than what Mr. Gifford has supposed, their foundation was rotten indeed for in Suckling's Session of the Poets, there is not one syllable about an unlucky play. I now come to a most direct accusation against Mr. Malone, conveyed in the most unmeasured terms-"Ben Jonson probably meant to sneer at the Tempest in the prologue to Every Man in his Humour-' our tempestuous drum;' and he has endeavoured to depreciate this beautiful comedy by calling it a foolery. For some remarks on this audacious falsehood, see vol. iv. p. 371." Mr. Gifford has said, upon another occasion, "To this atrocious charge, there is but one answer which occurs to me; and though that be usually wrapt up in the courtesy of a learned language, I shall not make use of it." I shall not pretend to guess at the phrase which, even in its most courteous garb, Mr. Gifford's delicacy prevented him from using; yet I cannot but question, if the whole armamentarium of Gaspar Scioppius himself could have furnished him with stronger terms than here and elsewhere he has applied to Mr. Malone, in plain home-spun English. But let us turn to vol. iv. p. 371, and see these threatened remarks. They are on a passage in the Induction to Bartholomew Fair. "If there be never a servant-monster in the fair, who can help it," he says, "nor a nest of antiques? he is loth to make nature afraid in his plays, like those that beget tales, tempests, and such like drolleries " Upon this Mr. Gifford observes,

"As this passage has furnished such abundant matter for obloquy, it may not be amiss to examine it at large. Steevens, who is inclined to be complimentary, says that the Tempest was not secure from the criticism of our poet, (he had just charged him with having unsparingly censured it) whose malice appears to be more than equal to his wit. He says, if there be never a servant-monster in the fair, who can help it.' And Malone affirms that Jonson endeavours to depreciate this beautiful comedy by calling it a foolery. The depreciation remains to be provedbut (I regret to say it) I have a heavier charge against Mr.

Malone than a too precipitate conclusion-a charge of misrepresentation. Foolery, cannot indeed be applied to any work without an intent to depreciate it: but this was not Jonson's word, nor was it even in his contemplation. The term used by him is drollery, which had a precise and specific bearing upon the whole subject of his Induction. A droll, or drollery, was the appropriate term for a puppetshow, and is so applied by all the writers of his time. Thus Claudia, in the Tragedy of Valentian, declares that She had rather make a drollery till thirty,' i. e. spend her youth in making puppet-shows, which she considers as the lowest scene of degradation: and so, indeed, in many other places. The term continued in use down to the last century, for Dennis says, in one of his letters, that he went to see the Siege of Namur, a droll, at Bartholomew Fair.' Subsequently to Jonson's time, the word was applied to a farcical dialogue in a single scene: but there is, I confidently believe, no instance of a drollery being used for a legitimate comedy. The reader now sees all the advantage derived by Mr. Malone from his sophistication: had he adhered to Jonson's own language, this part of the charge against him could not have been sustained for a moment. I now return to Steevens. Servantmonster' is undoubtedly to be found in the Tempest; but I am yet to learn that the expression was the invention of Shakspeare, or even peculiar to him; though he has applied it with inimitable humour. The reader is not to learn that the town in those days abounded with exhibitions of what were familiarly called monsters, i. e. creatures of various kinds which were taught a thousand antic tricks; the constant concomitants of puppet-shows. 'I would not have you,' says Machin, step into the suburbs, and acquaint yourself either with monsters, or motions.' (Dumb Night.) And Jonson himself, in a subsequent part of this play, makes Bristle tax Haggise with loitering behind to see the man with the monsters.' Elephants, camels, bears, horses, &c. were all accompanied

by apes, who amused the spectator by assuming a command over them. Nor is the custom, nor the language, yet obsolete. I have frequently seen, at a country fair, a dog or bear called out to show his obedience to his master,' an ape, or monkey, that mounted, and drove him. about at will. This was the servant-monster of Jonson's age; but there was yet another, the clown who conducted the mummery of such characters as the machinery of the show required, beasts and fishes of the most uncouth and monstrous forms. The frequency and popularity of these exhibitions are excellently noted by Mr. Gilchrist, and it is impossible to look at the part of Trinculo, without seeing that it bears an immediate reference to this custom; aud we may form some idea of the roar of the old theatre, at hearing him and his associate unwittingly characterise themselves as monsters, by adopting the well-known expression."

