out of all Honour and Privilege. They were nei∣ther suffer'd to be Lords nor Gentlemen.

Now notwithstanding not only all these Pagan Blots in their Scutcheon, but even the very Theodostan Code, that page 241. calls them Personae Inhonestae; belike this Gracious Queen was pleased to give them that gentler Treat∣ment, under her English, them they had found either from the Civil or Heathen Laws; and at least advanc'd them to tread very near the Heels of Gentlemen, under such Royal Smiles, and the kind Court Reception she gave them.

But methinks this Ingenious Quoter of History need not have look'd so far back as to 1580. or Queen Elizabeths 39. or Iac. 1st. for a National Opinion of the Stage: Here was a Modern one of much fresher Memo∣ry, and more pat to his purpose, when the Stage-plays lay under a more Universal Ab∣dication, viz. in the Reign of those later Powers at the Helm, who with no little A∣ctivity

leap'd over the Block, and the whole White-hall Stage it stood upon, and yet stum∣bled at the Straw. &c. A profane Comedy or Tragedy, were all Heathen and Anti∣christian, but Pious Regicide and Rebellion, were Religion and Sanctity with them. The Camel would go down, but the Gnat stuck in their Throats.

Now this Learned Gentleman ought by all means to have Quoted this National Opi∣nion of the Stage, as not only an Argument much more to his Cause, but a Relation that in pure Gratitude to the Patrons of his Book, ought not to have been omitted. For as this Author's View of the Stage is that more than Ordinary Darling to the Gentlemen of that Kidney, he cou'd in Honour and Ju∣stice do no less than tickle 'em with their own Memoirs. Nay as the whole Society of the Gentlemen of the Calves-head Feast, have made this Book their particular Bosom Favourite, it would be prudent in the Au∣thor, (and perhaps the Book was Compos'd and Calculated for that purpose) to harangue so considerable a Party; for 'tis a hard World we live in, and the gaining of good Friends may be serviceable.

From these, next let us see how the Stage stands discouraged by the Laws of other Countries, as he has alrady shew'd you how it stands in our own.

To begin with the Athenians. These People Plutarch tells you, thought a Comedy so unreputable a Performance, that they made a Law, that no Iudge of the Areopagus should write one.

This Learned Gentleman is resolved to make his Foreign State-Authority against the Stage and his English one all of a piece. For methinks this Athenian Law, that only pro∣hibited the Gravity of a Judge from writing a Comedy, Recorded by Mr. Collier in Mo∣numental Black and White, as the Athenian State-opinion against Plays, is certainly that most charming Argument, enough to set Heraclitus himself a smiling.

The Lacedemonians, who were remar∣kable for the Wisdom of their Laws, &c. Their Government would not endure the Stage under any Regulation.

Well, here's one positive Bill of Exclusion.

To pass on to the Romans. Tully in∣forms us, that their Predecessors counted all Stage-plays uncreditable and scandalous. Insomuch that any Roman who turned Actor, was not only to be Degraded, but likewise as it were Disincorporated, and Unnaturaliz'd by the Order of the Cen∣sors.

This Roman State-opinion is almost as Doughty a Quotation as his Athenian one. For here the Predecessors of the Romans counted Plays uncreditable, &c. But their kinder Successors, belike were of a contrary State-Opinion. Their Fore-fathers only past it as a Temporary Act, like the first of Iac. For the uncreditable Player was after∣wards set rectus in Curia. And how did those opinionated Predecessors (pray mark it) handle the Roman Offender that turn'd Au∣thor? Why truly, as Cicero Cited by St. Au∣gustine tells us, They Disincorporated and Unnaturaliz'd him. And how did they do all this? Why truly, as it were. Their Censors of the Stage did put their Order in Execution but very gently. Well, to do this Author as much Justice, as he has done the Roman Censors, I must own to the World, that he argues (as it were) most judi∣ciously, and, as it were, to the purpose.

We read in Livy, That the Young People kept their Fabulae Attellanae to themselves.

They would not suffer this Diversion to be blemish'd by the Stage. For this Reason, as the Historian observes the Actors or the Fabulae Attellanae were neither Expell'd their Tribe, nor refused to serve in Arms, both which Penalties it appears the Com∣mon Players lay under.

Here Livy gives us another Roman State-Account in Relation to the Stage, viz. That some of their Dramatick Entertainments were thought worthy to be the particular Performance of Gentlemen, who belike were either so pleas'd with it, or so proud of it, as to Monopolize the Diversion to themselves, and all without the least Stain to their Gentility. That Lash of the Roman Cen∣sors was only, as it appears, or, as it were, for the poorer Hirelings Players; and for this very good Reason,

Et quod Turpe est cerdoni Volesos Brutosque decebit.

Playing in it self belike was no fault, ta∣king Money for it was all.

His last State Opinion is,

That in the Theodosian Code Players are called Personae Dishonestae, &c.

That is (to Translate it softly) Persons Maimd, and blemish'd in their Reputation. Their Pictures might be seen at the Play-house, but were not per∣mitted to hang in any creditable Place of the Town, the Function of the Players being scandalous by the Civil Law.

As scandalous as the Civil Law had ren∣der'd Players, however these scandalous Fel∣lows were handled as softly as Mr. Collier Tran∣slates;

Their scandal was so little a publick Nuisance, that the Christian Government, even in its primitive Lustre, always suffer'd them amongst them; and as Gondibert says,

—Is not Powers Permission a Consent, Which is in Kings the same as to Ordain; And Ills ordain'd are free from punishment?

But of this Subject, I shall have occasion to be more at large.

These few State Memoris against the Stage, that Stage that Flourish'd in the Greek and Roman Empires, above a Thou∣sand Years together; in the Histories of so many Ages, and through two such Spaci∣ous Empires, are all he can find us; I dare not say, will not; for he's never sparing of Scandal if he knew where to get it.

To all these State Authorities, he finishes that Head of his Discourse with a long Pa∣storal Letter of the Lord Bishop of Arras in Flanders, publish'd about two Years ago a∣gainst Plays; too long here to repeat.

But here I am afraid our Author mi∣stakes himself. For one single Flandrian Doctor, as I take it, is not a whole National Opinion; and therefore this Pastoral Letter is but a very indifferent Authority upon that Head.

Now for another Head, which he calls the Testimony of the most celebrated Hea∣then Philosophers, Orators and Historians, concerning the Stage.

To begin with Plato, this Philosopher tells us,

That Plays raise the Passions, and pervert the use of them, and by con∣sequence are dangerous to Morality. For this Reason he banishes these Diversions his Common-wealth.

Aristotle lays it down for a Rule,

That the Law ought to forbid young People the seeing of Comedies, such Permissions not being safe till Age and Discipline had confirmed them in Sobriety, fortified their Virtue, and made 'em as it were proof against Debauchery. That the force of Musick and Action is very affecting, it commands the Audience, and changes the Passions to a resemblance of the Matter before them.

Here the Charge of Plato and Aristotle a∣gainst Plays somewhat agrees, viz. in Rais∣ing the Passions, which Aristotle Expounds the changing the Passions of the Audience to a Resemblance of, or Sympathy with, the Matter before them; only Plato sat a little the severer Judge upon them; for he Banisht them his Common-wealth: But Aristotle car∣ries not Matters so high as to a total Exclu∣sion, but allows them as an innocent Diver∣sion

to Persons of mature Age and Discre∣tion.

But methinks Mr. Collier gives but a lame Account of Plato's Reason for Banish∣ing Plays from out his Common-wealth. For I can hardly believe that that Learned Philosopher, whatever Motives he had for Excluding Plays from his Government, would have talk'd so far out of his own na∣tural Philosophy, as to tell us that Raising a Passion perverts the use of it. For if, as A∣ristotle explains the Case, the Raising the Passion is here meant, That the Passion re∣presented on the Stage imprints the same Passion into the Audience (a Point which we shall hardly grant him, and which we shall have occasion to speak of hereafter:) Yet all this while, if the worst Passion or Representation on the Stage should have this wondrous Operation upon the frail Au∣dience; For instance, if a Man should see a Hercules Furens, and grow as mad, and pull up Oaks as fast as he; or a Lustful Tar∣quin, and presently fall a Ravishing: Or a Young Lady should see a lewd Thais, and immediately take Taint, and play the Wan∣ton like her; however here's no perverting the use of the worst of all these Passions. 'Tis true, all these foremention'd Passions are none of the best: But the worst Passion in producing its own natural bad Effects,

Plato would hardly have call'd it, perverting the use of the Passion. But Mr. Collier in verbo Sacerdotis assures us, he Translates faithfully, and therefore as wise a Man as Plato was, we are bound to give it against him.

Tully cries out upon Licentious Plays and Poems, as the Bane of Sobriety and Wife thinking. That Comedy subsists up∣on Lewdness, and that Pleasure is the root of all Evil.

Plutarch, he tells us, was of the Opini∣on that Plays were dangerous to corrupt Young People: (And here he joyns with Aristotle.) And therefore Stage-Poetry, when it grows too hardy and licentious, ought to be checkt.

Here Plutarch concurs with Tully, viz. That Plays are to be checkt only when too Licentious, as the Bane of Sobriety, and an Excitation to Lewdness.

Livy reports the Original of Plays a∣mong the Romans, viz. That they were brought in upon the score of Religion, to pacifie the Gods, and remove a Mortality. But then he adds, That the Motives are sometimes good, when the Means are stark naught; that the Remedy in this Case was worse than the Disease, and the

Atonement more Infectious than the Plague.

Livy is an Author, that Mr. Collier has all the reason in the World to set a value upon; for he's a Man of his own Gall. He owns that Plays were Originally an Institution founded upon Religion, that by their Di∣vine Power and Influence they pacified the Anger of the Gods, and removed a Pesti∣lence, or some other general Mortality. (For he plainly confesses they did the Work, not the Cure design'd, but perform'd.) Yet with all these sovereign and pacifick Vir∣tues, and the whole Glory of a National Deliverance wrought by them, the Remedy was a worse Plague than that it had cured. Could Mr. Collier himself have declaim'd more pathetically!

Valerius Maximus, Livy's Cotemporary, gives much the same account of the Rise of Theatres at Rome. 'Twas Devotion that built them. And for the Perform∣ance of those Places, which Mr. Dryden calls the Ornaments; this Author Censures as the Blemishes of Peace: And which is more, he affirms, They were the occasi∣ons of Civil Distractions, and that the State first blush'd, and then bled for the Entertainment. He concludes,, the Con∣sequences of Plays were intollerable.

And very well he might conclude so, if he was of his own Cotemporaries Opini∣on, viz. That they were a worse Plague than what they cured. But methinks these two Roman Authors between them have given Plays an unaccountable Power; for belike they could make Peace in Heaven, and raise Wars on Earth; they pacified the Gods, but set the World at Dissention. And indeed had either the Spirit of a Livy or Col∣lier reign'd amongst them, those Civil Di∣stractions had been not at all to be won∣der'd at: For such angry Gentlemen would have found Matter of Quarrel with Plays, though for their atoning of Heaven, and averting of Judgements.

Seneca, the Philosopher, he tells us, was very angry at the Play-house, and for this Reason,

That scarce any Body would ap∣ply themselves to the study of Nature and Morality, unless when the Play-house was shut, and the Weather foul. That there was no Body to teach Philosophy, because there was no Body to learn it. But that the Stage had Nurseries and Company enough.

This Quarrel of Seneca against the Stage, I confess was highly reasonable; for un∣doubtedly that angry Gentleman of Learn∣ing was sensibly touch'd in the most tender part, viz. Honour and Interest. Perhaps the

Auditory had found as much good Instru∣ction to be glean'd up at a Play-house Le∣cture, as at a Philosophy one; and so be∣cause the Play-house-School got ground of the Philosophers, 'twas high Time, to cry out, Great was his own Diana of Ephesus.

Tacitus relating how Nero hired decay'd Gentlemen, for the Stage, complains of the Mismanagement; and lets us know, 'twas the part of a Prince, to Relieve their Ne∣cessity, and not to tempt it, &c. And that his Bounty should rather have set them above an ill Practice, then put them up∣on it.

Though Nero's Conduct, was not al∣ways to be Vindicated, however, begging both Tacitus and Mr. Collier's Pardon, I must give it on his side in this Case; and say, he was here very much in the Right. For if that Prince thought it no Degradation to his own Imperial Dignity, Personally to Act in Plays himself, I know no Reason he had to think it either a Shame or a Conde∣scension in a Private Gentleman, and a De∣cay'd one too, to come upon the Stage. If the Sovereign could play the Histrio, sure the Subject was not above it.

Plays, in the Opinion of the Judicious Plutarch, are dangerous to corrupt Young People; and therefore Stage-Poetry, when

it grows too Hardy and Licentious, ought to be check'd.

Here Plutarch's Charge against the Play-house, is not over severe; the Dangers from the Stage only threaten'd the Younger sort of People. Wisdom and Gravity, nay, pos∣sibly Mr. Collier himself, might enter a Play-house Walls, and come off unhurt. Nay, as Dangerous as it might be even to Youth it self; the Danger belike lay not either in the Play-house or the Play; but the Abuses and Corruptions that crept into the Representations there: For he condemns the Stage-Poetry, but only when it grows too Hardy and too Licentious. Plutarch's Check does not reach Mr. Collier's, he brings only the pruning Hook.

I have here recited every Individual Au∣thority quoted by Mr. Collier, of his Hea∣then Philosophers, Historians, and Orators; I think they are somewhat short of half a Score. And how far their several Authorities reach, I hope I have indifferently well ex∣plain'd.

Well, to Sum up this Heathenish Evi∣dence. This Learned Scholiast has made hard shift to muster up a little above half a dozen Philosophers, Orators and Historians, that have either enter'd their Pagan Protests,

or prefer'd some Arraignment against Plays.

Now the particular Opinions of not half a score of these Dissenting Ethnick Doctors, out of at least half as many hundred of that Fraternity, especially too at their rate of talking, or Mr. Collier for 'em, is no more a Conclusive Argument, in my simple Judgment, against the Stage; Then a Dio∣genes in his Tub and his Rags; or an Epi∣mantus at his Roots and his Water, should perswade any Rational Man from a clean Shirt upon his Back, and a good House o're his Head; or a good Dish of Meat and a Bottle of Wine for his Dinner, viz. if he is able to purchase it.

