defeat and the fuccefs which Ford's play obtained, wrote the following Epigram upon his fuccefsful competitor: "PLAYWRIGHT, by chance, hearing fome toys I had writ, Five of my jefts, then ftolne, pafs'd him a play." This epigram, I own, is fo much in the manner of the time, and particularly of Ben Jonson, that for a long time I knew not how to question its authenticity. It is fo ftrongly marked, that every poetical reader muft immediately exclaim, aut Erafmus, aut diabolus. Nor indeed is it to be wondered at that it is much in Ben's manner; for, not to keep the reader longer in suspense, it was written by him.-Well then, fays the writer of the letter in queftion, here you have a ftrong confirmation of all the other facts which you affect to doubt, and every impartial judge must acquit me of having fabricated them. This, however, we fhall find a non fequitur: for this very epigram, though written by Jonfon, is as decifive a proof of impofition as any other which I have produced. The fact is, this epigram, addreffed to PLAYWRIGHT, is found among Jonfon's printed poems, as are two others addressed to the fame perfon." Mr. M. I 6 See Jonfon's Works, folio, 1616: Epig. XLIX. То РелYWRI Cн т. verfes damnes PLAYWRIGHT me reades, and still my fuppofe, was poffeffed only of the modern edition of Jonfon's Works printed in 8vo. in 1716, and, no dates being affigned to the poems, thought he might fafely make free with this epigram, and affix the date of the year 1630, or 1631, to it; but unluckily it was published by Old Ben himself fourteen or fifteen years before, in the first folio collection of his works in 1616, and confequently could not have any relation to a literary altercation between him and Ford at the time The New Inn and The Lover's Melancholy were brought on the fcene. It appears from Ben Jonfon's Dedication of his Epigrams to Lord Pembroke, that most of them, though publifhed in 1616, were written fome years before; the epigram in question therefore may be referred to a ftill earlier period than the time of its publication. On one of the lines in this epigram, as exhibited by Mr. Macklin, For wittie, in his language, is obfcene. 66 PLAYWRIGHT, I loath to have thy manners knowne In my chafte booke: profeffe them in thine owne." Epig. LXVIII. On PLAY WRIGHT. " PLAYWRIGHT, convict of publick wrongs to men, Two kindes of valour he doth fhew at ones, Active in his braine, and paffive in his bones.' The perfon aimed at, under the name of Playwright, was probably Decker. 7" I here offer to your lordfhip the ripeft of my ftudies, my epigrammes, which, though they carry danger in the found, do not therefore feek your fhelter. For when I made them, I had nothing in my confcience, to expreffing of which I did need a cypher. But if I be falne into thofe times, wherein, for the likeness of vice," &c. Five of my jefts, then ftolne, pafs'd him a play." we find the following note: "Alluding to a character in The Ladies' Trial, which Ben fays Ford ftole from him." If the writer of this letter had faid, "Alluding to a character in The Ladies' Trial, which Ford ftole from Ben Jonfon," we might fuppofe him only mistaken; and this anachronism (fuppofing that the epigram had been written in 1631) might not affect the present question. But we are told," Ben says so." "Ben fays fo." He certainly has not faid fo in his works, and therefore the letter-writer muft mean, that it is afferted in the pamphlet from which he pretended to quote, that Ben had faid sọ. But Ben could not poffibly have faid fo, even if he had written this epigram at the time to which it has been fafely afcribed; for this plain reason, that The Ladies' Trial was not produced till feveral years afterwards. It was first printed in 1639, two years after Ben Jonfon's death, and does not appear to have been licensed by Sir Henry Herbert before that time. The origin of this note, by which confufion is worfe confounded, was probably this: Langbaine under the article, Fletcher, mentions that a fcene in his Love's Pilgrimage was follen from the very play of which we have been speaking; Jonfon's New Inn. This fcene Fletcher himfelf could not have ftollen from The New Inn, for he was dead fome years before that play appeared; but Shirley, who had the re 8' One of the leaves of Sir Henry Herbert's Manufcript, which was miffing, having been recovered fince this page was printed, I find that The Ladies Trial was performed for the first time at the Cockpit theatre in May 1638, on the 3d of which month it was licenfed by the Mafter of the Revels. J vifal of fome of thofe pieces which were left imperfect by Fletcher, (as appears from Sir Henry Herbert's Office-book,") finding The New Inn unsuccessful, took the liberty to borrow a scene from it, which he inferted in Love's Pilgrimage, when that play was revived, or as Sir Henry Herbert calls it, renewed, in 1635. Mr. M. had 2 In Sir Henry Herbert's Office-book is the following entry: "For a play of Fletcher's, corrected by Shirley, called The Night-Walkers, the 11th of May, 1633,-£.2 0 0. 2 Received of Blagrove from the King's Company, for the renewing of Love's Pilgrimage, the 16th of September, 1635, -£10 o." Ibidem. The addition of a new scene, and fometimes an entire act, to an old play, appears from the following entries in the fame book to have been common: For the adding of a fcene to The Virgin Martyr, this 7th July, 1624,- £0 10 0." For allowing of a new act in an ould play, this 13th May, 1629,0 10 0. For allowing of an ould play, new written or forbisht by Mr. Bifton, the 12th of January, 1631, £1 0 0. "An ould play, with fome new fcenes, Doctor Lambe and the Witches, to Salisbury Courte, the 16th Auguft, 1634, £1 0 0." Received of ould Cartwright for allowing the [Fortune] company to add fcenes to an ould play, and to give it out for a new one, this 12th of May, 1636,-.1 0 0." This practice prevailed in Shakspeare's time. "The players," fays Lupton, in his London and the Country carbonadoed and quartered, 8vo. 1602, "are as crafty with an old play, as bauds with old faces: the one puts on a new fresh colour, the other a new face and name.' If the Office-books of Edmund Tilney, Efq. and Sir George Buck, who were Mafters of the Revels during the greater part of the reign of King James the Firft, fhall ever be discovered, I have no doubt that the Vifion, Mafque, and Prophecy, in the fifth act of Cymbeline, will be found to have been interpolated by the players after our poet's death. probably fome imperfect recollection of what he had read in Langbaine, and found it convenient to fubflitute Ford's play for that of Fletcher. We are next told, that this pamphlet afferts that Ben Jonfon had given out that The Lover's Melancholy was not written by Ford, but purloined from Shakspeare's papers, of which Ford in conjunction with Heminge and Condell is faid to have had the revifal, when the firft folio edition of our poet's works was published in 1623. It fhould not be forgotten, that the writer of this letter had afferted in a former letter, that it appears from Several of Ford's Sonnets and Verfes that he lived in the ftricteft intimacy with Shakfpeare, to the time of his death: and I may confidently add, that there is not the smallest ground for the affertion, no fuch fonnets or verses being extant. We need not, therefore, hesitate to pronounce the prefent affertion to be equally unfounded as the former. After what has been already flated, it would be an idle wafte of time to enter into any long difquiation on this fiction. It was evidently thrown out to excite the expectation of the town with refpect to the piece itself on the night of performance. The old plays of the minor poets of the laft age being in 1748 little known or attended to, those who were curious could not eafily fatisfy themselves concerning the merit or demerit of The Lover's Melancholy by reading it, (it not being republifhed in Dodfley's Collection,) and therefore would naturally refort to the theatre to examine whether there was any ground for fuch an affertion: the precife end which the letter-writer had in view. |