A Short View of the Immorality and Profaneness of the English Stage/Chapter IV

The Lines of Virtue and Vice are Struck out by Nature in very Legible Diſtinctions; They tend to a different Point, and in the greater Inſtances the Space between them is eaſily perceiv'd. Nothing can be more unlike than the Original Forms of theſe Qualities: The Firſt has all the ſweetneſs, Charms, and Graces imaginable; The other has the Air of a Poſt ill Carved into a Monſter, and looks both fooliſh and Frightful together. Theſe are the Native Appearances of good and Evil: And they that endeavour to blot the Diſtinctions, to rub out the Colours, or change the Marks, are extreamly to blame. 'Tis confeſſed as long as the Mind is awake, and Conſcience goes true, there's no fear of being impoſed on. But when Vice is varniſh'd over with Pleaſure, and comes in the Shape of Convenience, the caſe grows ſomewhat dangerous; for then the Fancy may be gain'd, and the Guards corrupted, and Reaſon ſuborn'd againſt it ſelf. And thus a Diſguiſe often paſſes when the Perſon would otherwiſe be ſtopt. To put Lewdneſs into a Thriving condition, to give it an Equipage of Quality, and to treat it with Ceremony and Reſpect, is the way to confound the Underſtanding, to fortifie the Charm, and to make the Miſchief invincible. Innocence is often owing to Fear, and Appetite is kept under by Shame; But when theſe Reſtraints are once taken off, when Profit and Liberty lie on the ſame ſide, and a Man can Debauch himſelf into Credit, what can be expected in ſuch a caſe, but that Pleaſure ſhould grow Abſolute, and Madneſs carry all before it? The Stage ſeem eager to bring Matters to this Iſſue; They have made a conſiderable progreſs, and are ſtill puſhing their Point with all the Vigour imaginable. If this be not their Aim why is Lewdneſs ſo much conſider'd in Character and Succeſs? Why are their Favourites Atheiſtical, and their fine Gentleman debauched? To what purpoſe is Vice thus prefer'd, thus ornamented, and careſs'd, unleſs for Imitation? That matter of Fact ſtands thus, I ſhall make good by ſeveral Inſtances: To begin then with their Men of Breeding and Figure. Wild-blood ſets up for Debauchery, Ridicules Marriage, and Swears by Mahomet. Bellamy makes ſport with the Devil, and Lorenzo is vitious and calls his Father ''Bawdy Magiſtrate. Horner is horridly Smutty, and Harcourt'' falſe to his Friend who uſed him kindly. In the Plain Dealer Freeman talks coarſely, cheats the Widdow, debauches her Son, and makes him undutiful. Bellmour is Lewd and Profane, And Mellefont puts Careleſs in the beſt way he can to debauch Lady Plyant. Theſe Sparks generally Marry up the Top Ladys, and thoſe that do not, are brought to no Pennance, but go off with the Character of Fine Gentlemen: In Don-Sebaſtian, Antonio an Atheiſtical Bully is rewarded with the Lady Moraima, and half the Muffty&apos;s Eſtate. Valentine in Love for Love is (if I may ſo call him) the Hero of the Play; This Spark the Poet would paſs for a Perſon of Virtue, but he ſpeaks to late. 'Tis true, He was hearty in his Affection to Angelica. Now without queſtion, to be in Love with a fine Lady of 30000 Pounds is a great Virtue! But then abating this ſingle Commendation, Valentine is altogether compounded of Vice. He is a prodigal Debauchee, unnatural, and Profane, Obſcene, Sawcy, and undutiful, And yet this Libertine is crown'd for the Man of Merit, has his Wiſhes thrown into his Lap, and makes the Happy Exit. I perceive we ſhould have a rare ſet of Virtues if theſe Poets had the making of them! How they hug a Vitious Character, and how profuſe are they in their Liberalities to Lewdneſs? In the Provoked Wife, Conſtant Swears at Length, ſolicits Lady Brute, Confeſſes himſelf Lewd, and prefers Debauchery to Marriage. He handles the laſt Sybject very notably and worth the Hearing. There is (ſays he) ''a poor ſordid Slavery in Marriage, that turns the flowing Tide of Honour, and ſinks it to the loweſt ebb of Infamy. 'Tis a Corrupted Soil, Ill Nature, Avarice, Sloth, Cowardize, and Dirt, are all its Product.—But then Conſtancy (alias Whoring) is a Brave, Free, Haughty, Generous, Agent''. This is admirable ſtuff both for the Rhetorick and the Reaſon! The Character Young Faſhion in the Relapſe is of the ſame Staunchneſs, but this the Reader may have in another Place.