And now as doughtily as these Orators have supported his Cause, upon this Dimi∣nitive Foundation, what a Colossus has he rais'd.

For he concludes upon this Head, with telling us,

This was the Opinion of those Celebrated Authors, with respect to Thea∣tres. They charge 'em with the Corruption of Principles and Manners, and lay in all imaginable Caution against them. And yet these Men had seldom any thing but this World in their Scheme; and form'd their Judgment only upon Natural Light, and common Experience. We see then to what sort of Conduct we are obliged.

The Case is plain: Unless we are little enough to renounce our Reason, and fall short of Philosophy, and live under the pitch of Heathenism.

Here I must confess this Insinuation is very artful. But all this while these Philo∣sophers that charge the Stage with this Cor∣ruption of Principle and Manners, give us but their bare Word for it. Was it enough for the Great Plato and Aristotle, the very Doctors of the Chair in the Old Heathen Divinity, (for Religion was then but Philo∣sophies Pupil); was it enough, I say, for those Zealots in Morality, to see that Stage that had stood hundreds of Years, and to look upon it, as such a Nursery of Corrup∣tion, and say no more against it? Does it look like the Man that the World received him, for Plato, to tell us in a Line and a Half, That Plays raise the Passions, and pervert the use of them, and by consequence are dange∣rous to Morality; only to start such an unin∣telligible Fragment, and not make a little Sermon-Work upon that Text? Perhaps indeed, Sic Volo, sic Iubeo, might be enough to banish Plays from his own Common-wealth; and even that short Sentence might be Supererrogation. However, he owed that Justice both to the World around him, and Posterity after him, to read a little lon∣ger Esculapian Lecture upon so Epidemick a Disease.

Undoubtedly had either Plato or Aristo∣tle but half Mr. Collier's Pique against the Play-houses, they would have spared their Ink as little as he has done; and conse∣quently have supplied him with more copi∣ous Satyr, and more sensible Arguments upon that Subject.

But for once I'll joyn Issue with him, and to throw some Weight more into his Scale, I'll suppose these half a dozen Philosophical Doctors with their Natural Light, and as many Doctor Collier's with their Divine Light, had all past their Negative Vote a∣gainst the Stage; however they would hard∣ly carry the Cause. For truly I know no Reason why the Stage should be obliged to stand upon a stronger Basis then the very Sanction of our Laws themselves. And I doubt not but a Foundation may be very honest and innocent, though not establish'd by a Nemine Contradicente.

To these Testimonies of the Philoso∣phers, &c. he tells you,

He'll add a cou∣ple of Poets, who both seem to be good Judges of the Affair in hand.

The first is Ovid, who in his Book, De Arte Amandi, gives his Reader to under∣stand that the Play-house was the most like∣ly Place to forage in. Here would be choice,

nothing being more common than to see Beauty surprized, Women Debauch'd, and Wenches pick'd up at those Diver∣sions.

Ovid. Lib. 1.

Sed tu praecipue curvis venare Theatris, Haec Loca sunt voto fertiliora tuo. —Ruit ad celebres cultissiama Foemina Ludos; Copia judicium saepe mor at a meum est. Spectatum veniunt, veniunt spectentur ut ipsae, Iile Locus casti damna pudor is habet.

In this Authority of Ovid, our Learned Observator, quite forgets himself, and runs off from his Theme. For Ovid has nothing to say against the Stage, or any Reflection, or Objection against the Dramatick Presen∣tations there. His present Business, to speak in the modern Dialect, is only with the Pit, Box and Galleries. This Quotation therefore is but very indifferently rank'd under that Head, viz. The Opinion of Paganism concern∣ing the Stage. He tells us indeed, the Young and the Fair are to be seen at the Theatres; That Beauty and High Toppings, Faemina Cultissima, and undoubtedly Beauty and High Virtue too, Faemina Castissima may be seen in a Play-house; nay, and come thither too,

to see and be seen, without any offence to Modesty. And hither 'tis that Ovid invites his Young Pupils in the Art of Love, to fo∣rage in (as he calls it.)

And here I'll give Mr. Collier the Point, viz. That a Debauchee may pick up a Wench at those Diversions. Nor is it any great wonder in so Universal a Concourse of the Young and the Fair, to find some smutty Corn in so large a Field. Society and Crowds, upon a more sacred Ground than a Play-house, are not wholly compos∣ed of Honour and Innocence, but that a Carrion Crow may be catch'd even in a flock of Doves.

And truly had not Mr. Collier been wil∣fully over-sighted, he would have inform'd us, that Ovid was of the same Opinion. For in the very immediate foregoing Verses to this Quotation, he advises his Young Liber∣tine to forage the Temples of the Gods; for he may find the same Game to fly at there too.

And here I am sorry I must joyn with Ovid; when much Diviner Altars are sub∣ject to the same Profanation. 'Tis not all Religion and Piety that enters a Church Door: Hypocrisie and Wantonness are too often too bold Intruders: And not only to see and to be seen, is the height of the Devo∣tion, but possibly the Lecture and the Sermon

may be sometimes made the screen to the Rover and the Wanton.

But Mr. Collier, I hope, will not infer from hence, that the Church Doors should be shut up, or Devotion barr'd entrance, for fear of Prophanation or Hypocrisie herding in along with them.

'Tis true, there may be a Case, and a weighty one, for keeping us out from Church, Prayers, Sacraments, and what not; as we find it recorded in a Learned Dis∣course publish'd by this Orthodox School-man, called, A Perswasive to Consideration, tender'd to the Royalists, particularly those of the Church of England, Printed in the Year, 1695. being a Discourse upon this Text— In the Day of Adversity consider—Where Page 35 we Read, as follows.

However, I am loth to leave my Church! (the Auditor thus Expostulating with him) You say well. But can you expect to find the Church, where it's peculiar Doctrines are disowned; where it's Authority is opposed, and betrayed to the Secular Power? Does the Being of a Church consist in Brick and Stone? What would you do if Jupiter was worshipped there? I hope the chiming of the Bells would not draw you to the Service of the Idol. If it is urged, that we may be so planted as to want the Advantage of an Orthodox Pastor;

What is to be done in such Circumstances? Must we pray alone, without the Assistance of Priest or Congregation? To this Question, after what has been said, I think the Proverb a sufficient Return; Better be alone than in ill Company. If 'tis farther objected, That by this Principle we lose the Benefit of the Blessed Sacrament. To this I an∣swer,

1. That this Objection is oftentimes no more than Pretence: For if People would take that Pains which the Regard to the In∣stitution requires, it seldom happens but they might receive it from proper Hands.

But 2. I answer, That breaking the Unity of the Church by Schismatical Communion, and making our selves Partakers of other Men's Sins, (1 Tim. 5. 22.) is a bad Pre∣paration for the Sacrament. To break a mo∣ral Law for a positive Ordinance, though ne∣ver so valuable, looks like robbing in order to Sacrifice.

And therefore when the Case is truly put; a pious Desire of Receiving will be Equiva∣lent to the Thing. This being an allowed Rule in Instances of Necessity. So that we cannot be said to lose the Benefit of the Blessed Sa∣crament, though we are not so happy as to partake in the Administration.

Now by the same Strength of Reason he has here carry'd the Cause against the whole Church of England, and Excluded his Royalists from all publick Devotion; undoubtedly he may shut up the Play-house Doors, and exclude 'em from all publick Diversion too.

The other Poet he joyns with Ovid, is the Author of the Plain-Dealer.

This Poet, in his Dedication to Lady B. some Eminent Procuress, pleads the Merits of his Function, and insists upon being Bil∣leted upon Free Quarter. Madam, says he, I think a Poet ought to be as free of your Hou∣ses as of the Play-houses, since he contributes to the Support of both, and is as necessary to such as You, as the Ballad-Singer to the Pick∣purse, in convening the Cullies at the Thea∣tres to be pick'd up and carried to a Supper, and Bed, at Your Houses. This is frank Evidence, and ne're the less true for the Air of a Jest.

As frank as this Plain-Dealer's Evidence is, here's nothing but what, with a very Grave face of Truth, and in as earnest a Jest, might have been said upon any other Publick places of Meeting, viz. the Dancing-Schools,

the Mall, the Parks, the Gardens; and where not? And unless this Man of Mo∣rals, would have a Law made to suppress all Places of general Resort, and confine Mankind to Cells and Caves, I know not well how he will prevent all these Enor∣mities that the Plain-Dealer has here rallied upon.

Nay, this I will positively averr, That both the Plain-Dealer and Mr. Collier's Ar∣gument on this side, lies much stronger a∣gainst any other publick Place of Resort than the Play-house. For if Wantonness and Lewdness will creep into all Publick Soci∣eties, though of never so innocent a Founda∣tion, the Theatres lie least obnoxious to that Danger. For in all the other forementioned Places of Resort, we make our own Diver∣sion, have no Entertainment but what we give our selves; and consequently, as Idle∣ness is the Mother of Lust, and when We have least to do, the Devil has most; we lie more open to Temptation and Irregular De∣sires, than we can do in a Play-house, where the Diversion is all found to our Hands, and the Auditor has both his Eyes and his Ears so employ'd, and is so much taken up with either the Pity and Concern for the Distres∣ses of Tragedy, or a Mirth and Delight from the Pleasantry of Comedy, that he has

hardly the Leisure to rove after any Imagina∣tions of his own.

And therefore if our Platonick Author is for banishing of Plays, for this only Grievance within the Walls of a Play-House, he may as justly Vote for the rooting up a Garden, for fear the Spider should suck Poyson from the Flowers.

Next, to proceed to his Testimony of the Fathers, he begins with Theophilus Bishop of Antioch, who lived in the second Cen∣tury.

'Tis not lawful (says this Father) for us to be present at the Prizes of the Gladia∣tors, least by this Means we should be ac∣cessary to the Murders there committed. Neither dare we presume upon the Liber∣ties of your other Shows, least our Senses should be tinctur'd and disobliged with Indecency and Prophaneness. The Tragi∣cal Distractions of Tereus and Thyestes are Nonsense to us. We are for seeing no Representations of Lewdness. The Stage Adulteries of the Gods and Hero's are unwarrantble Entertainments; and so much the worse because the Mercinary Players set them off with all the Charms and Advantages of Speaking. God forbid

that Christians, who are remarkable for Modesty and Reservedness, who are obli∣ged to Discipline, and train'd up to Vir∣tue; God forbid, I say, that we should dishonour our Thoughts, much less our Practice, with such Wickedness as this.

Tertullian, who lived in the latter End of this Century, thus Addresses the Hea∣thens upon this Subject.

We keep off from your Publick Shews, because we cannot understand the Warrant of their Original. There's Superstition and Idolatry in the Case; and we dislike the Entertainment, because we dislike the Rea∣son of its Institution, &c.

His Book, De Spectaculis, was wrote on purpose to diswade the Christians from the publick Diversions of the Heathens, of which the Play-house was one, &c.

The Arguments of Tertullian which are too long here to recite, were chiefly upon these two Heads, viz. That Pleasure was a bewitch∣ing Thing, and the Levity of the Theatres for that Cause was not consistent with the severer Principles of Christianity. His se∣cond Argument was the low Character of Players, from the Magistracy it self, who,

though they abetted the Stage, discountenanced the Players, and crampt their Freedoms, &c.

To conclude, he insinuates the great dan∣ger of being present at those Entertainments; and tells us one sad Example of a Demoniack Possession.

A certain Woman went to the Play-house, and brought the Devil home with her. And when the unclean Spirit was prest in the Exorcism, and ask'd how he durst attack a Christian? I have done no∣thing (says he) but what I can justifie; for I seiz'd her upon my own Ground.

Before I enter upon any other Argument, I shall make some few Remarks upon this Possession.

I shall not Dispute Tertullian's Veracity in this Relation; yet methinks, upon a thorough Examination, neither Tertullian nor Mr. Collier have over-well proved the Play-house to be the Devils own Ground, when the Title's supported by no more Au∣thority than a bare single Affirmative, and that from no other Mouth than the Father of Lies, the Devil himself. If the Play-house were really a Chattellany of Lucifer, a Fief of the Infernal Empire, some Do∣ctors

are of Opinion, the Devil would be the last would tell us so: For as the subtilty of that cunning Seducer strows all his Pit-falls with Flowers, he has neither that Charity for Mankind, nor owes that Service to God, to play thus Booty against himself in so frank a Declaration. However, if that rest∣less Sworn Enemy of Man, had any such generous Principle in him, the Dives in Flames had had no occasion of supplicating a Monitory Messenger, to send to his World∣ly Friends, from Abraham: But might e'ne have begg'd the Civil Favour of that kind Errand from one of his own Tormentors. This I must say, that this foolish Devils im∣prudent Discovery was so Capital a piece of Treason against the Interest of his own Infernal Kingdom, that really I am of Opi∣nion, to set him Rectus in Curia Diabolica, he wants Absolution.

Well, but perhaps you'll say, This Dis∣covery was no Blunder in his Politicks, but extorted by the Divine Force of the Exor∣cism. Really Sir, that may be. However to give this Devil and his Vouchers their due, all this Confession carries a very rank Face of a Sham still. For if it were substan∣tial Verity, that the Play-house was truly and firmly the Devils own Ground, and every Christian Rambler catch'd upon it his

own Lawful, and, to use his own words, Ju∣stifiable Seizure; at this rate, the Devil must be soften'd into a Spirit of that unaccoun∣table Mercy, so very unlike the Bible Pi∣cture we have of him, when among so many Thousands and Ten Thousands, nay Mil∣lions and Millions of Christians, that since that Day have been caught in a Play-house Walls, so pat for his Clutches; nevertheless this only single Seizure of that kind is all that's Recorded against him.

I have several times heard this Demoni∣ack Story warmly play'd, as not a little for∣midable Battery against the Theatres, by some passionate Zealots, no very good Friends either to our Church or our Stage; and to confirm this Diabolical Authority, those Enthusiasts without question had read, that 'twas no new Thing for the Cloven-foot to deliver Oracles, and therefore doubt not but this may be one.

