The Augustan Reprint Society JAMES BOSWELL, ANDREW ERSKINE, and GEORGE DEMPSTER _Critical Strictures on the New Tragedy of Elvira, Written by Mr. David Malloch_ (1763) With an Introduction by Frederick A. Pottle Publication Number 35 Los Angeles William Andrews Clark Memorial Library University of California 1952 * * * * * GENERAL EDITORS H. RICHARD ARCHER, _Clark Memorial Library_ RICHARD C. BOYS, _University of Michigan_ ROBERT S. KINSMAN, _University of California, Los Angeles_ JOHN LOFTIS, _University of California, Los Angeles_ ASSISTANT EDITOR W. EARL BRITTON, _University of Michigan_ ADVISORY EDITORS EMMETT L. AVERY, _State College of Washington_ BENJAMIN BOYCE, _Duke University_ LOUIS BREDVOLD, _University of Michigan_ JAMES L. CLIFFORD, _Columbia University_ ARTHUR FRIEDMAN, _University of Chicago_ EDWARD NILES HOOKER, _University of California, Los Angeles_ LOUIS A. LANDA, _Princeton University_ SAMUEL H. MONK, _University of Minnesota_ ERNEST MOSSNER, _University of Texas_ JAMES SUTHERLAND, _University College, London_ H. T. SWEDENBERG, JR. , _University of California, Los Angeles_ CORRESPONDING SECRETARY EDNA C. DAVIS, _Clark Memorial Library_ * * * * * INTRODUCTION "WEDNESDAY 19 JANUARY [1763]. This was a day eagerly expected by Dempster, Erskine, and I, as it was fixed as the period of our gratifying a whimproposed by me: which was that on the first day of the new Tragedy called_Elvira's_ being acted, we three should walk from the one end ofLondon to the other, dine at Dolly's, & be in the Theatre at night; & asthe Play would probably be bad, and as Mr. David Malloch, the Author, whohas changed his name to David Mallet, Esq. , was an arrant Puppy, wedetermined to exert ourselves in damning it. "[1] George Dempster, aged thirty, a Scots lawyer who by putting his fortuneunder severe strain had been elected Member of Parliament for the Forfarand Fife burghs, was in London in his official capacity. Andrew Erskine, aged twenty-two, younger son of an impoverished Scots earl, was waiting inLondon till the regiment in which he held a lieutenant's commission shouldbe "broke, " following the Peace. James Boswell, heir to the considerableestate of Auchinleck in Ayrshire, also aged twenty-two, had come to Londonin the previous November in an attempt to secure a commission in the FootGuards. Dempster, Erskine, and Boswell had constituted themselves atriumvirate of wit in Edinburgh as early as the summer of 1761, and hadalready made more than one joint appearance in print. [2] David Mallet, now in his late fifties, was also a Scotsman. "It wasremarked of him, " wrote Dr. Johnson many years later, "that he was theonly Scot whom Scotchmen did not commend. "[3] Scotsmen considered him arenegade. They felt that he had repudiated his country in changing hisdistinctively Scots name, perhaps also in learning to speak English sowell that Johnson had never been able to catch him in a Scotch accent. They would have been willing to forget his humble origins if he had notshown that he was ashamed of them himself. But when he allowed himself toassume arrogant manners and to style himself "Esq. " (a kind of behaviorespecially offensive to genuine men of family, like our trio), they choseto remember, and to remind the world, that he was the son of a tenantfarmer (a Macgregor, at that), that as a boy he had been willing to runerrands and to deliver legs of mutton, and that for a time in his youth hehad held the menial post of Janitor in the High School of Edinburgh. It was not merely the Scots who had their knives out for Mallet. He wasgenerally unpopular, apparently for adequate reasons. He had accepted alarge sum of money from the Duchess of Marlborough to write a life of theDuke, of which he never penned a line, though he pretended for years thathe was worn out by his labors in connection with it. He courted Pope, accepted kindnesses from him, and then attacked him after he was dead. Hepublished Bolingbroke's posthumous infidelities, causing Johnson to remarkthat Bolingbroke bad charged "a blunderbuss against religion and morality"and had "left half a crown to a beggarly Scotchman, to draw the triggerafter his death. "[4] His behavior towards the memory of his friend andcollaborator Thomson was thought to be less than candid. He had written adiscreditable