The first objection I have heard made to the Poem is, that the persons are too obfcure for fatire. The perfons themselves, rather than allow the objection, would forgive the fatire; and if one could be tempted to afford it a ferious answer, were not all affaffinates, popular infurrections, the infolence of the rabble without doors, and of domefticks within, moft wrongfully chaftifed, if the Meannefs of offenders indemnified them from punishment? On the contrary, Obfcurity renders them more dangerous, as less thought of: Law can pronounce judgment only on open facts, Morality alone can pafs cenfure on intentions of mischief; so that for secret calumny, or the arrow flying in the dark, there is no publick punishment left, but what a good Writer inflicts.

The next objection is, that these sort of authors are Poor. That might be pleaded as an excufe at the Old Baily, for leffer crimes than Defamation, (for 'tis the cafe of almost all who are try'd there) but fure it can be none, for who will pretend that the robbing another of his reputation fupplies the want of it in himself? I question not but fuch authors are poor, and heartily wish the objection were removed by any honeft livelihood. But Poverty is here the accident, not the fubject he who defcribes malice and villany to be

pale and meagre, expreffes not the leaft anger against Paleness or leannefs, but against malice and villany. The Apothecary in Romeo and Juliet is poor, but is he therefore juftified in vending poifon? Not but Poverty itself becomes a just subject of fatire, when it is the confequence of vice, prodigality, or neglect of one's lawful calling; for then it increases the publick burden, fills the streets and highways with Robbers, and the garrets with Clippers, Coiners, and Weekly Journalists.

But admitting that two or three of these offend lefs in their morals, than in their writings; muft Poverty make nonfenfe facred? If fo, the fame of bad authors would be much better confuited than that of all the good ones in the world; and not one of a hundred had ever been call'd by his right name.

They mistake the whole matter: It is not charity to encourage them in the way they follow, but to get 'em out of it: For Men are not bunglers because they are poor, but they are poor because they are bunglers.

Is it not pleafant enough, to hear our authors crying out on the one hand, as if their persons and Characters were too facred for Satire; and the publick objecting on the other, that they are too mean even for Ridicule? But whether bread or fame be their end, it must be allow'd, our author by

and in this Poem, has mercifully given 'em a little of both.

There are two or three, who by their rank and fortune have no benefit from the former objections (fuppofing them good) and thefe I was forry to fee in fuch company. But if without any provocation, two or three gentlemen will fall upon one, in an affair wherein his intereft and reputation are equally imbark'd; they cannot certainly, after they have been content to print themselves his enemies,com. plain of being put into the number of them?

Others, I'm told, pretend to have been once his Friends. Surely they are their enemies who fay fo, fince nothing can be more odious than to treat a friend as they have done. But of this I can't perfuade my felf, when I confider the constant and eternal averfion of all bad writers to a good one.

Such as claim a merit from being his Admirers, I would gladly ask, if it lays him under a perfonal obligacion ? at that rate he would be the most oblig'd humble fervant in the world. I dare fwear for these in particular, he never defir'd them to be his Admirers, nor promis'd in return to be theirs; That had truly been a fign he was of their acquain tance; but would not the malicious world have fufpected fuch an approbation of fome motive worfe

than ignorance, in the Author of the Efay on Criticism? Be it as it will, the reafons of their Admiration and of his Contempt are equally fubfifting, for his works and theirs are the very fame that they were.

66

One therefore of their affertions I believe may be true, 66 That he has a contempt for their writings." And there is another which would probably be fooner allow'd by himself than by any good judge befide, "That his own have found "too much fuccefs with the publick." But as it cannot confift with his modefty to claim this as a juftice, it lies not on him, but entirely on the publick, to defend its own judgment.

There remains what in my opinion might feem a better plea for these people, than any they have made ufe of. If Obfcurity or Poverty were to exempt a man from fatire, much more should Folly or Dulness, which are ftill more involuntary, nay as much so as perfonal Deformity. But even this will not help them: Deformity becomes an object of ridicule when a man fets up for being handfome; and fo muft Dulness when he fets up for a Wit. They are not ridicul'd because Ridicule in itself is, or ought to be, a pleafure; but because it is juft, to undeceive and vindicate the honest and unpretending part of mankind from Impofition, becaufe particular intereft ought to yield to general,

and a great number who are not naturally Fools ought never to be made fo, in complaifance to a few who are. Accordingly we find that in all ages, all vain pretenders, were they ever fo poor or ever fo dull, have been conftantly the topicks of the most candid Satirifts, from the Codrus of JUVENAL to the Damon of BOILEAU.

Having mention'd BOILEAU, the greatest Poet and moft judicious Critic of his age and country, admirable for his Talents, and yet perhaps more admirable for his Judgment' in the proper application of them; I cannot help remarking the resemblance betwixt him and our Author, in Qualities, Fame, and Fortune; in the diftinctions fhewn to them by their Superiors, in the general esteem of their Equals, and in their extended reputation amongst Foreigners; in the latter of which ours has met with the better fate, as he has had for his Tranfla tors perfons of the most eminent rank and abilities in their respective nations*. But the refemblance

*Effay on Criticism in French Verse by Generat Hamilton. The fame in Verse alfo by Monfieur Roboton, Counsellor and Privy Secretary to King George I. after by the Abbe Reynel, in Verfe, with Notes. Rape of the Lock, in French, Paris 1728. in Italian

B 4

Verfe,