But in all these Declamations of the Fa∣thers against Stage-plays, St. Cyprian, Ter∣tullian, and St. Augustine, and all of 'em confess 'twas the General Opinion of the Christians that Plays were a Lawful Diver∣sion; and therefore the whole business of those Declamations, is the opening the Chri∣stians Eyes, and refuting that too Epidemi∣cal

Erroneous Opinion; and what occasion'd that spreading Error amongst them was, that the appearance of that general Inno∣cence in those Entertainments gave them that Reception amongst the Christians, that they could not believe them Criminal with∣out some express Divine Precept against them; and accordingly St. Cyprian, the Au∣thor de Spectaculis, argues against those, who thought the Play-house no unlawful Diversion be∣cause 'twas not condemned by express Scrip∣ture.

So Tertullian reproves the Christians, That their Faith is either too full of Scruples, or too barren of Sense. Nothing (he says) will serve to settle them but a plain Text of Scripture. They hover in uncertainty, because 'tis not said as expresly, [Thou shalt not go to the Play-house,] as 'tis [Thou shalt not Kill, &c.]

And here, with all due Reverence to these Christian Fathers, the Scriptural silence in that Case well furnish some more curious Specu∣lations than they have been pleas'd to make; and which I hope will be no unpardonable Inquiry to prosecute a little farther then they have done.

First then, as our Blessed Saviour was Born in the Days of Augustus, 'tis known,

by all Historians, that the shutting up of Ianus's Temple Doors in his Reign, univer∣sally open'd those of the Play-houses. The∣atrick Representations in all the Provinces of the Spacious Roman Empire, were the then Common Publick Diversion and En∣tertainment, and such they continued many Reigns after him.

Now it may raise a little Wonder why the Apostles, that went forth by a special Command of the Almighty to Convert all Nations, Preaching Repentance, and the Kingdom of Heaven; They that so exactly perform'd that great Commission, as to Ar∣raign or Censure Vice and Impiety from the highest to the lowest, in all its several Bran∣ches; not only pronounced their lowder A∣nathemas against the more crying Sins, but read Divinity-Lectures even upon the Ward∣robe and Dressing-Box, correcting the very Indecencies of the Hair, the Apparel, and each uncomely Gesture, &c. That these Mis∣sioners of Salvation should travel through so many Heathen Nations (the Gentiles they were sent to call) and meet at every turn the Theatre and the Stage-players staring them in the very Face, and not make one Repri∣mand against them, is a Matter of very seri∣ous Reflection.

Had the Play-house been, as St. Cyprian calls it, the Seat of Infection; or as Clemens Alexandrinus much to the same Sense calls it, the Chair of Pestilence; and (to join the Au∣thority of the Unclean Spirit along with them,) the Devils own Ground; I am of Opinion in this Case, that those Divine Mo∣nitors, the Apostles, that sets Bars to the Eye, the Ear, the Tongue, to every smallest Avenue that might let in the Tempter; would hardly have left the Broad Gates to the Play-house so open, without one Warning to the unwary Christian in so direct a Road to Perdition. Such a Discovery I believe would have been rather the earlier Cautio∣nary Favour of some of our kind Evangeli∣cal Guardians, then the Extorted Confession of our greatest Infernal Enemy two hundred Years after.

'Tis true, St. Cyprian gives a Reason for this Apostolical Silence, viz.

That some things are more strongly forbidden be∣cause unmention'd. The Divine Wisdom would have had a low Opinion of Chri∣stians, had it descended to particulars in this Case. Silence is sometimes the best Method for Authority. To forbid, often puts People in mind of what they should not do; and thus the force of the Precept is lost by naming the Crime, &c.

Here the World must pardon me, if I pre∣sume to say, That St. Cyprian plays more the Orator than the Church-man. I hardly believe that there has been that Crime too Black to lie upon Scripture Paper, when the very Sin that drew down Fire upon Sodom and Gomorrah has been recorded there: Nor can I grant him his Consequence, viz. That such Black Sins are the more strongly forbidden because unmention'd. This I am certain, That the many, the loud, and the repeated Ful∣minations of Vengeance from the Mouths of the Patriarchs, the Prophets, and the Apo∣stles, denounced against the most Tremen∣dous Iniquities and Abominations, does not very well prove the Scriptural Silence in such Cases.

Besides, St. Cyprian here, under the notion of a Reason for such Silence, either flies wide from the Matter, or else contradicts himself. The Charge he all along lays a∣gainst Plays, is the Levities and Impertinences of the Comedies, the Ranting Distractions of Tragedies, that Plays were originally the Institu∣tion of Heathen Idolatry. That as they are Lewd Representations, they are of this dange∣rous Consequence, viz. That by using to see such Things we shall learn to do them, &c. And that therefore we must draw off our Inclinations from these Vanities, &c.

All this is so far from a Blackness too deep for Paper, or a Monster too hideous for the Modesty of Divine Revelation to expose to Light, that nothing can be less. But granting this Christian Father the li∣berty of being sometimes cooler, and some∣times warmer upon that Subject, and allow∣ing these Levities and Vanities to be so many Gorgons and Medusa's; granting the Play-house to be that Rock, that Quick∣sand, or any other more devouring Gulph; however, the Divine Wisdom in that Case, instead of having a low Opinion of Chri∣stians, had it descended to a particular Cau∣tion against it; especially when the hidden Rock or Quicksand lay so unseen by the general Eye of Christians, that both by Ter∣tullian and St. Cyprian's Confession, the Dan∣ger appear'd so little, that 'twas the pub∣lick Christian Opinion, the Play-house was a Lawful Diversion; on the contrary, the Divine Wisdom, I say, had as much oc∣casion of some seasonable Admonition, to hang out as a Watch-Light or Sea-Mark, against those hidden Rocks, as ever Aaron had to warn the Children of Israel from the Tents of Coran, Dathan and Abiram, before the Earth opened to swallow them: And undoubtedly had there been any such true Danger in a Play-house, the Divine Wis∣dom, without either a low Opinion of it¦self

in descending to give such a particular Caution, or the weak-sighted Christian to want it; amongst its other many thou∣sand particualar Monitory Favours and Mer∣cies, wou'd have added this One more to that infinite Number. I wish this Divine Author has not himself a much lower Opi∣nion of Christians, when to crutch his Ar∣gument against the Play-house, he would insinuate, that even a Gospel-Precept may be sometimes ensnaring, and the very Com∣mands of God himself against a Sin, a Temptation to draw us into it; and conse∣quently that in some Cases it is much safer, and more divine Prudence, to leave the Sin∣ner to grope out his way to Salvation, than to give him a Light to guide him thi∣ther.

Besides, these Fathers, instead of defending the Spiritual Silence against Plays (the main Argument they drive at,) the Gospel-Light being no ways wanted to guard against them, but that even the very Light of Na∣ture was sufficient in that Case; On the con∣trary, as they have managed their Indict∣ment against the Stage, have put it so far out of the power of Nature, that they seem to enforce the absolute necessity of a parti∣cular Revelation Pilot even to 〈…〉〈…〉 Danger that lay there.

For Instance, Tertullian.

Will you not avoid this Seat of Infe∣ction? The very Air suffers by their Im∣purities, and they almost pronounce the Plague! What tho' the Performance may be in some measure Pretty and Entertain∣ing? What, tho' Innocence, yes, and Vir∣tue too, shines through some part of it? 'Tis not the Custom to prepare Poison un∣palatable, nor make up Rats-bane with Rhubarb and Sena. No, to have the Mis∣chief speed, they must oblige the Sense, and make the Dose pleasant. Thus the Devil throws in a Cordial Drop to make the Draught go down; and steals some few Ingredients from the Dispensatory of Heaven. In short, look upon all the en∣gaging Sentences of the Stage: Their Flights of Fortitude and Philosophy, the Loftiness of their Stile, the Musick of the Cadence, and the fineness of their Con∣duct; Look upon it only, I say, as Honey dropping from the Bowels of a Toad, or the Bag of a Spider. Let your Health over-rule your Pleasure, and don't Die of a little Liquorishness.

Now if the Visible Beauties of the Stage were made up of all those attracting

Charms and Graces, viz. Engaging Sen∣tences, Morality, Philosophy, Virtue and In∣nocence, and all so shining; could Nature in this Case, as St. Cyprian says, so govern, where Revelation does not reach, as to discover the Latent Poison in the Pill, and all mix'd up with so many Ingredients of Heaven, and under so many Leaves of Gold? Could meer Natural Light supply the Holy Text, to warn us against so lovely and fair a Face, set forth by Tertullian with all these en∣snaring Enchantments, without any want of a Spiritual Illumination, to tell us, 'Tis the Syren that wears it?

Tertullian however endeavours to palliate this Scriptural Silence, and tells us, Though Plays are not expresly forbidden in Scripture, we have the meaning of the Prohibition, though not the Sound, in the First Psalm, Blessed is the Man that walks not in the Counsel of the Ungodly, nor stands in the way of Sin∣ners, nor sits in the Seat of the Scornful.

I hope no Man will interpret my Amaze∣ment at the Application of this Text to the Condemnation of Play-houses, to any want of Veneration to so celebrated a Pillar of the Church as Tertullian; nay, and all this the substantial Meaning, only the empty Sound wanting!—And here I must de∣clare,

had the Demoniack Woman had no plainer Christian Light to lead her to Hea∣ven, than this to shew her the Snares of a Play-house, I am very much afraid she had continued under Possession still, and never got loose from the Infernal Talons that seiz'd her there.

And here again I must once more beg my Reader not to charge me with the Ridicu∣ling of Divine Writ, when I declare from my Soul I should as soon quote, and with as reasonable a Construction, that Verse in the Psalm, Why does the Heathen rage, and the People imagine a vain Thing? for a two∣edg'd Sword against Seneca and Terence, the Ranting of Tragedy, and the Fiction of Comedy; and that Hercules Furens, and the Comical Davus, were both hewed down together.

But to return to the Fathers.

If the Heathen Dramatick Poetry, in the Plays of their Times, were so scandalous, so lewd, and infamous a Representation, that the very mention of them in Divine Precept, though to set the Mark of Cain upon them, [Thou shalt not see a Play] by the Venerable Tertullian being even rank'd with [Thou shalt not Kill], were too black

a Record to foul the very Paper with: I am here very much afraid, that this Learn'd Histriomastix, our Author, has thrown a∣way a great deal of Oyl and Labour in washing the Ethiop; when in his First Chapter of The Immodesty of the Stage, in his comparing the Ancient and Modern Play-wrights, he clears almost the whole Body of the Greek and Latin Dramatick Poets from every Thing so much as tending to Lewdness or Smut, or even a double Entendre that way. In short, what with the Native Morals and Virtues of the Poets themselves, and the Superiour Care of the Publick Inspectors and Censors of the Theatre, he sets forth, at large, that Modesty and Innocence of the Heathen Stage, so far from encouraging Lewdness and Debaucheries, corrupting of Manners, &c. or any of those hideous Phaenomena's through that long and learned Harangue of the Fathers against them; that hardly any thing, scarce North and South, can be more opposite, than the Sentiments of these Doctors of the Primitive Church in his last Chapter, and of this sometimes Minister of the English Church in the first Chapter.

For Instance, he begins with Plautus, an Author that, he tells us,

Has left us 20 intire Comedies; out of which Volume

of Antiquity, he quotes but five censur∣able Passages, and those but moderate ones, viz. Lena and Bacchis the Strumpet are airy and somewhat over-merry, but not obscene. Chalinus, in Womans Cloths, is the most remarkable. Pasicompa Charinus his Wench, talks too freely to Lysimachus, and so does Sophroclidisca, Slave to Lemnoselene; and lastly, Phro∣nesiam, a Woman of the Town, uses a double Entendre to Stratophanes. This Poet, he farther informs us, confesses Smut a scandalous Entertainment; that such Liberties ought to fall under Neg∣lect, to lie unmentioned, and be blotted out of Memory. And that this was not a Copy of his Countenance, we may learn from his Compositions. Nay, this very Plautus, who wrote in an Age not perfectly refin'd, has regard to the Re∣tirements of Modesty, and the Dignity of Humane Nature; and though he often seems to design his Plays for a Vulgar Capacity, he does not make Lewdness his Business.

Of Terence, who appear'd when Breed∣ing was more exact, and the Town better polish'd, he says,

That he managed ac∣cordingly, and has but one faulty bor∣dering Expression, which is that of

Chremes to Clitopho. This single Sentence apart, the rest of his Book is unfullied, and fit for the nicest Conversation. Nay, his very Strumpets are modest, and con∣verse not unbecoming their Sex.

Then for Seneca, he assures us,

He is clean throughout the whole Piece; and stands generally off from the point of Love. In fine, to dispatch the Latins together, he tells you, They had nothing smutty so much as in a Song, and kept their Lan∣guage under Discipline.

To do the same Right to the Greek Poets he tells us,

How the Stage had both its beginning and highest Improvement at Athens.—Aeschylus was the first who appear'd with any Reputation: His Ge∣nius seems noble, and his Mind generous, willing to transfuse it self into the Audi∣ence, and inspire them with a Spirit of Bravery. His Materials were shining and solid, &c. This Tragedian had al∣ways a nice Regard to good Manners, &c. and so govern'd his Expressions of Love, that they carried a Face of Virtue along with them.

To Sophocles, that next succeeded him on the Stage, he gives this Character,

That

he was in Earnest an extraordinary Per∣son; and among his many eminent and all virtuous Qualifications, when he con∣cerns himself with Amours, nothing can be more temperate or decent, &c. His Descriptions of Love are within the Terms of Honour; the Tendernesses are solemn as well as soft; they move to Pity and Concern, and go no farther. In fine, like his Predecessor, he lightly touches upon an amorous Theam; and, to use our Author's ingenious Allusion,

He glides along like a Swallow upon the Water, and skims the Surface, without dipping a Feather.