party pamphlet at the instigation of the Earl of Hardwickeagainst the unfortunate Admiral Byng, and had then deserted Hardwicke forthe Earl of Bute, who had found him a sinecure of £300 a year. And even asearly as 1763 people were saying that he was really not the author of thefine ballad _William and Margaret_ which he had published as his own. Boswell, at least, had meditated an attack on Mallet before _CriticalStrictures_ was written. In the large manuscript collection of hisverses preserved in the Bodleian Library are two scraps of an unpublishedsatire imitating Churchill's _Rosciad_ (1761), to be entitled _TheTurnspitiad_, a canine contest of which Mallet is the hero: If dogg'rel rhimes have aught to do with dog, If kitchen smoak resembles fog, If changing sides from Hardwick to Lord B--t Can with a turnspit's turning humour suit, If to write verse immeasurably low, Which Malloch's verse does so compleatly show, Deserve the preference--Malloch, take the wheel, Nor quit it till you bring as _gude a Chiel_![5] And the decision to damn _Elvira_ was made in advance of theperformance, as we have seen. Having failed, in spite of shrill-sounding catcalls, to persuade theaudience at Drury Lane to damn the play, our trio went to supper at thehouse of Erskine's sister, Lady Betty Macfarlane, in Leicester Street, andthere found themselves so fertile in sallies of humour, wit, and satire onMallet and his play that they determined to meet again and throw theirsallies into order. Accordingly, they dined at Lady Betty's next day (20January). After dinner Erskine produced a draft of their observationsthrown into pamphlet size, they all three corrected it, Boswell copied itout, and they drove immediately in Lady Betty's coach to the shop ofWilliam Flexney, Churchill's publisher, and persuaded him to undertake thepublication. Next day Boswell repented of the scurrility of what they hadwritten and got Dempster to go with him to retrieve the copy. Erskine atfirst was sulky, but finally consented to help revise it again. It wentback to Flexney in a day or two, and was published on 27 January. [6] _Elvira_ was essentially a translation or adaptation of Lamotte-Houdar'sFrench tragedy _Inès de Castro_, a piece published forty yearsbefore, but the English audience of 1763 saw in it a compliment to theKing of Portugal, whose cause against Spain Great Britain had espousedtowards the end of the Seven Years' War. The preliminaries of peace hadalready been signed, but the spirit of belligerency had not subsided; sothat the making of the only odious person in the play (the Queen) aSpaniard, and having it end with a declaration of war against Spain, couldnot fail to please a patriotic audience. Since nobody reads _Elvira_any more, I shall venture to give an expanded version of Genest's outlineof the plot, in order to make the comments in Critical Strictures moreintelligible: Don Pedro [son of Alonzo IV, King of Portugal] and Elvira [maid of honourto the Queen, who is the King's second wife, and is mother of the King ofSpain] are privately married--the King insists that his son should marryAlmeyda [the Queen's daughter, sister to the King of Spain]--heacknowledges his love for Elvira--she is committed to the custody of theQueen--Don Pedro takes up arms to rescue Elvira--he forces his way intothe palace--she blames him for his rashness--the King enters, and DonPedro throws away his sword--Don Pedro is first confined to his apartment, and then condemned to death--Almeyda, who is in love with Don Pedro, doesher utmost to save him--she prevails on the King to give Elvira anaudience--Elvira avows her marriage, and produces her two children--theKing pardons his son--Elvira dies, having been poisoned by the Queen--DonPedro offers to kill himself, but is prevented by his father. [7] The play had a respectable run, in spite of its colliding with theHalf-Price Riots, but contemporary accounts appear to indicate that itwas not highly thought of by the judicious. I extract the following tersecriticism from a letter in the _St. James's Chronicle_ for 20 January, the day after the play opened: _A Brief Criticism on the New Tragedy of Elvira_ Act I. Indifferent. Act II. Something better. Act III. MIDDLING. Act IV. Execrable. Act V. Very Tolerable. Dempeter later regretted his