To ſum up the Evidence. A fine Gentleman, is a fine Whoring, Swearing, Smutty, Atheiſtical Man. Theſe Qualifications it ſeems compleat the Idea of Honour. They are the Top-Improvements of Fortune, and the diſtinguiſhing Glories of Birth and Breeding! This is the Stage-Teſt for Quality, and thoſe that can't ſtand it, ought to be Diſclaim'd. The Reſtraints of Conſcience and the Pedantry of Virtue, are unbecoming a Cavalier: Future Securities, and Reaching beyond Life, are vulgar Proviſions: If he falls a Thinking at this rate, he forfeits his Honour; For his Head was only made to run againſt a Poſt! Here you have a Man of Breeding and Figure that burleſques the Bible, Swears, and talks Smut to Ladies, ſpeaks ill of his Friend behind his Back, and betraies his Intereſt. A fine Gentleman that has neither Honeſty, nor Honour, Conſcience, nor Manners, Good Nature, nor civil Hypocricy. Fine, only in the Inſignificancy of Life, the Abuſe of Religion and the Scandals of Converſation. Theſe Worſhipful Things are the Poets Favourites: They appear at the Head of the Faſhion; and ſhine in Character, and Equipage. If there is any Senſe ſtirring, They muſt have it, tho' the reſt of the Stage ſuffer never ſo much by the Partiality. And what can be the Meaning of this wretched Diſtribution of Honour? Is it not to give Credit and Countenance to Vice, and to ſhame young People out of all pretences to Conſcience, and Regularity? They ſeem forc'd to turn Lewd in their own Defence: They can't otherwiſe juſtifie themſelves to the Faſhion, nor keep up the Character of Gentlemen: Thus People not well furniſh'd with Thought, and Experience, are debauch'd both in Practiſe and Principle. And thus Religion grows uncreditable, and paſſes for ill Education. The Stage ſeldom gives Quarter to any Thing that's ſerviceable or Significant, but perſecutes Worth, and Goodneſs under every Appearance. He that would be ſafe from their Satir muſt take care to diſguiſe himſelf in Vice, and hang out the Colours of Debauchery. How often is Learning, Induſtry, and Frugality, ridiculed in Comedy? The rich Citizens are often Miſers, and Cuckolds, and the Univerſities, Schools of Pedantry upon this ſcore. In ſhort, Libertiniſm and Profaneſs, Dreſſing, Idleneſs, and Gallantry, are the only valuable Qualities. As if People were not apt enough of themſelves to be Lazy, Lewd, and Extravagant, unleſs they were prick'd forward, and provok'd by Glory, and Reputation. Thus the Marks of Honour, and Infamy are miſapplyed, and the Idea's of Virtue and Vice confounded. Thus Monſtrouſneſs goes for Proportion, and the Blemiſhes of Human Nature, make up the Beauties of it.

The fine Ladies are of the ſame Cut with the Gentlemen; Moraima is ſcandalouſly rude to her Father, helps him to a beating, and runs away with Antonio. Angelica talks ſawcily to her Uncle, and Belinda confeſſes her Inclination for a Gallant. And as I have obſerv'd already, the Toping Ladies in the Mock Aſtrologer, Spaniſh Fryar, Country Wife, Old Batchelour, Orphan, Double Dealer, and Love Triumphant, are ſmutty, and ſometimes Profane.

And was Licentiouſneſs and irreligion, alwaies a mark of Honour? No; I don't perceive but that the old Poets had an other Notion of Accompliſhment, and bred their people of Condition a different way. Philolaches in Plautus laments his being debauch'd; and dilates upon the Advantages of Virtue, and Regularity. Luſiteles another Young Gentleman diſputes handſomly by himſelf againſt Lewdneſs. And the diſcourſe between him and Philto is Moral, and well managed. And afterwards he laſhes Luxury and Debauching with a great deal of Warmth, and Satir. Chremes in Terence is a modeſt young Gentleman, he is afraid of being ſurpriz'd by Thais, and ſeems careful not to ſully his Reputation. And Pamphilus in Hecyra reſolves rather to be govern'd by Duty, than Inclination.