Next for Euripides, his Character a∣grees too with his Elder Brothers, even to priding himself in Virtue and Mo∣desty, delivering great Thoughts in com∣mon Language, and being drest more like a Gentleman than a Player. His Di∣stinction lies in the Perspicuity of his Stile; in Maxims and Moral Reflection; in his peculiar Happiness for touching the Passions, especially that of Pity; and lastly, in exhausting the Cause, and ar∣guing pro and con upon the stretch of Reason. And for Modesty he is intirely in the Authors Favour, &c. He calls Whoring Stupidness and playing the

Fool; and to be Chast and Regular is with him, as well as with Aeschylus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. As much as to say, 'tis the consequence of Sense and right Think∣ing, &c.

'Tis true, he singles out one frail Brother of the Quill, Aristophanes, and finds a very foul Blot in his Scutcheon, viz. Atheism; and hereupon very passionately declaims up∣on that Topick, viz. upon his ridiculing the Gods, and breaking in upon Religion, &c. for several whole Pages. But as heavy as the Atheist lies upon him, still he wipes off the Imputation of Debauchery, assuring us,

That as to the business of Love, Aristo∣phanes always declin'd it. He never pat∣ches up a Play with Courtship and Whin∣ing, tho' he wrote nothing but Come∣dy, &c.

'Tis true, as to the Atheism of Aristophanes, tho' it may appear somewhat a Sin against the Athenian Light of Theo∣logy: It happen'd to be a Fault on the bet∣ter side, (at least in the Christian Scale) when only against the Libertine Houshold of Heathen Gods, where neither Infidelity nor Apostacy were altogether so Capital.

Now, as such were the Characters of the Ancient Poets, and those the very Founders of the Feast in the Theatrical Entertain∣ments

in St. Cyprian and Tertullian's Days, and some Ages after them, I cannot but once more repeat my Amazement at their over-passionate Exclamations against the Stage, especially upon the mistaken Topick of Lewdness and Debauchery.

After all this honest and faithful Review of the Ancient Stage, taken even by our kind Author himself, I fancy he has given us some more substantial Reasons for the Scriptural Silence against Plays, than all these Fathers have done. For if such, by his own generous Acknowledgment, was the Stage Primitive State of Innocence; (a Confession which we highly stand obliged to him for, though like one of Sir Martin Marral's Discoveries, considering how lit∣tle it makes for his Cause,) I fear we shall thank him for a Favour he never intended us.

If therefore, as I was saying, or rather our Author has said for me, such was not only the Innocence of the Heathen Stage, under all the Restrictions of Chastity, Modesty and Decency, not only from the native prin∣ciples of the Authors, but also from the Re∣gulation of Publick Authority; but even such was the Merit (so I may call it) of those Theatrick Representations so little

tending to the Corruption of Manners, That several of them were written with a Ge∣nius, to speak in his own Language, enough to transfuse and inspire a Spirit of Bravery, so far from a Check, as to be rather an Excita∣tion to Virtue. Here, upon all these Con∣cessions even from our Author himself, (pro∣vided still that as Stage-Plays are only Hu∣mane Institutions, and Worldly Diversions, and that that Objection shall be found no Bar to this Plea of Innocence, as that I hope we shall make out;) this then being the Stage, and these the Plays that faced the whole Travels of the Apostles; here's a ve∣ry substantial Argument for the Evangelical Silence, in not one word against them; for the Mouths of those Divine Oracles open'd only to the Correction of Vice.

Nor will it raise any part of an Obje∣ction against this Argument for their Si∣lence, &c. That the Original innocent Con∣stitution of Plays was sometimes Corrupted, their Modesty Debauch'd, and Abuses crept in amongst them, as this Author often ob∣serves against them; For as the very Hea∣thens themselves had their Censors and In∣spectors appointed to correct and punish those Abuses, and to keep the Stage in the bounds of Modesty, I hope the Christians needed no particular Scriptural Precept in

that Case: The Divine Wisdom must then have most truly had a low Opinion of Chri∣stians, to think they wanted any particular Evangelical Light to follow, even where the Ignorant Heathen had led before them. And as to the more horrid Representations of the Amphitheater, so frequent in the Neronian Reign, in which St. Paul died; here indeed there wanted no Evangelick Command, to warn the Christian from those Execrable Bloody Walls, where Mur∣der upon Murder even in cold Blooded Sport was made a Publick Entertainment; The Divine Wisdom, as St. Cyprian says, had had a low Opinion indeed to think the Christian could want a Heavenly Caution of entring those Shambles of Humane But∣chery.

Besides, to shew how little the Dramatick Poetry lay under the Gospel Censure, our Author, (tho' upon another occasion,) is pleas'd to quote that Text of St. Paul, Evil Communications corrupt Good Manners, as the Expression first of the Comick Poet Menan∣der, 290 Years before Christ, and after∣wards of St. Paul the Apostle. Here I would ask whether St. Paul the most Learned of the Apostles, in delivering the Divine Ora∣cles of God, would have incorporated the say∣ing of a Heathen Poet, that possibly had

been spoke a hundred times over on the Publick Stage, by a Hireling Player, into the Gospel of Truth, notwithstanding the Morality and Innocence of the Expression it self; had Stage-Plays in themselves, and that in their worst capacity of Comedies, justly lain under St. Cyprian's Character of them, viz. That were they not otherwise highly Criminal, the Foolery of them is egregious and unbecoming the Gravity of Believers?

For some other Instances of St. Paul's Respect for the Poets.

In Acts 17. 28. In him we live and move and have our Being; as certain of your own Poets have said, for we are also his Of∣spring.

In his Epistle to Titus, Chap. 1. ver. 14, 15. speaking of the People of Crete, he says in the words of Epimenides the Poet.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. One of themselves, even a Prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are always Liars, evil Beasts, slow Bellies: This Witness is true, &c.

Here the Apostle has not disdain'd to quote a Heathen Poet, nay, and honour him with the Title of Prophet.

Now therefore as the Spirit of God spoke by the inspired Apostles, we may venture to boast, it gives some Reputation to the Poet, and sure a little Vindication of the In∣nocence of the Profession, that the Holy Ghost himself has spoke in the words of a Menan∣der, and an Epimenides.

But to make a little farther Examination into the Reason of this over-violent Zeal and Vehemence of the Primitive Fathers against the Stage. We are to consider the foremen∣tioned Authority, viz. Theophilus, Tertul∣lian, Clemens Alexandrinus, Minutius Foelix, and St. Cyprian, so faithfully translated by Mr. Collier, lived all in the second or third Century, in the Mourning Minority of the Church of God, under the Heathen Persecu∣tions. For Constantine, the first Christian Emperor, began his Reign but in the be∣ginning of the fourth Century. Had not then those Primitive Fathers, with Stakes, Gibbets, Cauldrons, Gridirons, Racks, &c. all before their Eyes, a just cause of Com∣plaint against the Christian Inclination for Plays, Delight and Pleasure at that time of Day? Does the Son from his Fathers Death-Bed go to the Musick-House? or the Widow from her Husbands Funeral to the Dancing-School? Was the Play-house a seasonable Christian Diversion, possibly to come from

a Laurences Gridiron to a Thyestes Feast? I may here joyn with Tertullian.

In Ear∣nest, Christian, our Time for Entertain∣ment is not yet; ye are too craving and ill manag'd, if you are so violent for De∣light, page 258.

Besides, was it not a yet greater aggrava∣tion to the ill timed Christian Fondness for Plays, to herd, consort and mix with their Tyrants, Persecutors and Murderers the Heathens, in their Entertainments and Di∣versions? And therefore is it to be doubted, but that this unseasonable Inclination of the Christians for Plays went a great way in the Fathers Passionate Declamations against them; and undoubtedly to check the Chri∣stian Fondness in that Case, push'd 'em up∣on the necessity of enlarging upon that stron∣ger Argument, viz. The Unlawfulness of Plays, where the weaker one, the Indecency of seeing them, would not prevail?

Nay, as Clemens Alexandrinus joyns the Circus and the Theatre together, when he says, They may not improperly be called the Chair of Pestilence. Does not therefore the bloody Gladiator, the profession of the Murder at the Prize, as Minutius Foelix calls it, the Secular Games, and the Pantomimi, and all the rest of

the more Licentious and Barbarous Heathen Entertainments, go a great way in the Con∣demnation of the more Innocent Plays, whilst the Stage suffers with the Ill Compa∣ny it keeps; all those horrid Diversions, be∣ing at the same time supported by the Ty∣rant Pagan Emperors? Nay, does not the very Christian Horror of those Heathen Tyrants, the Patrons of those Plays, go a great way with these Fathers to the Con∣demnation of the Feast for the Founders sake? And therefore is all this Vehemence, though to a stretch of Argument, and the Racking of Reasons against them, any thing to be won∣der'd at?

Suppose we could parallel the same Mo∣dern Case; were there, for Instance, any such Diversion as Plays amongst the Turks, would not the Grecian Patriarchs be as tender of the Christians mixing in that Diversion, more especially if our Mahometans were like their Heathens, a Spirit of Persecution? Why then are all these Primitive Champions brought down to Battle our Theatres, when their whole Ground of Quarrel and Foun∣dation of Complaint, is so Foreign to the present State of the English Stage?

Next, we'll examine the short Account he pretends to give us of the Councils of

the Primitive Church concerning the Stage.

The Council of Illiberis or Collioure, De∣creed,

That it shall not be lawful for any Woman, who is either in full Communi∣on, or a Probationer for Baptism, to Mar∣ry or entertain any Comedians or Actors; who takes this Liberty shall be Excommu∣nicated, Anno 305. Can. 67.

The first Council of Arles, Excommu∣nicates Players as long as they continue to Act, Anno 314. Can. 5.

The second Council of Arles made their 20th Canon to the same purpose, and al∣most in the same words, Anno 452.

The third Council of Carthage, of which St. Augustine was a Member, Ordains, That the Sons of Bishops or other Clergy∣men should not be permitted to furnish out publick Shews, or Plays, or be present at them. Such sort of Pagan Entertainments being forbidden the Laity, it being al∣ways unlawful for all Christians to come among Blasphemers.

By the 35th Canon of this Council 'tis Decreed, That Actors or others belong∣ing

to the Stage, who are either Con∣verts or Penitents, &c. shall not be de∣nied Admission in the Church, which our Author remarks, was a Proof that Players as long as they kept to their Employment were barr'd Commu∣nion.

Another African Council declares,

That the Testimony of People of ill Reputation, of Players, and others of such scandalous Employments, shall not be ad∣mitted against any Person. Anno 424. Can. 96.

The second Council of Chaalon sets forth,

That Clergy-Men ought to abstain from all over-engaging Entertainments in Musick, or Show (Oculorum aurium{que} ille∣cebris); and as for the smutty and licenti∣ous Insolence of Players, and Buffoons, let 'em not only decline the hearing it them∣selves, but likewise conclude the Laity obliged to the same Conduct. Anno 813. Can. 9.

I have here recited his Authority of the Councils of the Church at this full length,

as affording Matter for several serious Re∣flections and weighty Considerations. First, then it appears by the express words of the Council of Carthage, that the Comedies then Acted, were Pagan Entertainments, and ge∣nerally perform'd by Pagans, viz. Blasphe∣mers, and for certain were the Composition of the Heathen Poets; for we have no Re∣cord or mention of any Christian Poet that compiled or wrote any Theatrical Repre∣sentations; For had there been any such Christian Author, his Name at least, if not some of his Works would in all likelihood have been transmitted to Posterity, as well as so many of the Dramatick Labours of the Heathen Poets: Besides, had there been any such Dramatick Christian Writers, undoubt∣edly the several Councils that prohibited the Performance of Plays, and expresly forbid the furnishing or dressing out of Shews or Plays, would have much more particularly repri∣manded the more Capital Offender, viz. the Compiler and Composer of such Entertain∣ments, it being their equal Duty and Cau∣tion to crush the Egg as the Cocatrice.

Nevertheless, though Playing then stood upon that Heathenish bottom, however the Christians were apt not only to entertain Comedians and Actors, but Personally them∣selves

to be Actors, nay, and in those very Heathen Compositions.

Now here was occasion of just Complaint in those Divine Assemblies, the Councils of the Church, against this Practice of the Christians, were the matter of Playing it self never so innocent. For much the same Reproach (though not the same Apology) lay against them, as the Jews threw upon our Saviour, viz. for consorting with Pub∣licans and Sinners.

Christianity in those Days was in its Morning: The Sun of Righteousness had not fully dispelled the Heathen Darkness and Ignorance. The Christians had the Uncon∣verted Heathen every where round them. And as the great Work of calling in the fulness of the Gentiles was not yet perfect∣ed; it might reasonably give Offence to the Fathers of the Church, and raise some sha∣dow of fear, that the Christian Condescen∣sion to intermix in the Pagan Diversions and Vanities, viz. their Plays, and those origi∣nally too of an Idolatrous Foundation, might give that Reputation or at least that Coun∣tenance to Infidelity, as possibly might in some measure retard the great Work of Uni∣versal Conversion.

Now as all these Councils commenced from the beginning of the Fourth Century, at, or after the Administration of the Roman Empire was lodged in the Hands of Chri∣stian Princes, those Primitive Royal Sons of the Church, those Champions of the Faith that would never be wanting in their utmost Zeal and Industry to propagate the Gospel of Truth: Here, I say, it will afford a Matter of the nicest Speculation, viz. How Players and Playing should lie under this publick Censure of the Church, and yet Acting it self continued unsilenced and un∣suppressed by so many successive Christian Emperors.

That it kept all this while so unsuppress'd, is plain and evident; otherwise, why so many repeated Decrees of Councils against them, if the occasion of Offence, viz. Play∣ing it self, had not continued? Nor can it be supposed, had Playing been very much offensive, or had but half the black Colours Mr. Collier has laid upon it, but that some Ghostly Counsellors would have advised those Emperors to such a Suppression of the Stage; and undoubtedly they had listen'd to such Advice. Their Power of putting such Advice in Execution was indisputable, and had the Argument been powerful enough

to perswade 'em, without question the Will would not have been wanting; and conse∣quently the Christian Roman Empire would never have faln short of the Heathen Plato in his Common-wealth, in banishing the Play∣house, upon a full Conviction of their Chri∣stian Duty to oblige them to such a Refor∣mation: At least, had the Lenity of those Christian Emperors, who propagated the Faith, not by Rods of Iron, but Beams of Mercy, indulged their Pagan Subjects to continue their Heathen Plays and Vanities; nevertheless, 'tis highly to be supposed, they had either used their own Imperial, or com∣mission'd their Ecclesiastical Authority to forbid that Liberty to their Christian Subjects.

