and would never have pardoned it in this or any play.

What opinion Henry the Third had of his successor, is evident from the words he spoke upon his death-bed: "He exhorted the nobility (says Davila) to acknowledge the King of Navarre, to whom the kingdom of right belonged, and that they should not stick at the difference of religion; for both the King of Navarre, a man of a sincere noble nature, would in the end return into the bosom of the church, and the Pope being better informed, would receive him into his favour, to prevent the ruin of the whole kingdom." I hope I shall not need in this quotation to defend myself, as if it were my opinion that the Pope has any right to dispose of kingdoms; my meaning is evident, that the King's judgment of his brotherin-law was the same which I have copied; and I must farther add from Davila, that the arguments I have used in defence of that succession were chiefly drawn from the King's answer to the Deputies, as they may be seen more at large in page 730 and 731 of the first edition of that history in English. There the three Estates, to the wonder of all men, jointly concurred in cutting off the succession; the Clergy, who were managed by the Archbishop of Lyons and Cardinal of Guise, were the first who promoted it; and the Commons and Nobility afterwards consented, as referring themselves (says our author) to the Clergy; so that there was only the King to stand

in the gap; and he by artifice diverted that storm which was breaking upon posterity.

The crown was then reduced to the lowest ebb of its authority, and the King, in a manner, stood single, and yet preserved his negative entire ; but if the Clergy and Nobility had been on his part of the balance, it might reasonably be supposed that the meeting of those Estates at Blois had healed the breaches of the nation, and not forced him to the ratio ultima regum; which is never to be praised, nor is it here, but only excused as the last result of his necessity. At for the parallel betwixt the King of Navarre, and any other prince now living," what likeness the GoD of Nature and the descent of virtues in the same channel have produced, is evident; I have only to say, that the nation certainly is happy where the royal virtues of the progenitors are derived on their descendants.

In that scene, it is true, there is but one of the three Estates mentioned, but the other two are virtually included; for the Archbishop and Cardinal are at the head of the deputies; and that the rest are mute persons every critick understands the reason,- —ne quarta loqui persona laboret. I am never willing to cumber the stage with many speakers, when I can reasonably avoid it, as here I might. And what if I had a mind to pass over the Clergy and Nobility of France in silence, and

Charles II. grandson of Henry IV. of France.

to excuse them from joining in so illegal and so ungodly a decree? Am I tied in poetry to the strict rules of history? I have followed it in this play more closely than suited with the laws of the drama; and a great victory they will have who shall discover to the world this wonderful secret, that I have not observed the unities of place and time; but are they better kept in the farce of THE LIBERTINE DESTROY'D ? It was our common business here to draw the parallel of the times, and not to make an exact tragedy. For this once we were resolved to err with honest Shakspeare; neither can CATILINE OF SEJANUS, (written by the great master of our art,) stand excused any more than we from this exception; but if we must be criticised, some plays of our adversaries may be exposed, and let them reckon their gains when the dispute is ended.

I am accused of ignorance, for speaking of the third Estate as not sitting in the same house with the other two. Let not those gentlemen mistake themselves; there are many things in plays to be accommodated to the country in which we live ; I spoke to the understanding of an English audience. Our three Estates now sit, and have long done so, in two houses; but our records bear witness that they, according to the French custom, have sat in one; that is, the lords spiritual and temporal within the bar, and the commons without

"Shadwell's tragedy entitled THE LIBERTINE, printed in 1676.

it. If that custom had been still continued here, it should have been so represented; but being otherwise, I was forced to write so as to be understood by our own countrymen. If these be errours, a bigger poet than either of us two has fallen into greater; and the proofs are ready whenever the suit shall be recommenced.

Mr. Hunt, the Jehu of the party, begins very furiously with me, and says, I have already condemned the charter and city, and have executed the magistrates in effigy upon the stage, in a play called THE DUKE OF GUISE, frequently acted and applauded, &c.

Compare the latter end of this sentence with what the two authors of the Reflections, or perhaps the associating club of the Devil Tavern write in the beginning of their libel :-" Never was mountain delivered of such a mouse; the fiercest tories have been ashamed to defend this piece; they who have any sparks of wit among them are so true to their pleasure, that they will not suffer dulness to pass upon them for wit, nor tediousness for diversion; which is the reason that this piece has not met with the expected applause: I never saw a play more deficient in wit, good characters or entertainment, than this is."

For shame, gentlemen, pack your evidence a little better against another time. You see, my Lord Chief Baron has delivered his opinion, that the play was frequently acted and applauded; but you of the jury have found Ignoramus on the wit and the success of it. Oates, Dugdale, and Tur

berville, never disagreed more than you do: let us know at last which of the witnesses are true protestants, and which are Irish. But it seeins your authors had contrary designs: Mr. Hunt thought fit to say, it was frequently acted and applauded, because, says he, it was intended to provoke the rabble into tumults and disorder. Now if it were not seen frequently, this argument would lose somewhat of its force. The Reflector's business went another way; it was to be allowed no reputation, no success, but to be damned root and branch, to prevent the prejudice it might do their party accordingly, as much as in them lay, they have drawn a bill of exclusion for it on the stage. But what rabble was it to provoke? Are the audience of a playhouse, which are generally persons of honour, noblemen, and ladies, or at worst, as one of your authors calls his gallants, men of wit and pleasure about the town,* are these the rabble of Mr. Hunt? I have seen a rabble at Sir Edmondbury Godfrey's night,' and

• Infamous witnesses in the business of the Popish Plot. Sir Edmondbury Godfrey, who, as a Justice of Peace, had taken the information of Titus Oates concerning the Popish Plot, was murdered in October 1678. * In Shadwell's EPSOM WELLS, a comedy, 1673, three of the gallants are called men of wit and pleasure.

9 For some years after the Popish Plot, it was customary on the 17th of Nov. (Q. Elizabeth's birth-day,) to make a mock-procession of Friars, Nuns, &c. in which the effigies of Sir Edmondbury Godfrey and the Pope were borne, and the latter was burnt. See p. 93.