PREFACE.

AS the following Plays were intended only for a pri⯑vate theatre, I have been tempted by that circum⯑ſtance to introduce a kind of novelty into our language, by writing three comedies in rhyme, though the Comic Muſe of our country has been long accuſtomed to expreſs herſelf in proſe, and her cuſtom has the ſanction of ſet⯑tled precept, and ſucceſsful example. The Antiquarian, indeed, may remind me that Gammer Gurton's Needle, one of the earlieſt of our old plays, with other comic productions of that rude period, was written in rhyme; and poſſibly ſome faſtidious enemies of that Gothic jin⯑gle, as they affect to call it, may conſider the preſent Publication as nothing more than a relapſe into the moſt barbarous mode of dramatic compoſition.

For the boldneſs of an attempt, which has no modern precedent to plead in its behalf, ſome apology may be due to the Public.

In the firſt place, I beg it may not be ſuppoſed, that by writing a comedy in rhyme, I mean to convey an in⯑direct [168] cenſure on the contrary practice. No one can prize more highly than I do the many excellent comedies in proſe, with which our language is enriched. I am very far from entertaining a wiſh to overturn the cere⯑monial which the Comic Muſe of England has eſta⯑bliſhed; but I hope to find our country as much a friend to toleration in the forms of literature, as in thoſe of re⯑ligion. The cuſtom of other enlightened nations, both ancient and modern, may be pleaded on this occaſion in behalf of verſe. Ariſtophanes, in his play of the Clouds, ſeems to pride himſelf on his poetry. Arioſto having written two comedies in proſe, converted them both into metre at a maturer period of his life; and Moliere, the unrivalled maſter of the French comie theatre, who has written admirably both in proſe and rhyme, is, I think, moſt admirable, and moſt truly comic, when he adheres to the latter.

To the author who attempts a comedy in Engliſh rhyme, our language ſeems to offer an advantage, which the French poet did not enjoy. The Comic Muſe of France has chiefly confined herſelf to that ſtructure of verſe, which belongs equally to her Tragic Siſter. In the poetry of our nation, this particular meaſure is ap⯑propriated to ſportive ſubjects, and though hitherto not uſed in Comedy, it poſſeſſes to an Engliſh ear a very co⯑mic vivacity. That it is highly calculated for poems of wit and humour, we have a ſtriking proof in that [169] moſt exquiſite production the Bath Guide. How far it may ſucceed through the varied ſcenes of an Engliſh play, experiment only can determine. As ſome rea⯑ders, on the firſt ſight of a comedy in rhyme, may haſ⯑tily ſuppoſe that the faſhion and the materials of the work are borrowed from the Theatre of France, I think it proper to declare, in juſtice to the writers of that country, that they are by no means anſwerable for any defects which may be found in theſe dramatic per⯑formances. I am not conſcious of having borrowed a ſingle character or ſituation from any comic writer what⯑ever, either foreign or domeſtic.—The firſt of the three comedies, contained in the preſent Publication, was founded on a real anecdote related to me by an intimate friend, who, concealing the names of the par⯑ties, mentioned their ludicrous adventure as a new and tempting ſubject for the Comic Muſe.—The plan of the ſecond aroſe in the mind of its author, from his re⯑marking the various effects of Connoiſſeurſhip in diffe⯑rent characters. An attachment to the fine arts, which is allowed to refine and ſtrengthen the virtues of a manly and a generous ſpirit, has perhaps a peculiar ten⯑dency not only to ſhew, but to increaſe the narrowneſs of a vain and feeble mind; and if ſuch a tendency exiſts, it is the province of a comic writer to counteract and correct it.—The aim of the third comedy in this col⯑lection is to laugh at two diſtinct ſpecies of affectation, [170] very prevalent in our age and country; the affectation of refined ſentiment, and the affectation of pompous and pedantic expreſſion. I proteſt however againſt perſonal application: and, to guard againſt it, let me declare, that this ridicule is levelled, not at the great and reſpectable Veteran in the field of literature, whoſe phraſes may ſometimes be borrowed by a character in the play; but at the nameleſs and ſervile herd of his awkward imitators.—Vigor and originality of thought give a ſanction to the pomp and peculiarity of his lan⯑guage. If ſingularities of ſtyle are united with genius and moral excellence, they are properly regarded with a partial reſpect; but when theſe ſingularities are pre⯑poſterouſly copied, and ſeem to prevail as a faſhion, they become, I apprehend, very fair ſubjects of ſportive ſatire.

When I reflect what long and eſtabliſhed prejudice a rhyming play muſt encounter—when I remember that even Dryden himſelf, the moſt able advocate, and the greateſt maſter of rhyme in our language, has expreſsly condemned the uſe of it in comedy—I am alarmed at the hardineſs of my attempt; but when I recollect that time, the moſt infallible teſt of literary opinion, has fully ſhewn the miſtake of that immortal Poet, in re⯑commending the uſe of rhyme in Engliſh Tragedy, I am inclined to hope that he might be equally miſtaken in ſuppoſing it utterly unſuited to our Comic Muſe. It may be urged indeed, with great truth, that a comedy [171] in rhyme cannot be ſo cloſe a copy of Nature as a co⯑medy in proſe, the latter adhering to the very language of common life. But from a ſiſter-art we may borrow, at leaſt a plauſible argument in favour of Poetry, on the preſent occaſion. The great maſter, who has deſcanted ſo happily on the principles of Painting, obſerves with great propriety, in one of his diſcourſes, that ‘"we are not always pleaſed with the moſt abſolute poſſible re⯑ſemblance of an imitation to its original object: caſes may exiſt, in which ſuch a reſemblance may be even diſagreeable. I ſhall only obſerve, that the effect of figures in wax-work, though certainly a more exact repreſentation than can be given by painting or ſculp⯑ture, is a ſufficient proof that the pleaſure we receive from imitation is not increaſed merely in proportion as it approaches to minute and detailed reality: we are pleaſed, on the contrary, by ſeeing ends anſwered by ſeeming inadequate means^*."’—On theſe prin⯑ciples, which perhaps are equally juſt in the two kindred arts, a comedy in Rhyme may be ſtill more entertaining than a comedy, of equal merit in other points, which confines itſelf to proſe; and a critic who exclaims againſt the unnatural effect of a rhyming dialogue, may as juſtly cenſure a portrait on canvaſs, becauſe it is not ſo exact a copy of life, as an image of coloured wax. In both caſes, the artiſt, whether painter or poet, may be [172] juſtly called a true and a pleaſing copier of Nature, if he preſerves as high a degree of reſemblance, as his mode of imitation will admit, and embelliſhes his work with the attractive and almoſt indiſpenſable graces of eaſe, ſpirit, and freedom.

It is ſaid by Voltaire of theatrical compoſition in general, ‘"Tous les genres ſont bons hors le genre en⯑nuyeux."’ If the preſent comedies fall not within the claſs which that lively Writer has ſo juſtly proſcribed, the Author may be allowed to hope, that his liberal and enlightened readers will look with indulgence on a Pub⯑lication, which aroſe from his wiſh to introduce a ſtrik⯑ing, and he truſts not a blamable, variety into the amuſements of Engliſh literature.