But as nothing of all this was done, but the open and publick Stage continued un∣shaken, in defiance of all this Holy Breath against it; what can we in all Reason con∣clude, but that these Christian Princes lookt back to the fore-mention'd Father louder Thunder against the Stage, as only a tem∣porary Blast; the greatest Cloud that rais'd all that Storm, the main Ecclesiastical Mat∣ter of Complaint, was dispell'd; for the late Mourning, now Smiling Church, had thrown off her Cypress, her Wounds were all heal'd, and her Tears wiped away; and

thus that great Stage-Stumbling-Block, viz. the unseasonableness of Mirth and Diversion, was removed. The Christians too now joining in the Heathen Diversion, met their Friends, not their Persecutors there. And for the bloodier Gladiators, and all the other lewder and more barbarous Theatrick En∣tertainments, they fell in course with the Tyrants that supported them. Thus all these highest Provocations of the Primitive Christian Quarrel against the Theatres com∣posed and ended, and nothing but the Inno∣cent Dramatick Stage left standing; and that to liable to all the Inspection and Regula∣tion of Censors and Supervisors, upon any Abuse or Corruption: How then must these Christian Emperors look upon these Decrees of the Councils, but as an over-warmth of Zeal, a sort of a Iury-Presentation, past at their Vacat Exiguis, not weighty enough to found a State-Indictment upon? Nay, their Sentence perhaps not worthy the Execution, as pronounc'd by not altogether the proper Judges of the Fact: A true Inquisition into the Stage being more the States, than the Churches Province. Those Reverend Di∣vine Doctors of their Councils, pass their Judgment at too far distance; their Gravi∣ties come least, or perhaps never into a Play-house Walls; and therefore the full Cognizance of the Matter, and the true

Merits of the Cause, lay not so much in their Reach.

For these therefore, and whatever other Reasons the Primitive Christian Government was induced to continue the Stage; Is not here one of the most convincing Arguments for the present Establishment of the The∣atres, especially comparing the different Cir∣cumstances between them? Our Plays are no Heathen Compositions; our Authors and Auditors profess one Faith; our Stage lies under no Ecclesiastical Reprimand from the Fathers of our Church: In short, we have so many more favourable Aspects, and all that Weight on our side, in ballance between 'em, enough to silence even Calumny it self.

And thus, as our Stage has so leading an Example as the Primitive Christian Indul∣gence to warrant its Foundation; as it has received the Protection of Crown'd Heads, it has sometimes had the Honour of their Royal Presence at its Diversions too; and what's yet greater, even Princes of the most exalted Piety have been the Royal Guests within those publick Walls.

In a Sermon upon the Death of the late QUEEN, preach'd by William Payne, D. D.

Rector of St. Mary Whitechappel, Chaplain to His MAJESTY, Page 19 and 20. di∣lating upon that copious Theme, the shin∣ing Piety of that truly Christian Princess, we read as follows:

She gave Patterns of Virtue not un∣couth or fantastick, affected or unnatural, such as we meet in the Legends, but what are agreeable to Civil Life, and to all the Stations of this World, what Christianity and the plain Law of God require of us; and those Things which they had not forbidden, She did not think necessary to forbid her Self. The undue Rigours and Severities of some Indiscreet Persons have done great Harm to Religion and Virtue, by condemning those Things as absolutely sinful, which are so only by Accident, but in themselves innocent; such as Dancing, Playing at Cards, going to Plays, and the like. Our Admirable QUEEN could distinguish here between Duty and Prudence, between Unlawful and Inexpedient. She would not refuse those Common Diversions, nor use them too much: She would not wholly keep from seeing of Plays, as if they were utterly unlawful, &c.

Here are two Christian Authorities, one from the Theatre and the other the Pulpit, of a contrary Opinion to Mr. Collier, viz. That Plays in themselves are an Innocent Diversion.

And here I must look back to one Argu∣ment of the Fathers against the Theatres. St. Chrysostome, to oppose the Worldly Di∣version of the Stage, tells us how St. Paul exhorts us to rejoyce in the Lord. He said, In the Lord, not in the Devil. And St. Ierome on the same Subject says,

Some are De∣lighted with the Satisfactions of this World, some with the Circus, and some with the Theatre. But the Psalmist Com∣mands every good Man to delight himself in the Lord.

These Precepts of the Psalmist, and the Apostle, are indeed the highest Duty of Christianity. But as we are but Men, 'tis a Duty too weighty to lye upon Humane Weakness, without any Intervals of some lighter Alleviations of the Cares and La∣bours of Life. Were Life to be intirely di∣vided between the Prayer-book, the Psal∣ter and the Plough, Rejoycing in God is that Exercise of Piety, requiring so Intent and Exalted a Meditation, that the weak∣ness of Humane Nature would hardly be

able to keep up the Soul on so sublime a flight, without flagging her Wing, and Devotion so severely tyed to the Altar, I fear, would make but a very lean Sacrifice.

But both the Psalmist and the Apostle did not extend this Command to Rejoyce only in the Lord; no, their Commission reach'd not so far, they neither did, nor could de∣liver such a Precept, because their Lord and Master, our Blessed Saviour himself, would have refuted them.

For to give us an Instance, that Tempo∣ral and Worldly Mirth and Rejoycing has received a Warrant of Authority even from Christ himself; we need but read how Christ and his Mother were called to the Marriage in Cana of Galiiee, where his Be∣ginning of Miracles was turning Water in∣to Wine.

Here we may Innocently and Modestly presume to suppose, at this Marriage Festival, when their Wine, as the Text expresses, was drank out, that Cheerefulness and Mirth went round with the Glass, not Spiritual Mirth, for that wants not the Juice of the Grape. And here undoubtedly our Saviour would neither have been himself a Guest at the Feast, or heightned the Mirth at the

Price of a Miracle, had either a Cheerful Glass, a Sociable Rejoycing, or the Inno∣cent Delights of Life been Sinful and Unlaw∣ful. Nor can the End of this Miracle, exprest in the Text, viz. The manifesting forth his Glory, and making his Disciples believe on him, be any Argument to weaken my As∣sertion. For 'twere even Impiety to sug∣gest, That our Saviour could want Occasi∣on or Opportunities of Exerting the God, to need a poor Choice for the Ground of a Mi∣racle.

Next, let us examine one of the most Ca∣pital Offences of Dramatick Poetry arraign'd both by the Philosophers, Fathers of the Church, and the Son of the Church, Mr. Collier, viz. The Raising the Passions, &c.

Here we'll begin with Tragedy. Tragedy indeed does raise the Passions; and its chief work is to raise Compassion: For the great Entertainment of Tragedy, is the moving that tenderest and noblest Humane Passion, Pity. And what is it we pity there, but the Distresses, Calamities and Ruins of Ho∣nour, Loyalty, Fidelity or Love, &c. represent∣ed in some True or Fictitious, Historick or Romantick Subject of the Play? Thus Vir∣tue, like Religion by its Martyrdom, is ren∣dred more shining by its Sufferings, and the

Impression we receive from Tragedy, is only making us in Love with Virtue, (for Pity is a little Kin to Love) and out of Love with Vice; for at the same time we pity the suffering Virtue, it raises our Aversions and Hate to the Treachery or Tyranny in the Tragedy, from whence and by whom that Virtue suffers. How often is the good A∣ctor (as for Instance, the Iago in the Moor of Venice, or the Countess of Notingham in the Earl of Essex) little less than Curst for Acting an Ill Part? Such a Natural Affe∣ction and Commiseration of Innocence does Tragedy raise, and such an Abhorrence of Villany.

And that this is truly the Entertainment of Tragedy, we come on purpose to see Virtue made Lovely, and Vice made Odious. That Expectation brings us to the Play; and if we find not that very Expectation an∣swer'd, instead of any satisfactory Delight we receive, or any Applause we return, we Explode and Hiss our Entertainment; the Play sinks, and the Performance is lost, and we come away with this Disrelish as to think both our Money and Time ill spent.

'Tis true a Character that has not all the Perfections of true Honour or Innocence,

nay a Vicious one sometimes may move Compassion. But then 'tis not the Vice or Blemishes in the Character that moves that Pity. For Instance in the Orphan, we pity the Vicious and Libertine Polydore that lyes with his Brother's Wife. But when do we pity him? When he's touch'd with that sense and horror of his Guilt, that he gives up his Life, (pick's a feign'd Quarrel with the Injur'd Castalio, and runs upon his Sword) to Expiate. 'Tis not the Criminal but the Penitent, the Virtue not Vice in the Cha∣racter moves the Compassion.

Thus we pity Timon of Athens, not as the Libertine nor Prodigal, but the Misanthro∣pos: When his Manly and Generous Indig∣nation against the Universal Ingratitude of Manking makes him leave the World and fly the Society of Man; when his open'd Eyes and recollected Virtue can stand the Temptation of a Treasure he found in the Woods, enough to purchase his own Estate again: When all this glittering Mine of of Gold has not Charm to bribe him back in∣to a hated World, to the Society of Vil∣lains, Hypocrites and Flatterers. We pity the Evandra too, his Mistress, not for the Vice and Frailty in her Character, but for that Generous Gratitude to the Founder of her Fortunes, that she sells all she has in the

World, and brings it all in Jewels to relieve the Distresses of Timon; and what heigh∣tens our Pity, is, that she follows him, not for a Criminal or wanton Conversation with him: Nay, what's yet greater, she can quit all the Vanities and Temptations of Life, and with an equal Contempt of Jewels and Gold, can embrace his voluntary Poverty, eat Roots, drink Water, and dye with him.

However, if the pitying Part is not the main Offence, there's another more dread∣ful Danger from Tragedy. For as his Mi∣nutius Foelix, upon that Subject, tells us,

Sometimes a Luscious Actor shall whine you into Love, and give the Disease that he Counterfeits.

Mr. Collier himself is more at large upon this Play-house Danger: For he concludes his Book with this last Argument to prove the Unlawfulness of Plays, viz.

Were the Stage in a condition to wipe off all her other Imputations, there are two Things behind which would stick upon them, and have an ill Effect upon the Au∣dience. The first is their dilating so much upon the Argument of Love. The Sub∣ject is Treated Home, and in the most tender and passionate manner imagina∣ble

&c. These Love Representations, oftentimes call up the Spirits and set them at Work. The Play is Acted over again in the sense of Fancy, and the first Imita∣tion becomes a Model. Love has generally a Party within; and when the Wax is pre∣par'd the Impression is easily made. Thus the Disease of the Stage grows catching. It throws its Amours among the Com∣pany; and forms these Passions, when it does not find them, &c.

I don't say the Stage Fells All before them, and disables the whole Audience: 'Tis a hard Battle where none escapes. However their Triumphs and their Tro∣phies are unspeakable. Neither need we much wonder at the matter. They are dangerously prepar'd for Conquest, and Empire. There's Nature, and Passion, and Life, in all the Circumstances of their Action. Their Declamation, their Mein, their Gestures and their Equipage, are moving and significant. Now when the Subject is agreeable, a lively Re∣presentation, and a passionate way of Expression, make wild work, and have a strong Force upon the Blood and Tem∣per.

I cannot well understand what Mr. Col∣lier means (and I-fear, he don't over-well understand himself,) in all this last Para∣graph. But perhaps he design'd it more for Rapsody than Reason; and so 'tis no great matter whether it be Intelligible or not. For all this Nature, Passion, Life and Action; Declamation, Mien, Gesture, and Equipage are purely the Actors, and by making such wild work in the Blood and Temper, and felling so many of the Audience before them, plainly tells us, That these unspeakable Tri∣umphs and Trophies, Conquest and Em∣pire are all the Actors and Actresses and the Cupids Darts come all from their own Eyes and Charms, and consequently the Au∣diences captivated Hearts are all their own; the Enamour'd Gentlemen in the Pit, and the Gay Ladies in the Boxes, are these Victori∣ous Players most passionate humble Ser∣vants.

This unspeakable Play-house Victory, I am afraid is a piece of News that wants Con∣firmation. For as to the Men-Players, I dare swear for 'em, that all the Feminine Trophies our Triumphant Young Fellows of both Play-Houses can boast, is not enough to buy them Sword-knots and Crevate∣strings. And for the Ladies of the Stage, with all the advantage of Paint, Plume, and

Candle-light; I do not hear they are so very over-stockt with Idolaters, or make any such general Slaughter-work amongst the Au∣dience before them.

But for once, we'll wave this Interpreta∣tion of Mr. Collier, and screw his foremen∣tion'd Rapsody to the Sense of his Minu∣tius, viz. That the Charms of the Coun∣terfeit whining Love, separate from the Charms of the whining Lover, shall infuse a True Love-sick Disease into the Audi∣ence.

Now 'tis worth one's Pains to inquire by what wonderful Operation, and by what unaccountable Conveyance, this Counter∣feit Disease must infuse the true Disease into the Audience. First, here's Pygmalion's Fa∣ble infinitely out-done; for the Pygmalion here does not animate the Image, but the Image the Pygmalion. But let that pass.

How then must this Love-disease be con∣tracted! why, thus. Here's a Young Beau∣tiful Actress on the Stage, we'll suppose, by Virtue of the Attracting Graces of Carriage, Movement, Address, Tenderness, Languish∣ment, and what not, shall make a Man fall in Love. In Love! With whom?

not the Mistress of all these Attracting Gra∣ces; No, that's the natural Way of falling in Love, and that's none of the Operation here. Those Graces that in any other Wo∣man but an Actress shall win Hearts for her self, shall here have a quite contrary Effect. You shall go off as cold as a Chaste Ioseph to all these visible Charms and Char∣mer that gave you the Fire, and be all in a flame for some Body else. These are in∣deed unspeakable Stage-Triumphs and Tro∣phies! Thus the Charms of one Woman wins a Heart for another. I have heard in∣deed of Celadon's kissing his Mistress upon another Woman's Lips, but that was no∣thing to this; He kiss'd his Mistress only in Imagination, but here the Lover is Cap∣tivated in true Earnest.