share in _Critical Strictures_ on theground that neither he nor his collaborators could have written atragedy nearly so good. _The Critical Review_, in which Mallet himselfsometimes wrote, characterized the pamphlet as "the crude efforts of envy, petulance, and self-conceit. " "There being thus three epithets, " saysBoswell, "we, the three authours, had a humourous contention how eachshould be appropriated. "[8] _The Monthly Review_ was hardly lesssevere. It conceived the author of _Critical Structures_ to be eithera personal enemy of Mallet's or else a bitter enemy of Mallet's country, prejudiced against everything Scotch. The reviewer could not but look uponthis author "as a man of more abilities than honesty, as the want ofcandour is certainly a species of dishonesty. "[9] It was natural to infer that _Critical Strictures_ was motivated byprejudice against Scotland. It appeared in the days of Wilkes's _NorthBriton_ and shortly after Charles Churchill's _Prophecy of Famine_, thatis, at the height of the violent anti-Scotch feeling which the opponentsof Bute (a Scotsman by birth) had stirred up and were exploiting inorder to force him out of office. But the critics might have rememberedthat the most savage criticism of any Scot generally comes from otherScots who think he has not remained Scotch enough; as witness, by whatnew appears to be retributive justice, the general Scots dislike ofBoswell himself. At any rate, the pamphlet was the production, not ofone Englishman imbued with a hatred of all things Scots, but of threewarmly patriotic Scotsmen. _Critical Strictures_ is the merest of trifles, but at least threereasons can be given for publishing a facsimile of it. Scholars onoccasion need to be able to read all the productions of great authors nomatter how trifling, and this one is excessively rare; so rare, indeed, that few of Boswell's editors have been able to get a sight of it. Itmakes a pleasant and useful footnote to _Boswell's London Journal, 1762-1765_, a work now being widely read, or at least widely circulated. And it contains a remark or two that should be of interest to historiansof English drama in the middle of the eighteenth century. Mr. C. Beecher Hogan has given me expert assistance in writing two of thenotes. The copy of _Critical Strictures_ used for making this reproductionwas given to the Library of Yale University by Professor Chauncey B. Tinker. Frederick A. PottleYale University. NOTES TO THE INTRODUCTION 1. _Boswell's London Journal, 1762-1763_, ed. F. A. Pottle, McGraw-HillBook Co. (New York), William Heinemann (London), 1950, p. 152, quotedwith permission of the McGraw-Hill Book Co. This edition (which willhereafter be referred to as LJ) prints the journal in a standardized andmodernized text. In the passage above quoted I have restored theampersands and capitals of Boswell's manuscript. 2. See F. A. Pottle, _The Literary Career of James Boswell_, ClarendonPress, 1929, pp. 6, 12. 3. "The Life of Mallet, " in _Lives of the Poets_. 4. James Boswell's _Life of Samuel Johnson_, ed. G. B. Hill and L. F. Powell, Clarendon Press, 6 vols. , 1934-1950, i. 268. (Hereafter referredto as _Life_. ) 5. Douce MS 193, 93^v, quoted with permission of the Curators of theBodleian Library. 6. LJ, pp. 154-155, 162, 163-164, 172, partly paraphrased, partly quoted. 7. John Genest, _Some Account of the English Stage from . .. 1660 to1830_, 10 vols. , Bath, 1832, v. 12-13. 8. _Life_, i. 409 _n. _ 1; _The Critical Review_, xv (Feb. 1763). 160. 9. _The Monthly Review_. Xxviii (Jan. 1763). 68, written by theeditor, Ralph Griffiths (B. C. Nangle, _The Monthly Review, First Series1749-1789_, Clarendon Press, 1934, p. 84, no. 995). * * * * * CRITICAL STRICTURES ON THE New TRAGEDY OF ELVIRA, WRITTEN BY Mr. DAVID MALLOCH. LONDON:Printed for W. FLEXNEY, near Gray's Inn, Holborn. MDCCLXIII. (Price Sixpence. ) * * * * * Advertisement. [A] We have followed the Authority of Sir _David Dalrymple_, and Mr. _Samuel Johnson_, in the Orthography of Mr. _Malloch_'s Name; aswe imagine the Decision of these Gentlemen will have more weight in theWorld of Letters, than even that of the said Mr. _Malloch_ himself. * * * * * CRITICALSTRICTURES, &c. In our Strictures on the Tragedy of _Elvira_, we shall not hasten all atonce into the midst of Things, according