which the writer of the pamphlet, if the pamphlet had any real existence, could scarcely have been mistaken. These two plays were certainly represented for the first time at the same theatre, namely, Blackfriars, as Mr. Macklin learned from their respective title-pages; but not in the same week, there being no less than two months interval between the production of the two pieces. Ford's play was exhibited at the Blackfriars on the 24th of November, 1628, when it was licensed for the stage, as appears from the Office-book of Sir Henry Herbert, Master of the Revels to King Charles the First, a manuscript now before me, of which a more particular account may be found in vol. iii. [Historical Account of the English Stage, &c.]; and Jonson's New Inn on the 19th of January in the following year, 1628-9. Very soon indeed after the ill success of Jonson's piece, the King's Company brought out at the same theatre a new play called The Love-sick Maid, or the Honour of Young Ladies, which was licensed by Sir Henry Herbert on the 9th of February, 1628-9, and acted with extraordinary applause. This play, which was written by Jonson's own servant, Richard Brome, was so popular, that the managers of the King's Company, on the 10th of March, presented the Master of the Revels with the sum of two pounds, "on the good success of The Honour of Ladies;" the only instance I have met with of such a compliment being paid him. No mention whatsoever is made of The Lover's Melancholy having been attended with any extraordinary success, though Mr. M. from private motives chose to represent it as having been acted with uncommon applause. We are next told, that Ben was so exasperated by the damnation of his piece, that he printed it with a very singular title-page, which is given; and that immediately upon this he wrote his celebrated Ode, "Come leave the loathed stage," &c. It is not very clear what the letterwriter means by the words, immediately upon this. If he means that Jonson wrote his Ode immediately after the play was damned in 1629, the assertion is made at random; if he means that immediately after he had published his play he wrote his ode, the fact is not true. The ode is printed at the end of the play, which was published in April, 1631. The next new fact found in this curious pamphlet is, that Ben Jonson, mortified by his own defeat and the suc cess which Ford's play obtained, wrote the following Epîgram upon his successful competitor: "Playwright, by chance, hearing some toys I had writ, "Five of my jests, then stolne, pass'd him a play." This epigram, I own, is so 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 so strongly marked, that every poetical reader must immediately exclaim, aut Erasmus, 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, says the writer of the letter in question, here you have a strong 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 shall find a non sequitur: for this very epigram, though written by Jonson, is as decisive a proof of imposition as any other which I have produced. The fact is, this epigram, addressed to Playwright, is found among Jonson's printed poems, as are two others addressed to the same person.* Mr. M. I suppose, was possessed only * See Jonson's Works, folio, 1616: Epig. XLIX. TO PLAYWRIght. "Playwright me reades, and still my verses damnes; "Playwright, I loath to have thy manners knowne On PLAYWRIGHT. "Playwright, convict of public wrongs to men, The person aimed at, under the name of Playwright, was probably Decker. of the modern edition of Jonson's Works printed in 8vo. in 1716, and, no dates being assigned to the poems, thought he might safely 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 consequently 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 scene. It appears from Ben Jonson's Dedication of his Epigrams to Lord Pembroke, that most of them, though published in 1616, were written some years before*; the epigram in question, therefore, may be referred to a still earlier period than the time of its publication. On one of the lines in this epigram, as exhibited by Mr. Macklin, "Five of my jests, then stolne, pass'd him a play." we find the following note:-" Alluding to a character in The Ladies' Trial, which Ben says Ford stole from him." If the writer of this letter had said, "Alluding to a character in The Ladies' Trial, which Ford stole from Ben Jonson," we might suppose him only mistaken; and this anachronism (supposing that the epigram had been written in 1631) might not affect the present question. But we are told, "Ben says so." He certainly has not said so in his works, and therefore the letter-writer must mean, that it is asserted in the pamphlet from which he pretended to quote, that Ben had said so. But Ben could not possibly have said so, even if he had written this epigram at the time to which it has been falsely ascribed; for this plain reason, that The Ladies' Trial was not produced till several years afterwards. It was first printed in 1639, two years after Ben Jonson's death, and does not appear to have been licensed by Sir Henry Herbert before that "I here offer to your lordship the ripest of my studies, my epigrammes, which, though they carry danger in the sound, do not therefore seek your shelter. For when I made them, I had nothing in my conscience to expressing of which I did need a cypher. But if I be falne into those times, wherein, for the likeness of vice," &c. time. The origin of this note, by which confusion is worse confounded, was probably this: Langbaine, under the article, Fletcher, mentions that a scene in his Love's Pilgrimage was stollen from the very play of which we have been speaking; Jonson's New Inn. This scene Fletcher himself could not have stollen from The New Inn, for he was dead some years before that play appeared; but Shirley, who had the revisal of some of those 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 inserted in Love's Pilgrimage, when that play was revived, or as Sir Henry Herbert calls it, renewed, in 1635. Mr. M. had probably some imperfect recollection One of the leaves of Sir Henry Herbert's Manuscript, which was missing, having been recovered since the remark in the text was made, 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 licensed by the Master of the Revels. + 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. "Received of Blagrove from the King's Company, for the renewing of Love's Pilgrimage, the 16th of September, 1635, -.1 0 0." Ibidem. The addition of a new scene, and sometimes an entire act, to an old play, appears from the following entries in the same book to have been common: "For the adding of a scene 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. Biston, the 12th of January, 1631,-.1 0 0." "An ould play, with some new scenes, Doctor Lambe and the Witches, to Salisbury Courte, the 16th August, 1634,£.1 0 0. "Received of ould Cartwright for allowing the [Fortune] company to add scenes 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," says Lupton, in his London and the Country carbonadoed and quartered, 8vo. 1602, "are as crafty with an old play as bauds of what he had read in Langbaine, and found it convenient to substitute Ford's play for that of Fletcher. We are next told, that this pamphlet asserts that Ben Jonson 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 said to have had the revisal, when the first folio edition of our poet's works was published in 1623. It should not be forgotten, that the writer of this letter had asserted in a former letter, that it appears from several of Ford's Sonnets and Verses that he lived in the strictest intimacy with Shakspeare to the time of his death and I may confidently add, that there is not the smallest ground for the assertion, no such sonnets or verses being extant. We need not therefore, hesitate to pronounce the present assertion to be equally unfounded as the former. After what has been already stated, it would be an idle waste of time to enter into any long disquisition on this fiction. It was evidently thrown out to excite the expectation of the town with respect to the piece itself on the night of performance. The old plays of the minor poets of the last age being in 1748 little known or attended to, those who were curious could not easily satisfy themselves concerning the merit or demerit of The Lover's Melancholy by reading it, (it not being republished in Dodsley's Collection,) and therefore would naturally resort to the theatre to examine whether there was any ground for such an assertion the precise end which the letter-writer had in view. When he talked of Shakspeare's papers, he was probably thinking of what Heminge and Condell have said in their preface,-" we have scarce received from him a blot in his papers." But by his papers they meant nothing more than the old copies of his plays which had lain long in their house, from which they printed part of their edition. Whatever other papers our poet left, without doubt devolved to his family at Stratford. 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, Esq. and Sir George Buck, who were Masters of the Revels during the greater part of the reign of King James the First shall ever be discovered, I have no doubt that the Vision, Masque, and Prophecy, in the fifth Act of Cymbeline, will be found to have been interpolated by the Players after our poet's death. |