Really the Ladies in our Boxes stand high∣ly obliged to the Women in the Play-house, and are in all Honour bound to support the Stage. For instead of exercising any Dint of Charms of their own to get Lovers, they keep their Deputies on the Stage to do the Drudgery of Conquest, and carry off the Prize themselves.

One thing I would willingly advise Mr. Collier, viz. to sit Chair-man himself at a

Natural Philosophy Lecture, and read a little Learnedly upon this unspeakable way of catching the Disease of Love: Other∣wise I am afraid 'tis such a weak-faith'd Age we live in, that all his Metaphysical Divi∣nity will hardly convince 'em of this Super∣lative Operation of Love.

Besides, if his Minutius, and all the other Primitive Doctors much of the same Opi∣nion, could plead Infallibility, and their Ar∣gument were Unquestionable: Nevertheless they would hardly carry Mr. Collier's Cause. For if whining Love is this unspeakable Conqueror, and Love never whines but in our Tragedies, where the Virtuous Di∣stress'd Love is the Darling in the Play; Consequently if a Man should catch the Disease from a Iaffeir and Belvidira, or a Marius and Lavinia, or any such Character, such an Infection would rather recommend then condemn the Stage, not corrupt but reform the Audience, by refining that No∣ble Passion, so depraved in this Age, from Coldness and Libertinism, to Fidelity and Virtue.

Well, if the Infection from Tragedy strikes not altogether so mortal, let us exa∣mine the more pestilential Air of Comedy,

and search if possible, which way the more fatal Poison enters there.

First, then for the subject of Comedy, 'tis the Representation of Humane Life in a lower class of Conversation; we visit the Palace for Tragedy, and range the Town for Comedy, viz. for the Follies, the Vices, the Vanities and the Passions of Mankind, which we meet with every Day. In short, the Comedian, may join with the Satyrist,

Quicquid agunt Homines, Votum, Timor, Ira, Voluptas, Gaudia, Discursus, nostri est farrago libelli.

But to confine our selves into as narrow a compass as we can, under these three Heads, viz. Folly, Knavery, and Love, we may not improperly Rank the whole Characters in Comedy.

The Fools we may divide into three Classes, viz. the Cudden, the Cully and the Fop. The Cudden a Fool of God Almigh∣ties making; the Cully, of Man's making; and the Fop, of his own making.

For the first of these Fools the Cudden, the Sr. Martin Marral, or the Sr. Arthur Addle, &c.

I hope the Audience is in no danger of tak∣ing Taint from these Characters in Comedy; the made Fool may be a catching Disease, but not the born one.

For the second, one of the made Fools, the Cully. Here's the least danger of a Contagion that way; for that Disease is ra∣ther cured than catch'd from the Stage. The Country 'Squire or the Knight, the Prodi∣gal or the Bubble, &c. either Cozen'd by Sharpers, Spungers, Dicers and Bullies; or Jilted by Jades, or snared into any other Ruinous Folly of this Kind; In exposing these Characters, the Stage does the Work of a Philosophy School, it carries the whole Force of Precept and Instruction to warn unwary Youth from the Snares and Quick∣sands of Debauchery. It points him out the several Harpies that devour him, and instead of taking Taint from the Stage, the very sight of the Plague-spots not gives, but expels the Contagion.

For the third Fool, the Fop; this indeed of all Fools is the most incorrigible. For the Cudden wants no good Will to be wiser, and would learn Wit if he were capable of it. The Cully indeed is capable of being taught Wit, but seldom learns it, till he has too well paid for his Learning; sometimes

perhaps at no less Price than his Ruin, when he buys the Knowledge of finding himself a Chouse, by the same Experimental Wis∣dom as Sir Philip Sydney's Painter learnt to draw Battle-work from Musidorus, viz. when his Hands were cut off. But of all Fools the Fop is the blindest; his Faults are his Perfections, whilst he looks upon himself as the compleatest of Courtiers and Gentlemen; and by that means perhaps, tho' never to be cured of the Fondness he has for his own tawdry Picture; however, in all Places in the World he will never play the Narcissus at the Theatres, nor fall much in Love with his own painted Face, in a Sir Courtly's or a Lord Foppington's Looking∣glass. This I will positively say, He that does not bring the Fop to the Play-house, shall never carry it from thence. And in all the Stage Fop-pictures, the Play-house bids so fair for mending that Fool too, that if the good Will fails, the Fault's not in the Mirror, the Hand that holds it, or the Light 'tis sets at, but the perverse and deprav'd Opticks that cannot see themselves there.

As to the second Class, &c. the Villain, the Vsurer, the Cheat, the Pandar, the Bully, the Flatterer, and all the rest of their Bre∣thren in Iniquity; there's so little Danger from all their Stage-Pictures, that there's

here no fear of playing the Narcissus in the Glass; and therefore we'll pass to the lewd Love-Distempers in Comedy; and see what Mortality the more dangerous Contagion and Malignity from these Counterfeit Di∣seases may produce.

First then, to shew how very little Influ∣ence the Stage-Characters and Representa∣tions of Whoredom and Debauchery carry to the Temptation of the Audience, or the Corruption of Manners; or to make Lewd∣ness look lovely even to the very Practisers of it: Let us consider, that, he that loves Whoredom, loves the Harlot purely as the Harlot, the Sin when it comes singly, in puris naturalibus, with as little a Train at the heels of it as possible. For no Man loves the Levity and Fickleness of the Harlot, the falseness of her Oaths and Tears, the pro∣fusness of her Vanity, the insults of her Pride, or the mercynariness of her Lust. Every Man, nay, the greatest Libertine himself would have a Mistress, (if such a Creature of that kind can be found in the World) that brings Love for Love. The Man that loves the Wanton, loves not the Traitress nor the Hypocrite; The Syren may be lovely, and her Musick pleasing; but we are not over-fond of her Enchantments, her Rocks nor her Quicksands.

The same Argument holds on the other side: The Dalilah her self loves a Character of Honour and Fidelity in her Paramour, not the looseness of the Rover and the Libertine: The finest Gentlemen, one of them in all our Comedies; a Dorimant himself is no ve∣ry tempting Character for a Young Lady to fall in Love with. The veriest Wanton of that Sex is as much for Monopoly as the other; they care not for half Hearts, a Gallant divided between a Lovet, a Bellinda, and a Harriot. 'Tis true, we may see a mad Florimel upon a Stage in Love with a wild Celadon, for wildness sake; but that Rara avis in Terris, is hardly to be found off of the Stage.

Now as the Lovers, I mean the vicious Characters of Love, in our Comedies are generally (I might venture to say, all of 'em) set forth with some of these foremen∣tion'd Corruptions, viz. Levity, Hypocrisie, Infidelity, &c. we meet the Jilt, the Rover, the Libertine, false Vows, false Oaths, Love for Money, Treason for Love, or some o∣ther ther accumulated Sin, more than the bare Wanton, in all of them: All these therefore are so far from ensnaring or seducing the un∣wary Auditor, those inviting Charmers off of the Stage by what he sees presented upon it; that they are rather the Objects of his A∣version.

The Objects of his Aversion! Have a care what you say: no, no, says Dr. Collier at my Elbow, don't mistake your self Lactantius his Testimony in his Divine In∣stitutions, Dedicated to Constantine the Great, shall confute that Argument.

The Debauching of Virgins, and the A∣mours of Strumpets are the Subject of Comedy. And here the Rule is, the more. Rhetorick the more Mischief, and the best Poets are the worst Common-wealths-men. For the Harmony and Ornament of the Composition, serves only to recommend the Argument, to fortifie the Charme, and engage the Me∣mory. Let us avoid therefore these Di∣versions least somewhat of the Malignity seize us.

Well, to answer both the Primitive Dr. and the Modern one together, I fancy some very good and substantial Reasons, and Proof may be produc'd, That the Orna∣ment and Composition, the Poet and Rhe∣torick may make these Amours of Strum∣pets, Debauchery, &c. a delectable Enter∣tainment to the Auditor that hears them upon the Stage; and yet neither recommend the Argument, nor leave any Charm to

corrupt him, or Malignity to seize him; but rather the quite Contrary.

First then, why is the Jilt, the Strumpet, or the Adultress, an Entertaining Chara∣cter in Comedy? Why! Because those very Characters afford the most ample Matter in the Conduct of the Play, to gain one of the great Ends of Comedy, and that which chiefly attracts the Audience thither, viz. Mirth. It gives Occasion, Matter, and Sub∣ject to create the Laughter of the Audi∣ence.

The Jilt for Instance, with her Wind∣ings and Turnings, her Wheedles to draw in her Cully, and her Artifices to Secure and Manage him; The false Wife with her Faunings and Flattery, to lull the Hus∣bands Jealousie. Her Starts and her Fears at every Danger and Alarme, her whole Arts to cover the Hypocrite; and her Surprize and Confusion at her Detection and Disco∣very (for Comedy it self does that Drama∣tick Justice to bring her to shame, if no o∣ther punishment) as they afford plot design, and contrivance, &c. are the highest Jest of Comedy. And 'tis for that, and that only Charme that these Chara∣cters find so general a Reception on the Stage. And that this is truly the only

Charme, is manifest from the success of those Comedies. 'Tis not the Lewdness it self in a Vicious Character, that recom∣mends it to the Audience, but the witty Turnes, Adventures and Surprizes in those Characters that give it Reception. For without this, the Play drops and dies.

And to shew you, that a Vicious Chara∣cter, Quatenus as Vicious, is no Darling of the Audience; but that the Mirth only that it raises, is the Delight of Comedy; let an Ingenious Author raise the same Mirth upon a Virtuous Foundation, and that Comedy shall be as hug'd a Favourite as the other. For Instance in a Sr. Solmon Single and seve∣ral other Comedies, where the Love is all Virtuous. In fine, 'tis the Wit of the Com∣posure, not the Vice in the Composure, gives Life to the Comedy. A dull Repre∣sentation of Vice or Virtue, shall be equally Hist off the Stage. And tho' even Vice and Debauchery in a Theatrick Representation may find Applause, 'tis never the more a Closet Darling for being a Stage one. Nay rather one the contrary, much less the Darling of the Closet. For the publick exposure of Debauchery, with all her Trea∣cheries, Wills, Delusions, Impostures and Snares, has more of the Antidote than the Poyson.

There's a great deal of difference betwixt likeing the Picture and the Substance. A Man may be very well pleas'd with a Forest work piece of Tapestry, with the Lyons, the Bears, and the Wolves, &c. but not over fond of their Company in Flesh and Blood; and confequently the very worst Jilt may be the Minion upon the Stage, and, as I said before, our Aversion off it.

Nay, I dare be so bold, as to tell this an∣gry Gentleman, as highly as he Resents the Cuckolding of Aldermen and Quality in our Comedies, that I could find him Matter of very good Instruction, from a Character of this kind, in a very Ingenious Author, though not much in Mr. Colliers Favour. For Example, If the Reverend Gentlemen of the Fur would be but half as kind to a Play-house as a Pin-makers-Hall, and step for Edification, but so far towards Westminster, as to see the Old Batchelor; I doubt not but an Isaac Fondlewife would be a very seasona∣ble Monitor to Reverend City Sixty, to warn against the Marrying to Sixteen. Nor can I think it such a scandalous part of the Dramatick Poet; but rather a true Poetick Justice, to expose the unreasonableness of such Superannuated Dotage, that can blindly think or hope, that a bare Chain of Gold has Magick enough in the Circle to

bind the Fidelity of so unequal a Match, a Match so contrary to the Holy Ordinance of Matrimony; and an Itch at those Years that deserves the severest Lash of the Stage. And if an Author would pick out such a Character for a little Stage Satyr, where can he meet with it but amongst the City or Court Quality? Such Inequality of Marriages are rarely to be found, but under the Roofs of Honour; for so Antiquated a Lover, (the least he can do) must bring a Coach and Six, to carry off such a Young Bride.

One thing mightily offends this Divine Author, viz. That our Modern Plays make our Libertines of both Sexes, Persons of Fi∣gure and Quality, Fine Gentlemen and La∣dies of Fashion, a fault utterly unpractis'd by the Ancient Poets: For Terence and Plau∣tus his Strumpets are little People.

Now this is so far from a fault in our Co∣medies, that there's a necessity of those Characters, and a Vertue in that Choice. For as the greatest and best part of our Audi∣ence are Quality, if we would make our Comedies Instructive in the exposing of Vice, we must not lash the Vices at Wap∣ping to mend the Faults at Westminster.

And as the Instructive Design of the

Play must look as well to the Cautioning of Virtue from the ensnaring Conversation of Vice, as the lashing of Vice it self. Thus the Court Libertine must be a Person of Wit and Honour, and have all the accom∣plishments of a Fine Gentleman. (The Court Ladies receive no Visits from Ruffians.) Besides there needs no cautioning against a Don Iohn; every Fool would run from a Devil with a visible Cloven-foot. That De∣vil therefore must have all the Face and Charms of Honour, when it would seduce Honour; and therefore 'tis those very Pi∣ctures the Stage must present.

The Plain-dealer speaks very significantly to this purpose, and very much justifies this Choice of Characters for Plays. Who betrays you, Over-reaches or Cheats you, but your Friend? Your Enemy is not trusted with your Affairs. Who violates the Honour of your Wife, but your Friend? Your Enemy is not admitted into your Family.

Who therefore are those Dangerous Friends of Quality, but their Bosome Con∣versation? and who that Conversation but their Equality; and therefore for an Instru∣ctive Draught for Comedy, who so proper to sit to her Pencil as Quality?

Besides, Comedy opens a wrong Door to let in a Taint of Lust. Lust is the pro∣duct Thought and Meditation; not the Child of Laughter. The Auditor must have a much more serious Face than he wears at a Light Comedy, to take so deep and so fa∣tal an Impression.