to the Rules of Epic Poetry;Heroic Poems and Remarks on New Plays, are things so essentiallydifferent, that they ought not to be written by the same Rules. Had Mr. _Malloch_ been aware of these Distinctions in writing, which surely arenot very nice, he probably would have discovered that Scenes admirablyadapted for forming a Burlesque Tragedy, would never succeed in forminga serious Drama. In the Prologue the Author informs us, that thePreliminaries of Peace are signed, and the War now over and he humblyhopes, as we have spared the _French_, we will spare his Tragedy. But asthe Principles of Restitution seem at present strong in this Nation, before we extend our Mercy to him, we insist that in imitation of hisSuperiors, he shall restore every thing valuable he has plunder'd fromthe _French_ during the Course of his sad and tedious Composition. In the first Scene of this Tragedy a Gentleman who has been abroad, during the Wars, requests his Friend to acquaint him with what has pastat Court in the time of his Absence. We were equally surprized anddelighted with this new Method of informing the Spectators of theTransactions prior to the Commencement of the Play; nothing can be morenatural, for we imagine the Art of conveying Letters by Post was at thattime undiscovered. We must indeed acknowledge, that during the time ofthe Roman Empire Letters were transmitted with the utmost Celerity fromone Part to another of those immense Dominions; but we also know, thatafter the Subversion of that State by the Incursions of the _Goths_ and_Vandals_, the first Act of Cruelty committed by these Barbarians wasmurdering all the Post-Boys in cold Blood: In like manner as our inhuman_Edward_ upon his compleating the Conquest of _Wales_ ordered all theBards to be put to Death, amongst the Number of which had Mr. _Malloch_been included we had not now been tortured with his execrable Tragedy. Novelty of the same kind with this we have mentioned runs thro' thewhole Play, almost every Scene being an Interview and a _tête a tête_. The King wants to see his Son, the Queen wants to see _Elvira_, _Elvira_wants to see the King, and so on thro' the Five Acts. No new Thoughts or Sentiments are to be found in this Performance, wemeet only with old ones absurdly expressed. _Dryden_ said that _BenJohnson_ was every where to be traced in the Snow of the Ancients. Wemay say that _Malloch_ is every where to be traced in the Puddle of theModerns. Instead of selecting the Beauties, he has pick'd out whateveris despicable in _Shakespeare_, _Otway_, _Dryden_, and _Rowe_, like aPick-Pocket who dives for Handkerchiefs, not for Gold; and contentshimself with what he finds in our Great Coat Pocket, without attemptingour Watch or your Purse. Tho' Mr. _Malloch_ may only mean to borrow, yetas he possesses no Fund of Original Genius from whence he can pay hisDebts, borrowing, we are afraid is an inadequate Expression, the harsherone of stealing we must therefore, tho' reluctantly, substitute in itsroom. In the Prologue he acknowledges himself a Culprit, but as the Lossof what he has pilfered is insignificant to the Owners, we shall bringhim in guilty only of Petty Larcenary: We believe he has been driven, like poor People in this severe Weather by dire Necessity, to suchdishonest Shifts. In this Play the Author has introduced a Rebellion unparalleled inany History, Ancient or Modern. He raises his Rebellions as a skilfulGardener does his Mushrooms, in a Moment; and like an artful Nurse, he lulls in a Moment the fretful Child asleep. The Prince enters anAppartment of the Palace with a drawn Sword; this forms the Rebellion. The King enters the same Appartment without a drawn Sword. This quashesthe Rebellion. How to credit this Story, or to pardon this poeticalLicence, we are greatly at a Loss; for we know in the Year 1745 threethousand Mountaineers actually appeared at _Derby_. _Cataline_, we arecredibly informed, had a Gang of at least a Dozen stout Fellows; and itis pretty certain that _Bedemar_, when going to inslave _Venice_, hadprovided Pistols and Battle Powder for more than fifteen fighting Men. We are almost tempted to think, that Mr. _Malloch_ gets his Rebellionsready made, like his _Scotch_ Tobacco, cut and dry, at the Sign of theValiant Highlander. Our great Author possesses, in its utmost Perfection, the happy Art ofuniting rival Ladies, and of setting at Variance a virtuous Father andSon. How intimate his Acquaintance with Human Nature! How deep hisKnowledge of the Passions! No less exquisite and refined in his Morality, like a true Disciple of Lord _Bolingbroke_, he unites Vice and Virtuemost lovingly together; witness this memorable Line of the King's, addressed to _Elvira_; _'Midst all your Guilt I must admire your Virtue. _ Let us invert this Line, 'Midst all your Virtue I must abhor your Guilt. Let us parody it; O Mr. _David Malloch_! 