myself my opinion of its faults) I should be inclined to say it was a drama of a moral, grave and tender cast, inasmuch as I discovered in it sentiments, laudably directed against national prejudice, breach of trust, seduction, gaming, and the general dissipation of the time then present. I could not deny it a preference to the West-Indian in a moral light, and perhaps, if I were in very good humour with its author, I might be tempted to say that in point of dic tion it approached very nearly to what I conceived to be the true style of comedy-Joca non infra soccum, seria non usque cothur

пит.

At the time when this play came out, the demands of the stage for novelty were much limited, and of course the excluded many had full leisure to wreak their malice on the selected few. I was silly enough to be in earnest and make serious appeals against cavillers and slanderers below notice: this induced my friend Garrick to call me the man without a skin, and sure enough I should have been without a skin, if the newspaper beadles could have had their will of me, for I constantly stood out against them, and would never ask quarter. I

have been long since convinced of my folly, but I am not at all ashamed of my principle, for I always made common cause with my contemporaries, and never separated my own particular interests from those of literature in general, as will in part appear by the following paragraph, extracted from the advertisement, which I prefixed to this comedy on its publication-"Whether the reception of this comedy," I therein say, "may be such as shall encourage me to future efforts is of small consequence "to the public, but if it should chance to ob"tain some little credit with the candid part "of mankind, and its author for once escape "without those personal and unworthy asper"sions, which writers, who hide their own names, fling on them, who publish their's, my success, it may be hoped, will draw forth "others to the undertaking with far superior requisites; and that there are numbers under "this description, whose sensibility keeps them silent, I am well persuaded when I consider "how general it is for men of the finest parts "to be subject to the finest feelings; and I "would submit whether this unhandsome prac"tice of abuse is not calculated to create in

66

મંદ

the minds of men of genius not only a disin"clination to engage in dramatic compositions, "but a languid and unanimated manner of "executing them, &c. &c.-"

The remark is just, but I remember Lord Mansfield on a certain occasion said to me, that if a single syllable from his pen could at once confute an anonymous defamer, he would not gratify him with the word. This might be a very becoming rule for him to follow, and yet it might by no means apply to a man of my humble sort, and in truth there was a filthy nest of vipers at that time in league against every name, to which any degree of celebrity was attached, and they kept their hold upon the papers till certain of their leaders were compelled to fly their country, some to save their ears and some to save their necks. They were well known, and I am sorry to say some men, whose minds should have been superior to any terrors they could hold out, made suit to them for favour, nay even combined with them on some occasions, and were mean enough to enroll themselves under their despicable banners. It is to the honour of the present time, and infinitely to the repose of the present writers for

the stage, that all these dirty doings are completely done away, and an æra of candour and human kindness has succeeded to one, that was scandalously its opposite.

At this time I did not know Oliver Goldsmith even by person; I think our first meeting chanced to be at the British-Coffee-House; when we came together, we very speedily coalesced, and I believe he forgave me for all the little fame I had got by the success of my West-Indian, which had put him to some trouble, for it was not his nature to be unkind, and I had soon an opportunity of convincing him how incapable I was of harbouring resentment, and how zealously I took my share in what concerned his interest and reputation. That he was fantastically and whimsically vain. all the world knows, but there was no settled and inherent malice in his heart. He was tenacious to a ridiculous extreme of certain pretensions, that did not, and by nature could not, belong to him, and at the same time inexcusably careless of the fame, which he had powers to command. His table-talk was, as Garrick aptly compared it, like that of a parrot, whilst he wrote like Apollo; he had gleams

́of eloquence, and at times a majesty of thought, but in general his tongue and his pen had two very different styles of talking. What foibles he had he took no pains to conceal, the good qualities of his heart were too frequently obscured by the carelessness of his conduct, and the frivolity of his manners. Sir Joshua Reynolds was very good to him, and would have drilled him into better trim and order for society, if he would have been amenable, for Reynolds was a perfect gentleman, had good sense, great propriety with all the social attributes, and all the graces of hospitality, equal to any man. He well knew how to appretiate men of talents, and how near a kin the Muse of poetry was to that art, of which he was so eminent a master. From Goldsmith he caught the subject of his famous Ugolino; what aids got from others, if he got any, were worthily bestowed and happily applied.

he

There is something in Goldsmith's prose, that to my ear is uncommonly sweet and harmonious; it is clear, simple, easy to be understood; we never want to read his period twice over, except for the pleasure it bestows; obscurity never calls us back to a repetition of it.