Nay, if we could suppose that the Jest of a Comedy shall open his Laughing Mouth so wide as to let down a Lust like a Witches Ball of Pinns; or rather that a speaking I∣mage in a Comedy shall have the same con∣ceptionary Force upon us, as the European Picture at the Mauritanean Princesses Beds∣feet, that made her bring forth a White Child; Yet still the Picture in Comedy, like that in the Ladies Bed-Chamber, does not hang long enough for any such Con∣ceptionary Impression: For besides twenty other equally diverting Objects in the same Comical Lantscape; here's the whole Stage new furnish'd every Day; and a new Col∣lection of Painting for the next Entertain∣ment. The Venus yesterday is the Diana to day, the Iuno to morrow, all a quite contrary set of Imagery. And if the Move∣ment, the Gesture, the Equipage, have any such dangerous Force, here's not one Move∣ment one Day but what's quite alter'd the next; and so Change upon Change, &c.

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

so that in the infinite Variety of the Stage, here's no dwelling upon one darling Object to run any such Danger of Infection: For the whole Stage-Mercury is too volatile to fix.

But if the Stage had any such Magical Power, (for no Natural one will reach it) over poor weak Mortality to Enchant, Cor∣rupt, Confound, or what else Mr. Collier pleases; we'll try the Experiment but in one Play: For Instance, we'll take one of the loosest, and to answer the Temptation, one of the loveliest of those Libertine Pictures, Mr. Dorimant, we named before; and grant∣ing the Ladies Love Proof against such a Libertine Character; we'll suppose some Young mad Spark as much Charm'd with this lovely Dorimant, as this Divine Specu∣lator can fancy him, and consequently shall catch the true Disease from this amiable Counterfeit; pray which of all the Ignes fatui, in Mr. Dorimant's Character shall be the misleading Fire? For here in one Play, in the Presentation of poor three Hours, we have, First, Mr. Dorimant's Cooling In∣triegu, all his retreating Steps from the tiresome Embraces of an old Mistress, Ma∣dam Lovet; next his start of Love, an A∣mour, en passant, into the Arms of Belinda; and to conclude the Character, his last ho∣nourable

Passion for the Virtuous Mistress Harriot. Now I say, to which of all these three, shall this mad Sparks Tarantula dance? (For to all three together is a little too mad a Gallop:) If to the first: And consequent∣ly (to Copy from the Original) he goes home weaned from an old Darling Sin, and turns off some Bosom Dalilah; if our Spark catches Fire from this part of the wild Dorimant, I hope, our Ecclesiastical Censor will sind no Sin in so harmless an Infection. If to the second: If he takes Fire from Do∣trimant's Frailty with Belinda; there indeed he may want some Church-Buckets to quench him; 'tis high time for all Hands for his Conversion. But if he sums up the Character, and Copies the whole reform∣ing Rover, quits, like Dorimant, his old sour Grapes and forbidden Fruit, for the Charming Sweets of a Chaste Harriot, and finishes the Picture in the Comedy, in an honourable Wedlock Passion; then I hope this Reverend Corrigidore of unruly Love, will remit the Lash, and hold his whip Hand.

Thus you see what Boutefeu does Mr. Collier make of a poor Player, that with the Intoxication of a three Hours Tale of Love, shall put a Man not only into a whole Nights pain of it, but possibly to a total

Corruption of his whole Mass of Blood, and the very enflaming of an unquenchea∣ble Feavor. What Quixot Wind-mills can an Enthusiast raise, and then Battle the Gyant of his own Creation!

The second of the two Things he has to object against the Stage, is,

Their Encou∣raging Revenge. What is more common then Duells and Quarrelling in their Characters of Figure? Those Practices which are infamous in Reason, Capital in Law, and damnable in Religion, are the Credit of the Stage, &c. But this Subject he tells you he had discours'd of before,—viz. p. 67. Our Saviour (he says) tells us we must forgive until se∣venty times Seven. That is, we must ne∣ver be tired out of Clemency and good Nature. He has taught us to pray for the Forgiveness of our own Sins, only upon the condition of forgiving others: Here is no Exception upon the Repetition of the Fault or the Quality of the Pro∣vocation.

I shall not dispute upon Our Saviours Pre∣cepts of Forgiveness, but acknowledge it possibly, the highest Characteristick of Chri∣stianity, and a Perfection that comes nea∣rest to the Great Original of Mercy, that de∣liver'd

it. But to let my Reader see upon what stress, Mr. Collier enforces his Scriptural Arguments, we'll Examine, what Conse∣quence must follow the Universal Stretch of a Divine Precept.

By these Divine Commands of our Savi∣our to the Literal Extent of the Precept: In the first place I must neither Sue in Law nor Equity for the Recovery of a Just Right, or the Reparation of any wrong whatever. For the Prosecution of Law is directly opposite to this Forgiving Doctrine.

So here's Westminster-hall shut up imme∣diately. Nay, if the precept of God obliges me to the same Resignation of my Coat to the Thief that has Rob'd me of my Cloak, I am so far from Licens'd or Authoriz'd to take that Christian Revenge against the Of∣fender, viz. the Prosecution of publick Ju∣stice upon him; that the very Christian Judge, instead of Arraigning the Robber, the Cheat or the Felon at the Bar, for the Breach of our Humane Law; should rather stand obliged to Arraign the Prosecu∣tor for the Breach of a Divine one. So here's the Old-Bayly shut up too. Nay here's the very Law it self Arraign'd, as little less then Antichristian for punishing that Injury,

which the express Law of God, even seventy seven times over, obliges us to forgive. I be∣lieve this Author as bold a Sermonist, and as hardy a Hero of the Rockost, as his Per∣swasive to Consideration has prov'd him; Ne∣vertheless has hardly Courage enough to Preach this Doctrine to the Gentlemen of St. Stephens Chappel.

Nay, by this forgiving unrevenging Do∣ctrine push'd home, here's Passive Obedience and Non-Resistance set up with a Vengeance, not only in submission to Soveraign Tyranny to Lord it over us, but even to every little Diminitive Arbitrary Thief and Ruffain, the Lord and Master of my Purse, my House, my Coat, &c. for at this rate of Forgiveness, here's a General Goal-Deli∣very, Newgate Doors set open, Oppression, Injustice, Theft, Rapine and Villany let loose, and the Homo Homini Lupus at free Discretion to Spoil, Ravage, and Over-run the whole World, whilst the meek, hum∣ble, resigning, forgiving Christian is the tame bleating Sheep before him.

The Gentleman Thief at this rate will be as great as an Almanzor himself, and may Plume in his Vanity.

I am as free as Nature first made Man, Before the servitude of Laws began; When wild in Woods the Noble Savage ran.

In short, how can any Man of Sense ex∣tort such rigorous Constructions of the Di∣vine Commands; as if the God of Concord and Peace could set up a Doctrine of Chri∣stianity utterly destructive, not only to all Civil Government, but even to Human So∣ciety it self.

Mr. Collier is almost as angry at the Va∣nity, as at the greater Sins of the Stage; and passes his Vote for their Exclusion, even for that Offence alone. But if he'll make a fair distributive Justice to all other Vanities, I am afraid he'll set up another Doctrine al∣most as pernicious to Government as the first. For if the Vanity-shop the Play∣house must go down; pray let the Vanity∣shops the Embroiderer, the Laceman, the Featherman, the Ribband-Weaver, cum mul∣tis aliis come in for a snack; for there's not one of all those Professions but is utterly useless to the real wants of Life, and per∣haps deals in the more dangerous Vanities; for the Stage Vanities may only raise an In∣nocent Tear or a Laugh or so; but these o∣ther

ther Vanities are very often the unhappy Nurses of Pride, a more capital Fault.

I confess, a good stretch of this Argument for the General Retrenchment of Vanities would make a terrible City slaughter, and almost as many Beggers as the stretch of the other would Thieves: However, 'tis but Dr. Collier's Preaching them another healing Text, being a second Perswasive, to Poverty, like his First, to Consideration, to al∣leviate their sorrows, and soften their losses, by assuring them, That the Poor shall inherit the Kingdom of Heaven.

The Remarks upon King Arthur and Amphi∣tryon Examined.

TO come now to his particular Remarks upon the Modern Plays, I shall be∣gin by Seniority, viz. with Mr. Dryden, and examine his Offences in that most capital Sin of Profaneness and Blasphemy.

He tells you in King Arthur,

Mr. Dry∣den makes a strange jumble and hodg podg of Matters, Angels, Cupids, Syrens, and De∣vils, &c. the Hell of Heathenism, and the Hell of Revelation, &c. And why are Truth and Fiction, Heathenism and Chri∣stianity, the most Serious and the most Trifling Things blended together, and thrown into one form of Diversion? Why is all this done unless it be to ridicule the whole, and make one as incredible as the other?

Not at all; Learned Sir but because his betters have done it before him; and Mr. Dryden thinks it no scorn to follow his elder Brother Gamaliel Mr. Milton in his Paradise Lost.

Four Infernal Rivers that disgorge

Into the Burning Lake their Baleful Streams;

Abhorred Styx, the Flood of deadly Hate,

Sad Acheron, of sorrow black and deep;

Cocytus named of Lamentation loud,

Hear'd in the woful Stream, fierce Phlegeton,

Whose Waves of Torrent Fire enflame the Rage, &c. Parad. Lost, B. 2.

Is not here the Fictitious Rivers of Ache∣ron, Cocytus, Styx, and Phlelgeton, running as directly into the Revelation Lake of Brim∣stone,

as Mr. Collier is running out of Sense, Reason, and Good Nature, to charge such an innocent Poetica Licentia with so bar∣barous a design, as to ridicule the Revelation, and render Christianity, and all that's Serious and Sacred, incredible.

But to proceed with our Remarker,

Mr. Dryden's Airy and Earthy Spirits Discourse of the first state of Devils, of the chief of their Revolt, their Punish∣ment and Impostures. This, Mr. Dry∣den, (he says) very Religiously calls a Fai∣ry way of Writing, which depends wholly on the force of Imagination. Epist. Ded. What then, is the Fall of Angels a Romance? Has it no Basis of Truth, nothing to sup∣port it but strength of Fancy, and Poetick Invention! After he had mentioned Hell, Devils, &c. and given us a sort of Bible Description of those formidable Things, &c. I am surprized to hear him call it a Fairy kind of Writing. Is the History of Tophet no better proved than that of Styx; Is the Lake of Brimstone, and that of Phlegeton alike dreadful; and have we as much reason to believe the Torments of Titius and Prometheus, as those of the Devils and Damn'd? These are lamenta∣ble Consequences! And yet I cannot see how the Poet can avoid them.

[Not see? no, 'tis impossible he should, who so blind as—]

But setting aside the Dedication, the Representation it self is scandalously irre∣ligious, &c. To see Hell thus play'd with is a mighty Refreshment to a lewd Con∣science, and a byassed Understanding; it heartens the young Libertine, and con∣firms the well-wishers to Atheism, and makes Vice bold and enterprizing; such Diversions serve to dispel the gloom, and gild the horrors of the Shades below, and are a sort of ensurance against Dam∣nation. One would think these Poets went upon a certainty, and could demon∣strate a Scheme of Infidelity.

Thus he runs on for almost Forty Lines more, all upon this Head. I would not have made so long a Quotation, only to shew my Reader what a Iehu Champion of Religion he is, and how fast and how far he can drive at a breath. To give him his due, he has a mighty Copiousness of Words; and to do him right, in the use he makes of 'em, he's always as liberal as he is rich. I remember an Author that tells us, Words are the Wise Man's Counters, and the Fool's ready Money. Now, if this Learned Ma∣ster of Arts and Language, shall be mistaken

in his Charge against Mr. Dryden's Epistle Dedicatory, and Mr. Dryden's Fairy Writ∣ing, upon full Examination, instead of so frightful a Goblin, should prove but an in∣nocent harmless Spright, and consequently all this effusion of Rhetorick should be pro∣digally thrown away in waste; However, this plain dealing Author gives him that comfort, viz. that his Silver Eloquence is all current Sterling, and not gilt Brass.

Well then, to give Mr. Dryden's Fairys a little Examination.

Because Mr. Dryden allusively, and ve∣ry emphatically so, calls his description of Hell, and discourse of Devils, &c. a Fairy way of Writing, and as such, it depends up∣on the force of Imagination, that therefore he says, (or means it) that the Subject is Fairy Land he writes upon; that Hell is but Phantom; the Fall of Angels, Romance; and Damnation but Chimera; for a Fairy way of writing, our Author tells you, can be nothing but a History of Fiction, a Sub∣ject of Imaginary Beings, such as never had a∣ny Existence in Time or Nature. Good Hea∣ven! How perversly does this angry Gentle∣man Scribble! If the Infernal Powers are invisible, the Devils incorporeal Spirits, nay, the very locality of Hell it self, and the

materiality of the avenging Flames, are Things disputable amongst the most Learn∣ed Theologists. And if a discourse of Hell or Devils, with this Gentleman's leave, is a Subject that a Poet may presume to handle, (his leave, indeed, we ought to beg in this case; for if treating a Mahomet or Mufti too boldly, by this Author's Innuendo's is a Pro∣fanation of the true Divinity, who knows but an intrusion into the Affairs of Hell, by the same rate of Presumption, may be peep∣ing into a Sanctum Sanctorum) his leave there∣fore first beg'd, if Mr. Dryden may presume to speak a word or two of Hell, &c. (as there's scarce a Poet, either Divine or Pro∣fane that has not presumed upon the same subject;) pray let me ask this Theological Critick, if a Poetical Draught or Imagery of Hell and Devils, though drawn as near the Life as the whole Bible Light can set them, and done by the ablest Master skill of Man, can be any thing but a piece of Fai∣ry pencil Work, all the Colours, the Features, all by the force of imagination. For how can incorporeal and immaterial Beings be set forth to the Eye of Human Apprehen∣sion without an Array of form and shape; The Ghost must walk with a Body, the Fiend with a cloven Foot, or something of that kind; or the Apparition's lost: And what's all these but a Fairy Creation of Fan∣cy

in the very propperest Name he could give it?

Nay, in much the same kind of Language does not the Scripture it self all along speak of Almighty God? What is the Eye, the Ear, the Hand, or the Face of God, the common Scripture-Phrase, any thing more than mere Notion; that Infinity and Om∣nipotence whom the Skys cannot contain, thus humbly drawn into that human like Figure in Miniature, purposely adapted to those short-sighted Opticks, the narrow ca∣pacity of Man.