'midst all your Dullness I must admire your Genius. We heard it once asserted by _David Hume_, Esq;[B] that Mr. _Malloch_was destitute of the Pathetic. In this Observation however we beg leaveto differ with him. In the fourth Act the whole Board of PortuguesePrivy Counsellors are melted into Tears. The Trial of the Prince movesthe Hearts of those Monsters of Iniquity, those Members of Inquisition, when the less humane Audience are in Danger, from the Tediousness of twoinsipid Harangues of falling fast asleep. This majestic Scene is tooexactly copied from a Trial at the _Old Bailey_, to have even the Meritof Originality. And indeed it is to the Lenity of the King of _Portugal_that we owe by far the greater Part of this amazing Play. The good Manlets his rebellious Subjects out of Prison to chat with him, when awiser Monarch would have kept them close confined in _Newgate_. Theincomparable Action of that universal Genius Mr. _Garrick_ alone, savedthis Act from the Damnation it deserved. Had not he, like a second_Æneas_, carried the old doating and decrepid Father on his Back, hemust have lain by the Way. Tho' we must observe another Character inthis Play seemed better suited to the Impetuosity and Fire of thisActor. We could not but smile at the Humour of a merry Wag in the Pit, who at the Conclusion of one of the most tiresome Pleadings, with someDegree of Impatience and Emotion called out, _Encore, encore_. In the fifth Act we were melted with the Sight of two young Childrenwhich the King embraced, which the Prince embraced, which _Elvira_embraced. Mr. _Addison_ in the 44th No. Of the _Spectator_, has someRemarks so judicious and lively on the Practice of introducing Childrenon the Stage, that we must beg leave to transcribe the Passage. "A disconsolate Mother with a Child in her Hand, has frequently drawnCompassion from the Audience, and has therefore gained a Place inseveral Tragedies; a modern Writer who observed how this had takenin other Plays, being resolved to double the Distress, and melt hisAudience twice as much as those before him had done, brought a Princesson the Stage with a little Boy in one Hand, and a Girl in the other. Athird Poet being resolved to out-write all his Predecessors, a few Yearsago introduced three Children with great Success; and as I am informed ayoung Gentleman who is fully determined to break the most obdurateHeart, has a Tragedy by him where the first Person that appears on theStage is an afflicted Widow, in her mourning Weeds, with half a dozenfatherless Children attending her, like those that usually hang aboutthe Figure of Charity. Thus several Incidents that are beautiful in agood Writer become ridiculous by falling into the Hands of a bad one. " We would suggest to Mr. _Malloch_ the useful Hint of introducing insome of his future Productions, the whole Foundling Hospital, which witha well painted Scene of the Edifice itself would certainly call forth thewarmest Tears of Pity, and the bitterest Emotions of Distress; especiallywhen we consider that many of the Parents of these unfortunate Babes wouldprobably be Spectators of this interesting Scene. The Conclusion of the Piece is as abrupt as the other Parts of it areabsurd. We should be much at a Loss to guess by whom the Poison isadministered to _Elvira_, were we not aided in our Conjectures by theshrewd Suspicions which the King, tho' otherwise a very loving Husband, seems to entertain of his Wife. Upon my regreting that her Majesty, ifguilty, should escape without poetical Justice at least, a Gentleman whosat behind me, a Friend as I supposed of the Author, assured me herPunishment was reserved for the Farce, which for that Purpose was, contrary to Custom, added to the