Plautus&apos;s Pinacium tells her Friend Panegyric that they ought to acquit themſelves fairly to their Huſbands, tho' Theſe ſhould fail in their Regards towards them. For all good People will do juſtice tho' they don't receive it. Lady Brute in the Provok'd Wife is govern'd by different maxims. She is debauch'd with ill Uſage, ſays Virtue is an Aſs, and a Gallant's worth forty on't. Pinacium goes on to another Head of Duty, and declares that a Daughter can never reſpect her Father too much, and that Diſobedience has a great deal of ſcandal, and Lewdneſs in't. The Lady Jacinta as I remember does not treat her Father at this rate of Decency. Let us hear a little of her Behaviour. The Mock Aſtrologer makes the Men draw, and frights the Ladys with the Apprehenſion of a Quarrel. Upon this; Theodoſia crys what will become of us! Jacinta anſwers, we'll die for Company: nothing vexes me but that I am not a Man, to have one thruſt at that malicious old Father of mine, before I go. Afterwards the old Gentleman Alonzo threatens his Daughters with a Nunnery. Jacinta ſpars again and ſays, I would have thee to know thou graceleſs old Man, that I defy a Nunnery: name a Nunnery once more and I diſown thee for my Father. I could carry on the Compariſon between the old and Modern Poets ſomewhat farther. But this may ſuffice.

Thus we ſee what a fine time Lewd People have on the Engliſh Stage. No Cenſure, no mark of Infamy, no Mortification muſt touch them. They keep their Honour untarniſh'd, and carry off the Advantage of their Character. They are ſet up for the Standard of Behaviour, and the Maſters of Ceremony and Senſe. And at laſt that the Example may work the better, they generally make them rich, and happy, and reward them with their own Deſires.

Mr. Dryden in the Preface to his Mock-Aſtrologer, confeſſes himſelf blamed for this Practiſe. For making debauch'd Perſons his Protagoniſts, or chief Perſons of the Drama; And, for making them happy in the Concluſion of the Play, againſt the Law of Comedy, which is to reward Virtue, and puniſh Vice. To this Objection He makes a lame Defence. And anſwers

1ſt. That he knows no ſuch Law conſtantly obſerv'd in Comedy by the Antient or Modern Poets. What then? Poets are not always exactly in Rule. It may be a good Law tho' 'tis not conſtantly obſerv'd, ſome Laws are conſtantly broken, and yet ne're the worſe for all that. He goes on, and pleads the Authorities of Plautus, and Terence. I grant there are Inſtances of Favour to vitious young People in thoſe Authors, but to this I reply

1ſt. That thoſe Poets had a greater compaſs of Liberty in their Religion. Debauchery did not lie under thoſe Diſcouragements of Scandal, and penalty, with them as it does with us. Unleſs therefore He can prove Heatheniſm, and Chriſtianity the ſame, his precedents will do him little ſervice.

2ly. Horace who was as good a judge of the Stage, as either of thoſe Comedians, ſeems to be of another Opinion. He condemns the obſcenities of Plautus, and tells you Men of Fortune and Quality in his time; would not endure immodeſt Satir. He continues, that Poets were formerly admired for the great ſervices they did. For teaching Matters relating to Religion, and Government; For refining the Manners, tempering the Paſſions, and improving the Underſtandings of Mankind: For making them more uſeful in Domeſtick Relations, and the publick Capacities of Life. This is a demonſtration that Vice was not the Inclination of the Muſes in thoſe days; and that Horace beleiv'd the chief buſineſs of a Poem was, to Inſtruct the Audience. He adds farther that the Chorus ought to turn upon the Argument of the Drama, and ſupport the Deſign of the Acts. That They ought to ſpeak in Defence of Virtue, and Frugality, and ſhow a Regard to Religion. Now from the Rule of the Chorus, we may conclude his Judgment for the Play. For as he obſerves, there muſt be a Uniformity between the Chorus and the Acts: They muſt have the ſame View, and be all of a Piece. From hence 'tis plain that Horace would have no immoral Character have either Countenance or good Fortune, upon the Stage. If 'tis ſaid the very mention of the Chorus ſhews the Directions were intended for Tragedy. To this

I anſwer, that the Conſequence is not good. For the uſe of a Chorus is not inconſiſtent with Comedy. The antient Comedians had it. Ariſtophanes is an Inſtance. I know 'tis ſaid the Chorus was left out in that they call the New Comedy. But I can't ſee the concluſiveneſs of this Aſſertion. For Ariſtophanes his Plutus is New Comedy with a Chorus in't. And Ariſtotle who lived after this Revolution of the Stage, mentions nothing of the Omiſſion of the Chorus. He rather ſuppoſes its continuance by ſaying the Chorus was added by the Government long after the Invention of Comedy. 'Tis true Plautus and Terence have none, but thoſe before them probably might. Moliere has now reviv'd them, And Horace might be of his Opinion, for ought wee know to the contrary.