But to return to our King Arthur, after above 20 lines of the serious Consideration of Eternal punishment, and the frightful State of the Damn'd, &c. Let us see, says he,

how Mr. Dryden represents those un∣happy Spirits, and their place of abode! Why very entertainingly! Those that have a true tast for Atheism were never bet∣ter Regaled. One would think by this Play, that the Devils were mere Mormoes and Bugbears, fit only to fright Children and Fools. They rally upon Hell and Damnation, with a great deal of Air and Pleasantry; and appear like Robin Good-fellow, only to make the Company laugh. Philidel. is called a Puling Sprite, and

why so? For this Pious Reason, because,

He trembles at the yawning Gulf of Hell, Nor dares approach the Flames, least he should singe His gaudy silken Wings. He sighs when he should plunge a Soul in Sulphur, As with compassion toucht of foolish Man.

The Answer is, What a half Devil's he?

you see how admirably it runs all upon the Christian Scheme? Sometimes they are half Devils, and sometimes hopeful Devils, and what you please to make sport with. Grimbald is afraid of being whoop'd through Hell at his return, for mis∣carrying in his business. It seems there is great leasure for Diversion! There's Whooping in Hell, instead of Weeping and Wailing.

Our Author, you may observe, almost e∣very where, lashes the Poets with a twig of their own Birch; his Arguments are e∣very where all high flights of Rapture, on∣ly his Poetical Field of Fancy is a little too much over-run with the Savine and Worm-wood; the rankness of the Soil is most Fruitful in those bitterer sort of Vegetives.

But in his last Remark, his Divine Pega∣sus, as high as he generally flyes, is a lit∣tle jaded. And perhaps his Railery in this place has more of the Robin Goodfellow then Mr. Dryden's; and I am certain has more reason to set us a Laughing. For I dare to Swear, he is that particular Dissenter from the General Opinion of every reasona∣ble Judge, upon this Quotation from Mr. Dryden; that neither the Character of Phi∣lidel, though but Mr. Dryden's own Fai∣ry Creation, or those Pious Reasons, as he calls 'em, the before quoted Lines, have any thing of that extraordinary Air of Plea∣santry, to set either the Atheist agog, or the Company a tittering. And here I must de∣sire him once again to read Milton, and tell us if his Paradise Lost has not character'd the whole Body of the Apostate Angels, animating each other into an Obstinacy and Emulation in Wickedness, glorying in the very cause of their Fall, their Rebellion a∣gainst God, though in the midst of their Torments they suffer for't

Better to Rule in Hell than Serve in Heaven.

reproaching every Infernal faintness, daring each other in every new and hardier insult against God, and priding and pluming in every success in their Machinations against Hated Man.

Nay, does not Cowley, in his Divine Poem of Davideis make his Infernal Envy (a copy from the Original) speak in the same Di∣alect.

—Dares none Attempt what becomes Furies: Are ye grown Benum'd with Fear or Virtues sprightless Cold, You who were once, I'm sure so brave and bold! Oh my ill chang'd Condition, oh my Fate! Did I lose Heaven for this!

At thy dread Anger the fixt World shall shake, And frighted Nature her own Laws forsake. Do thou but threat, loud Storms shall make re∣ply, And Thunder eccho't to the trembling Sky. Heaven's gilded Troops shall flutter here and there, Leaving their boasted Songs tuned to a Sphear; Nay, their GOD too—for fear he did, when we Took noble Arms against his Tyranny; So noble Arms, and in a Cause so great, That Triumphs we deserve for our defeat. There was a Day, oh might I see't again, Thô he had fiercer Flames to thrust us in.

Now with what egregious partiality does he tell us, that what has stood the test of an Age in both these shining Authors, has met an universal Reception and Applause,

even in Divine Poetry, yet should now start up for such an impardonable Impiety, such a Titillation to Atheism, and what not.

Nobis non licet esse tam disertis.

Dramatick Poetry must not dare to han∣dle so dangerous a Noli me tangere.

Hitherto Mr. Collier has only picqueer'd, skirmisht with a few stragling Blasphemies, but he makes a pitcht Battle against the whole Play of Amphitryon.

And what does he infer from all this; but that Mr. Dryden is Blaspheming, even God himself.

To what purpose does Iupi∣ter appear, but in the shape of Iehovah! Why are the incomnunicable Attributes burlesqued, and Omnipotence applyed to Acts of Infamy! To what end can such horrible stuff as this serve, unless to ex∣pose the Notion, and extinguish the Be∣lief of a Deity. The Perfections of God are himself; to ridicule his Attributes and Being, are but two Words for the same thing. These Attributes are bestow'd upon Iupiter with great Prodigality, and afterwards execrably outraged. The case being thus, the cover of an Idol is too thin a pretence to screen the Blasphemy.

Now to wash off this stain, for 'tis a a black one, however 'tis but laid in Water Colours, Mr. Collier falsly charges Mr. Dry∣den with dressing his Iuipiter in the shape of Iehovah, for he gives him not one Trap∣ping, Plume, or Feather, that the Heathens had not given him before.

But to call over his whole Black List of Blasphemy and Debauchery together, through that whole Play, Iupiter says in one place,

Fate is, what I By Virtue of Omnipotence have made it: And Power Omnipotent can do no Wrong.

I swear, that were I Jupiter this Night, I would renounce my Heaven to be Amphi∣tryon.

I would not lose this Night to be Master of the Universe,

A whole Eternity were well emploid To love thy each perfection as I ought.

I would owe nothing to a Name so dull, As Husband is, but to a lover all.

That Name of Wife and Marriage Is Poison, to the dearest Ioys of Love.

Whom more then Heav'n and all the World I love.

Mercury, he calls him—King of the Gods.

In what Form will your Almighty-ship be pleased to transform your self to Night.

You have need of all your Omnipotence, and all your Godship.

The Devil take Jupiter for inventing that hard hearted merciless Knobbby Wood, a Crab-tree-Cudgel.

Here indeed, Mr. Dryden has furnisht him (out of his own old Heathen Heraldry) with Omnipotence and Arbiter of Fate. But as to the Creator of Nature, all the Functi∣ons of Providence in his hand, and his be∣ing described with the Majesty of the true God, I can find nothing of that; But no great matter, Mr. Collier draws up his Plea like a Bill in Chancery, 'tis not given up∣on Oath nor Honour, and half Truth, half Falsehood, is Secundum artem.

Now any man that reads this Almighty∣ship and Godship, that Mr. Dryden from the Mouth of his familiar Mercury gives this Iupiter, would swear that the Majesty of

the True God, was the least thought of in this Amphytrion, a God-ship that his own Pimp can wish at the Devil. Nay, though an Omnipotent power has been ascribed to Iupi∣ter by the Heathen Theology, yet Mr. Dryden is so tender of offending any over curious Christian, that he purposely Bur∣lesqnes his titular Attribute to this Almigh∣tyship, to take off all shaddow of such Of∣fence.

Besides, does not the Scripture over and over give the stile of Gods to all the Hea∣then Idols, though but Stocks and Stones; not that the Divine Inspiration in so ex∣pressing it in Holy Writ, could be suppo∣sed to give it as their due, any more then Mr. Dryden can be supposed to give Iupi∣ter his God-ship as his due. And if from Mr. Colliers own Authority, the Perfecti∣ons of God are himself, the same liberty that may give him his Titular God-head, may give him his Titular Perfections too.

However, as Mr. Collier sets up for a Play-house Scavinger, he's resolved to sweep cleanest where there's least Dirt. The Rea∣der is to understand, that Mr. Collier is not so much angry at Mr. Dryden's choice of his Subject, as his Mismanagement of it: And upon that Quarrel, he spends his Artillery

against him in four long Pages together; and to mend all Mr. Dryden's Capital Faults in his Iupiter. He tells us,

That Plautus was the only bold Heathen that brought Iupiter upon the Stage, he wrote upon the same unaccountable design (his Adul∣tery with Alcmena;) but Plautus his me∣thods of persuite are very different; his Iupiter does not solicit in scandalous Lan∣guage, nor flourish upon his Lewdness, nor endeavours to set it up for the Fashi∣on. Plautus had some Regard to the height of Iupiter's Character, and the Opinion of his Country, and the Restraints of Modesty, &c. As for the Greek Trage∣diens, they mention Iupiter in terms of Magnificence and Repect, and make his Actions and his Nature all of a piece, &c. Virgil's Iupiter is always Great and Solemn, and keeps up the port of the Deity. 'Tis true, Homer does not Guard the Idea with that Exactness, but with all, never sinks the Character into Obscenity.

Well, and for not following these Elder Sons of Apollo, in his Treatment of Iupiter, Mr. Dryden stands irreparably Condemned: And to have fenced against all Vengeances hanging over his Head, he should have mo∣delled his Play by Mr. Collier's Plan, viz. He should have had Plautus his regard to the

height of Jupiter's Character, that is to say, given him every individual Attribute, and twice as many more as he has given him already; according to the Opinion of Plau∣tus his Country, viz. with all the Adora∣tion of the Heathens that Worshipped him for their true supreme God. In all the terms of Magnificence and Respect, with a Homage as great as if we were the true God of Heav'n in earnest, keeping up his whole port of a Deity, &c. pluming him with every Feather of his whole God-head.

This Iupiter thus Glorified, should set out to Court Amphytrion's Wise, viz. for a Nights Lodging, in no scandalous Language, in all the Softest Modestest Divine Courtship, no sinking his Character into Obscenity, all wrapt up so clean, his Actions and his Na∣ture, the Adulterer and the God, all of a piece.

Good gracious Heaven, has not this En∣thusiast the whole Zeal of an Oliver's Por∣ter, and bids as fair to succeed him in his Moor-field Pallace? This is the Inno∣cent, and Mr. Drydens the Blasphemous Am∣phytrion.

How ingeniously Mr. Collier can out-blow the Satyr in the Fable! Mr. Dryden's Am∣phytrion is all a piece of Blasphemy for gi∣ving too much of the God to Iupiter, and has no way to mend that fault but by gi∣ving him more of it.

This Blasphemy of Amphytrion, nothing but Mr. Dryden's Absolon and Achitophel can out-doe, &c. Here we have Blasphe∣my on the top of the Letter without any trouble of Inference or Construction. This Poem runs upon all Scripture Names, up∣on suppositions of the true Religion, and object of Worship. Here are no Pagan Divinities in the Scheme; so that all the Athestick Rallery must point upon the true God. Absalom was David's natural Son; so that there's a Blot in his Scutcheon, and a Blemish upon his Birth. The Poet will make admirable use of this Remark presently. This Absalom, it seems, was very extraordinary in his Person and per∣formances; Mr. Dryden does not certain∣ly know how this came about, and there∣fore inquires of himself in the first place.

Whither inspired by a Divinier Lust, His Father got him with a greater Gust.

This is down-right Defiance of the li∣ving God! here you have the very Essence and Spirit of Blasphemy, and the Holy Ghost brought in upon the most hideous occasion. I question whether the Tor∣ments and Despair of the Damn'd dare venture at such Flights as these; they are bejond Description. I pray God they may not be bejond Pardon too.

Now are here only two unhappy Words, that blow the Bellows to all this Fire, viz. [Inspir'd] and [Diviner.] Inspire, especi∣ally in the Verb, is so far from being only appropriated to God, that scarce that Hu∣man Passion, Love, Joy, or what not, nay, a meer start of Fancy, a sudden lucky thought, but shall be said to inspire a Man.

Is this Gentleman, as sworn an Enemy to all Poetry, as to the Dramatick, that he willfully forgets, how the Poets upon all occasions invoked their Muses to inspire them. Nay, to go a little further, what if the Devil himself has had his Inspirations too, for as I take it, the old Heathen Ora∣cles were of his Inspiring. The Spirit of False-shood, as well as Truth, has had the Inspiring power, without intrenching upon the Prerogative of God. And though [Di∣viner]

is here made the Epithite to Lust, it makes not all to his purpose; 'tis true the Expression favours a little too much of the Libertine; yet I defie all the Sophistry of Malice it self to mount it up to Blasphemy, or to make it bear any tendency to that tremendous signification he has given it. For does not this Man of Letters know, that [Diviner,] though in the Comparative Degree, is here infinitely less then the posi∣tive [Diviner] only comparatively to the common Raptures of Lust. Had it been Written [Inspired with a Divine Lust] it might have given an overcurious Cynick some Umbrage for so profane a Constructi∣on, and yet even then too it would not have fully reacht the point, unless [A Di∣vine] had been changed to the more em∣phatick [The Divine.]

But here as Mr. Dryden has worded it, and upon the subject he speaks it, if any thing of a Deity was either meant or thought of in this Inspiration, 'twas that of Venus: And indeed, what can the Genuine Sense of this poor Couplet honestly and fairly construed mean, than that his Father In∣spired, or Animated with a Diviner or su∣blimer Lust, got him with that more then ordinary pleasure and transports, that pos∣sibly

(for 'tis not affirmatively said) to that sprightlier Vivacity to the Generation of his Absalom, that young Heir (to con∣tinue his supposition) might owe all those Personal Graces and Beauties, and all that innate Bravery, and the rest of the uncom∣mon Accomplishments the Poet has occasion afterwards to give him.

Here I must beg my Reader's Pardon, that my honest Defense of Truth has forced me upon this unseemly Explanation; I con∣fess again, this Distick carries but a lew'd Idea along with it, but so far from a Blas∣phemy against the Great God, and so un∣pardonable, as he fancies it, that I doubt not but a profane Oath in his Name, is, of the two, the greater Crimen laesae Maje∣statis Dei, and that upon a fair Tryal in a Court of Justice, the Mulct of two good Shillings, or as many Hours in the Stocks would be as much as our Law could well give against him.

Well, this Authot has the least reason of Quarrelling with Mr. Dryden's Fairy way of Writing; his way of Commenting is so far be∣yond it, that all his own Fairys are Gyants, whilst Mr. Dryden in this very Distict, is no less then leading up the old Host of Luci∣fer,

and charging at the Throne of God himself. At this rate of Remarking, I dare not say, whither this Author be inspired by a Puny or a full grown Sprite; But this I must say, to come up to all the Heights of that Christian Champion, he professes himself, un∣doubtedly he must have a double Portion of Faith and Hope, to make up for his Di∣minitive Talent of Charity.

FINIS.