Play. [C] Though in general this Tragedy is colder than the most extreme Parts of_Nova Zembla_, [D] yet we now and then feel a Warmth, but it is such aWarmth or Glow rather, as is sometimes produced by the Handling of Snow. Bad as this Play is, yet will the Author have the Profits of his ThreeNights: Few on the First Night having either Taste or Spirit to expresstheir Disapprobation. Like the Rascals who plundered _Lisbon_ afterthe Earthquake, Mr. _David Malloch_ will extract Guineas out ofRubbish. We shall now give, in a few Words, the Quintessence of this Play. Monarchsought to be just. Heroes are bad Men. Husbands ought to die for theirWives, Wives for their Husbands. We ought to govern our Passions. And theSun shines on all alike. A few of these new Remarks form the Sum total ofthis contemptible Piece. After the Play we were entertained with an Epilogue fraught with Humour, and spoken with Spirit. There was a Simile of a Bundle of Twigs formedinto a Rod, which seemed to convey a delicate Allusion to Mr. _Malloch_'s original Profession, [E] and some of the Lines contained anexquisite and severe Criticism on the Play itself. Amidst all the harshness inspired by a real Feeling of the Dulness of theComposition itself, it would be unjust not to bestow the highest Applauseon the principal Performers, by the Energy of whose Action even Dulnesswas sometimes rendered respectable. We were sorry to find such greatTalents so very ill employed. The melting Tones of a _Cibber_ shouldmake every Eye stream with Tears. _Pritchard_ should always elevate. _Garrick_ give Strength and Majesty to the Scene. Let us soften atthe keen Distress of a _Belvidera_; let our Souls rise with theDignity of an _Elizabeth_; let us tremble at the wild Madness of a_Lear_;[F] but let us not Yawn at the Stupidity of uninterestingCharacters. _FINIS_ * * * * * NOTES ON _CRITICAL STRICTURES_ [Footnote A: (P. 5) Advertisement. Johnson's dictum first appeared inthe abridgment of his dictionary, 1756, under _Alias_, which he definedas "A Latin word signifying otherwise; as Mallet _alias_ Mallock; thatis, _otherwise_ Mallock. " In four places in his _Memorials and LettersRelating to the History of Britain in the Reign of James the First_(1762) Dalrymple had given Mallet "his real name"; he had repented afterthe sheets were printed and had inserted a corrigendum, "For Malloch, r. Mallet, " which only made matters worse. See _The Yale Edition of HoraceWalpole's Correspondence_, iv. 78 _n. _ 17. Dalrymple chided theauthors of _Critical Strictures_ gently for using his name, and saidhe was sorry for having thus yielded to a private pique (LJ, p. 190_n. _ 6). But the matter remained of interest to him, for as late as1783 he sent Johnson a copy of one of Mallet's earliest productions, thetitle-page of which bore the name in its original spelling (_Life_, iv. 216-217; see also _Private Papers of James Boswell . .. In theCollection of . .. R. H. Isham_, ed. Geoffrey Scott and F. A. Pottle, 18vols. , Privately Printed, 1928-1934, xv. 208). ] [Footnote B: (P. 15) "We heard it once asserted by _David Hume_, Esq. " On4 November 1762, in Hume's house in James's Court, Edinburgh. "Mr. Mallethas written bad Tragedies because he is deficient in the pathetic, andhence it is doubted if he is the Author of _William and Margaret_. Mr. Hume said he knew people who had seen it before Mallet was born. Erskine gave another proof, viz. That he has written _Edwin andEmma_, a Ballad in the same stile, not near so good. " See _PrivatePapers_ (as in the note preceding this), i. 126-127, or the LimitedEdition of _Boswell's London Journal, 1762-1763_, McGraw-Hill andHeinemann, 1951, p. 101. Hume protested vigorously, though with goodhumor, at this breach of confidence, and Boswell wrote a flippant reply(LJ, pp. 206-207, 208-209). ] [Footnote C: (P. 20) ". .. Her Punishment was reserved for the Farce, whichfor that Purpose was, contrary to Custom, added to the Play. " Stock playswere always followed by an afterpiece, but the afterpiece was in mostcases omitted during the first run of a new play. For example, Mrs. Sheridan's _Discovery_ opened 3 February 1763 and ran for ten nights beforean afterpiece was added. The afterpieces presented with _Elvira_ up to27 January were as follows: 19 January, _The Male Coquette_ (Garrick);20 January, _High Life Below Stairs_ (Townley); 21 January, _OldMaid_ (Murphy); 22 January, _Catharine and Petruchio_ (Garrick'sadaptation of Shakespeare's _Taming of the Shrew_); 24 January, _HighLife Below Stairs_; 26 January, _Catharine and Petruchio_; 27January, _Edgar and Emmeline_ (Hawkesworth). But Mrs. Pritchard, whoplayed the Queen in _Elvira_, seems not to have appeared in any ofthese afterpieces, and no one of them contains a queen (Dougald MacMillan, _Drury Lane Calendar_, 1747-1776, Clarendon Press, 1938, pp. 94, 217, 239, 260, 282, 297). Furthermore, if the jest could be understood onlywith reference to a particular farce, that farce would surely have beennamed. This is no doubt a case where less is meant than meets the ear. The authors are merely saying that Mallet's play is badly constructed, and is so ridiculous generally that no one will know when the tragedyends and the farce begins. ] [Footnote D: (P. 21) "Though in general this Tragedy is colder than themost extreme Parts of _Nova Zembla_ . .. " This is perhaps the only passagein _Critical Strictures_ that can be attributed with certainty to one ofthe three authors. The remark is Dempster's, and had been made some timebefore Elvira was presented; in fact, he had applied it originally toJohnson's _Irene_. See LJ, pp. 69, 306. ] [Footnote E: (P. 22) ". .. A Simile of a Bundle of Twigs formed into aRod . .. Mr. _Malloch_'s original Profession . .. " Garrick's epilogue to_Elvira_ contains the following lines: A single critick will not frown, look big, Harmless and pliant as a single twig, But crouded _here_ they change, and 'tis not odd, For twigs when bundled up, become a rod. One of Mallet's duties, when he was janitor of the High School ofEdinburgh, had been to assist in the floggings, either by applying theinstrument of punishment himself (see LJ, p. 209) or by lifting the boysup on his back at the command of _tollatur_ and exposing the properportion of their anatomy to the master's birch (John Ramsay, _Scotlandand Scotsmen in the Eighteenth Century_, Blackwood, Edinburgh andLondon, 1888, i. 24 _n_. )] [Footnote F: (Pp. 23-24) ". .. Keen Distress of a _Belvidera_, . .. Dignityof an _Elizabeth_;. .. Wild Madness of a _Lear_. " The authors are listingwhat they conceive to be the most impressive tragic roles of Mrs. Cibber, Mrs. Pritchard, and Garrick, who played respectively Elvira, the Queen, and the King in _Elvira_. Belvidera in Otway's _Venice Preserved_was by all accounts one of Mrs. Cibber's best parts. It had beenassigned to her in the majority of the Drury Lane performances since 1747, and she had appeared in it as recently as 16 November 1762. Mrs. Pritchardhad played Queen Elizabeth in all the Drury Lane performances (1755-1760)of _The Earl of Essex_ by Henry Jones and of the play of the samename by Henry Brooke (1761-), but had appeared in neither role morerecently than 30 December 1761. A role of Elizabeth which she hadpresented more recently (18 December 1762) and had been appearingregularly in since 1748 was the Queen Elizabeth of Shakespeare's_Richard III_ as altered by Cibber. It is probably this last namedElizabeth that the authors of _Critical Strictures_ had in mind. Thechoice is unusual, critics generally having considered Lady Macbeth tobe her finest tragic role. Garrick had played Lear on 31 December 1762(_Drury Lane Calendar_, as above, pp. 237-238, 268, 313-315, 338). ] * * * * * PUBLICATIONS OF THE AUGUSTAN REPRINT SOCIETY FIRST YEAR (1946-47) Numbers 1-4 out of print. 5. Samuel Wesley's _Epistle to a Friend Concerning Poetry_ (1700) and_Essay on Heroic Poetry_ (1693). 6. _Representation of the Impiety and Immorality of the Stage_ (1704)and _Some Thoughts Concerning the Stage_ (1704). SECOND YEAR (1947-1948) 7. John Gay's _The Present State of Wit_ (1711); and a section on Witfrom _The English Theophrastus_ (1702). 8. Rapin's _De Carmine Pastorali_, translated by Creech (1684). 9. T. Hanmer's (?) _Some Remarks on the Tragedy of Hamlet_ (1736). 10. Corbyn Morris' _Essay towards Fixing the True Standards of Wit, etc. _ (1744). 11. Thomas Purney's _Discourse on the Pastoral_ (1717). 12. Essays on the Stage, selected, with an Introduction by Joseph WoodKrutch. THIRD YEAR (1948-1949) 13. Sir John Falstaff (pseud. ), _The Theatre_ (1720). 