In what character Butler was admitted into that Lady's fervice, how long he continued in it, and why he left it, is, like the other incidents of his life, utterly unknown.

The viciffitudes of his condition placed him. afterwards in the family of Sir Samuel Luke, one of Cromwell's officers. Here he obferved fo much of the character of the fectaries, that he is faid to have written or begun his poem at this time; and it is likely that fuch a defign would be formed in a place where he faw the principles and practices of the rebels, audacious and undifguifed in the confidence of fuccefs.

At length the King returned, and the time came in which loyalty hoped for its reward. Butler, however, was only made fecretary to the Earl of Carbury, prefident of the principality of Wales; who conferred on him the ftewardship of Ludlow Caftle, when the Court of the Marches was revived.

In this part of his life, he married Mrs. Herbert, a gentlewoman of a good family;

and lived, fays Wood, upon her fortune, having ftudied the common law, but never A fortune fhe had, fays his practifed it. biographer, but it was loft by bad fecurities.

In 1663 was published the first part, containing three cantos, of the poem of Hudibras, which, as Prior relates, was made known at Court by the tafte and influence of the Earl of Dorfet. When it was known, it was neceffarily admired: the king quoted, the courtiers ftudied, and the whole party of the royalifts applauded it. Every eye watched for the golden fhower which was to fall upon the author, who certainly was not without his part in the general expectation.

In 1664 the fecond part appeared; the curiofity of the nation was rekindled, and the writer was again praised and elated. But praife was his whole reward. Clarendon, fays Wood, gave him reafon to hope for "places and employments of value and cre"dit;" but no fuch advantages did he ever obtain. It is reported that the King once gave him three hundred guineas; but of this temporary bounty I find no proof. T 3

Wood

Wood relates that he was fecretary to Villiers Duke of Buckingham, when he was Chancellor of Cambridge: this is doubted by the other writer, who yet allows the Duke to have been his frequent benefactor.

both thefe accounts are falfe there is reafon to fufpect, from a story told by Packe, in his account of the Life of Wycherley; and from fome verses which Mr. Thyer has publifhed in the author's Remains.

68 ways

"Mr. Wycherley," fays Packe," had allaid hold of an opportunity which "offered of reprefenting to the Duke of "Buckingham how well Mr. Butler had de"ferved of the royal family, by writing his inimitable Hudibras; and that it was a "reproach to the Court, that a person of his

loyalty and wit should fuffer in obfcurity, "and under the wants he did. The duke

always feemed to hearken to him with at"tention enough; and after fome time un

dertook to recommend his pretenfions to "his Majesty. Mr. Wycherley, in hopes to "keep him fteady to his word, obtained of

his Grace to name a day, when he might

"introduce that modeft and unfortunate

poet

to his new patron. At last an appoint"ment was made, and the place of meeting

was agreed to be the Roebuck. Mr. But

ler and his friend attended accordingly: "the Duke joined them; but, as the d-1 "would have it, the door of the room where

they fat was open, and his Grace, who had feated himself near it, obferving a "pimp of his acquaintance (the creature too

was a knight) trip by with a brace of La"dies, immediately quitted his engagement, "to follow another kind of business, at "which he was more ready than in doing

$6

good offices to men of defert; though no "one was better qualified than he, both in "regard to his fortune and understanding, " to protect them, and, from that time to "the day of his death, poor Butler never "found the leaft effect of his promife!"

Such is the ftory. The verses are written with a degree of acrimony, fuch as neglect and disappointment might naturally excite; and fuch as it would be hard to imagine Butler capable of expreffing against a man who had any claim to his gratitude.

Notwithstanding this difcouragement and neglect, he ftill profecuted his defign; and in 1678 published the third part, which still leaves the poem imperfect and abrupt. How much more he originally intended, or with what events the action was to be concluded, it is vain to conjecture. Nor can it be thought ftrange that he fhould ftop here, however unexpectedly. To write without reward is fufficiently unpleafing. He had now arrived at an age when he might think it proper to be in jeft no longer, and perhaps his health might now begin to fail.

He died in 1680; and Mr. Longueville, having unsuccessfully folicited a fubfcription for his interment in Weftminster Abbey, buried him at his own coft in the churchyard of Covent Garden*. Dr. Simon Patrick read the fervice.

* In a note in the "Biographia Britannica," p. 1075, he is faid, on the authority of the younger Mr. Longueville, to have lived for fome years in Rofe Street, Covent Garden, and alfo that he died there; the latter of thefe particulars is rendered highly probable, by his being interred in the cemetry of that parish.

H.

Granger