Opere in longo fas est obrepere somnum. Mr. Malone's work was a long one; and his researches, which have thrown a light upon English literature, by which almost every succeeding writer has profited, and to which Mr. Gifford will confess his obligations, were various, and extensive in no common degree. If in the midst of these labours, by the casual failure of a memory not remarkably retentive, he has, in the haste of writing, substituted one word for another, are we at once to set this down as an instance of wilful misrepresentation? If a lapse of this kind is to be so heavily visited, "who shall escape whipping?" Not even Mr. Gifford. In the fifth volume of his edition of Ben Jonson, p. 254, Mr. Gifford has the following remark:-" It appears from the elegant rules drawn up by Jonson, for the regulation of his club, that women of character were not excluded from attending the meetings.

'Probæ fœminæ non repudiantor

I am far from wishing to insinuate that these fair ladies

had not a rightful claim to the epithet for which they are indebted to Mr. Gifford; but it was not bestowed upon them by Jonson. His words are- Lectæ fœminæ non repudiantor,' and, without calling into question their probity, it would seem, by the mention of tempting beauties,' in the verses quoted by Mr. Gifford, from Shakerly Marmion, " an enthusiastick admirer of Jonson," descriptive of these symposia, that some part of the company were at least drawn thither by "metal more attractive." Let it not be supposed for a moment, that I accuse Mr. Gifford of a wilful misquotation, or a wish to deceive. I know him to be as incapable of such meanness as even Mr. Malone, and I cannot express myself more strongly; but I have only pointed out this trivial error, with a view of showing that a verbal inaccuracy is a very distinct offence from an audacious falsehood. An hypothesis, indeed, has been started by Mr. Gifford, from the specifick meaning of the word drollery, by which he thinks the possibility of an allusion to Shakspeare is entirely removed; and had this interpretation of the passage been suggested, before it was quoted by Mr. Malone, there might, perhaps, have been some ground for suspecting that he had changed the term for the purpose of eluding the argument; but this was not the case; and impressed, as he was, with the notion that the Tempest was the object of satire, it was of very little consequence whether this beautiful drama was called a foolery or classed with a puppet-show. After all, I am compelled to say, that, without adopting the notion of a permanent hostility between those two illustrious contemporaries, I have seen nothing to convince me that Jonson, in a moment of spleen, to which we are all more or less subject, had not Shakspeare in view. The words servant monster seem so directly to point at Calaban, who is repeatedly called by that name, and so many gratuitous suppositions are required to support the other hypothesis, that I am afraid there is nearly as little reason to doubt that the Tempest was here alluded to, as

that a passage in Julius Cæsar (which Mr. Gifford admits) was twice exposed to his censure, in the Induction to the Staple of News, and his Discoveries. Jonson was not unfrequently in the habit of asserting his pre-eminence, as first having taught rules to the stage; and it surely would have been but a tame mode of expressing his own superior taste and correctness, if he had merely said that his scenes were more according to truth and nature than those which a puppet-show would furnish. One charge more I must advert to, and I have done. Mr. Malone, after producing the well known passage from the Return to Parnassus, which has generally been supposed to allude to some literary contest between Jonson and Shakbut which I shall not stop to examine; prospeare; ceeds to add the authority of Fuller in his Worthies, which is thus noticed by Mr. Gifford

"I will give Fuller's words. Many were the witcombates between Shakspeare and Ben Jonson. I behold them like a Spanish great galleon, and an English man of war. Master Jonson, like the former, was built far higher in learning, solid but slow in his performances, Shakspeare, like the latter, lesser in bulk, but lighter in sailing, could turn with all tides, tack about, and take advantage of all winds by the quickness of his wit and invention.' Fuller, vol. ii. p. 415.

"These wit-combates' then (on which Mr. Malone founds a charge of hostility,) turn out after all to be those sprightly repartees which so delighted their common friends. The solid attacks of Jonson repelled by the quick and lively sallies of Shakspeare (great masters, as both were, of conversation,) must, indeed, have been a mental treat of the highest kind, and could have given to no one, but the commentator, an idea of malice or illwill on either side. There is nothing visible to ordinary eyes, but the fulness of friendship, enlivened by a social meeting, and tending to hilarity and festive delight. Yet this is produced to prove Jonson's enmity! What idea