14. Edward Moore's _The Gamester_ (1753). 15. John Oldmixon's _Reflections on Dr. Swift's Letter to Harley_(1712); and Arthur Mainwaring's _The British Academy_ (1712). 16. Nevil Payne's _Fatal Jealousy_(1673). 17. Nicholas Rowe's _Some Account of the Life of Mr. WilliamShakespeare_ (1709). 18. "Of Genius, " in _The Occasional Paper_, Vol. III, No. 10 (1719);and Aaron Hill's Preface to _The Creation_ (1720). FOURTH YEAR (1949-1950) 19. Susanna Centlivre's _The Busie Body_ (1709). 20. Lewis Theobold's _Preface to The Works of Shakespeare_ (1734). 21. _Critical Remarks on Sir Charles Grandison, Clarissa, and Pamela_(1754). 22. Samuel Johnson's _The Vanity of Human Wishes_ (1749) and Two_Rambler_ papers (1750). 23. John Dryden's _His Majesties Declaration Defended_ (1681). 24. Pierre Nicole's _An Essay on True and Apparent Beauty in Which fromSettled Principles is Rendered the Grounds for Choosing and RejectingEpigrams_, translated by J. V. Cunningham. FIFTH YEAR (1950-51) 25. Thomas Baker's _The Fine Lady's Airs_ (1709). 26. Charles Macklin's _The Man of the World_ (1792). 27. Frances Reynolds' _An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Taste, and of the Origin of Our Ideas of Beauty, etc. _ (1785). 28. John Evelyn's _An Apologie for the Royal Party_ (1659); and _APanegyric to Charles the Second_ (1661). 29. Daniel Defoe's _A Vindication of the Press_ (1718). 30. Essays on Taste from John Gilbert Cooper's _Letters ConcerningTaste_, 3rd edition (1757), & John Armstrong's _Miscellanies_(1770). 31. Thomas Gray's _An Elegy Wrote in a Country Church Yard_ (1751);and _The Eton College Manuscript_. 32. Prefaces to Fiction; Georges de Scudéry's Preface to _Ibrahim_(1674), etc. 33. Henry Gally's _A Critical Essay_ on Characteristic-Writings(1725). 34. Thomas Tyers' A Biographical Sketch of Dr. Samuel Johnson (1785). * * * * * William Andrews Clark Memorial Library: University of California THE AUGUSTAN REPRINT SOCIETY _General Editors_ H. RICHARD ARCHER William Andrews Clark Memorial LibraryE. N. HOOKER University of California, Los AngelesR. C. BOYS University of MichiganJOHN LOFTIS University of California, Los Angeles The Society exists to make available inexpensive reprints (usuallyfacsimile reproductions) of rare seventeenth and eighteenth century works. The editorial policy of the Society continues unchanged. As in the past, the editors welcome suggestions concerning publications. All income of theSociety is devoted to defraying cost of publication and mailing. All correspondence concerning subscriptions in the United States andCanada should be addressed to the William Andrews Clark Memorial Library, 2205 West Adams Boulevard, Los Angeles 18, California. Correspondenceconcerning editorial matters may be addressed to any of the generaleditors. The membership fee is $3. 00 a year for subscribers in the UnitedStates and Canada and 15/- for subscribers in Great Britain and Europe. British and European subscribers should address B. H. Blackwell, BroadStreet, Oxford, England. * * * * * Publications for the sixth year [1951-1952] (At least six items, most of them from the following list, will bereprinted. ) THOMAS GRAY: _An Elegy Wrote in a Country Church Yard_ (1751). Introduction by George Sherburn. JAMES BOSWELL, ANDREW ERSKINE, and GEORGE DEMPSTER: _Critical Strictureson the New Tragedy of Elvira_ (1763). Introduction by Frederick A. Pottle. _An Essay on the New Species of Writing Founded by Mr. Fielding_(1751). Introduction by James A. Work. HENRY GALLY: _A Critical Essay on Characteristic Writing_ (1725). Introduction by Alexander Chorney. [JOHN PHILLIPS]: _Satyr Against Hypocrits_ (1655). Introduction byLeon Howard. _Prefaces to Fiction_. Selected and with an Introduction by BenjaminBoyce. THOMAS TYERS: _A Biographical Sketch of Dr. Samuel Johnson_ ([1785]). Introduction by Gerald Dennis Meyer. Publications for the first five years (with the exception of NOS. 1-4, which are out of print) are available at the rate of $3. 00 a year. Pricesfor individual numbers may be obtained by writing to the Society. * * * * * THE AUGUSTAN REPRINT SOCIETY_WILLIAM ANDREWS CLARK MEMORIAL LIBRARY_2205 WEST ADAMS BOULEVARD, LOS ANGELES 18, CALIFORNIA Make check or money order payable to THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OFCALIFORNIA.