Laſtly. Horace having expreſly mentioned the beginning and progreſs of Comedy, diſcovers himſelf more fully: He adviſes a Poet to form his Work upon the Precepts of Socrates and Plato, and the Models of Moral Philoſophy. This was the way to preſerve Decency, and to aſſign a proper Fate and Behaviour to every Character. Now if Horace would have his Poet govern'd by the Maxims of Morality, he muſt oblige him to Sobriety of Conduct, and a juſt diſtribution of Rewards, and Puniſhments.

Mr. Dryden makes Homewards, and endeavours to fortifie himſelf in Modern Authority. He lets us know that Ben Johnſon after whom he may he proud to Err, gives him more than one example of this Conduct; That in the Alchemiſt is notorius, where neither Face nor his Maſter are corrected according to their Demerits. But how Proud ſoever Mr. Dryden may be of an Errour, he has not ſo much of Ben Jonſon&apos;s company as he pretends. His Inſtance of Face &c. in the Alchemiſt is rather notorious againſt his Purpoſe then for it.

For Face did not Council his Maſter Lovewit to debauch the Widdow; neither is it clear that the Matter went thus far. He might gain her conſent upon Terms of Honour for ought appears to the contrary. 'Tis true Face who was one of the Principal Cheats is Pardon'd and conſider'd. But then his Maſter confeſſes himſelf kind to a fault. He owns this Indulgence was a Breach of Juſtice, and unbecoming the Gravity of an old Man. And then deſires the Audience to excuſe him upon the Score of the Temptation. But Face continued, in the Couſenage till the laſt without Repentance. Under favour I conceive this is a Miſtake. For does not Face make an Apology before he leaves the Stage? Does he not ſet himſelf at the Bar, arraign his own Practiſe, and caſt the Cauſe upon the Clemency of the Company? And are not all theſe Signs of the Diſlike of what he had done? Thus careful the Poet is to prevent the Ill Impreſſions of his Play! He brings both Man and Maſter to Confeſſion. He diſmiſſes them like Malefactours; And moves for their Pardon before he gives them their Diſcharge. But the Mock-Aſtrologer has a gentler Hand: Wild-Blood and Jacinta are more generouſly uſed: There is no Acknowledgment exacted; no Hardſhip put upon them: They are permitted to talk on in their Libertine way to the Laſt: And take Leave without the leaſt Appearance of Reformation. The Mock-Aſtrologer urges Ben Johnſon's Silent Woman as an other Precedent to his purpoſe. For there Dauphine confeſſes himſelf in Love with all the Collegiate Lady's. And yet this naughty Dauphine is Crowned in the end with the Poſſeſſion of his Uncles Eſtate, and with the hopes of all his Miſtreſſes. This Charge, as I take it, is ſomewhat too ſevere. I grant Dauphine Profeſſes himſelf in Love with the Collegiate Ladies at firſt. But when they invited him to a private Viſit, he makes them no Promiſe; but rather appears tired, and willing to diſengage. Dauphine therefore is not altogether ſo naughty as this Author repreſents him.

Ben Johnſon's Fox is clearly againſt Mr. Dryden. And here I have his own Confeſſion for proof. He declares the Poets end in this Play was the Puniſhment of Vice, and the Reward of Virtue. Ben was forced to ſtrain for this piece of Juſtice, and break through the Unity of Deſign. This Mr. Dryden remarks upon him: How ever he is pleaſed to commend the Performance, and calls it an excellent Fifth Act.

Ben Johnſon ſhall ſpeak for himſelf afterwards in the Character of a Critick; In the mean time I ſhall take a Teſtimony or two from Shakeſpear. And here we may obſerve the admir'd Falſtaffe goes off in Diſappointment. He is thrown out of Favour as being a Rake, and dies like a Rat behind the Hangings. The Pleaſure he had given, would not excuſe him. The Poet was not ſo partial, as to let his Humour compound for his Lewdneſs. If 'tis objected that this remark is wide of the Point, becauſe Falſtaffe is repreſented in Tragedy, where the Laws of Juſtice are more ſtrickly obſerv'd, To this I anſwer, that you may call Henry the Fourth and Fifth, Tragedies if you pleaſe. But for all that, Falſtaffe wears no Buſkins, his Character is perfectly Comical from end to end.

The next Inſtance ſhall be in Flowerdale the Prodigal. This Spark notwithſtanding his Extravagance, makes a lucky Hand on't at laſt, and marries a rich Lady. But then the Poet qualifies him for his good Fortune, and mends his Manners with his Circumſtances. He makes him repent, and leave off his Intemperance, Swearing &c. And when his Father warn'd him againſt a Relapſe, He anſwers very ſoberly,

Heaven helping me I'le hate the Courſe of Hell.

I could give ſome inſtances of this kind out of Beaumount and Fletcher, But there's no need of any farther Quotation; For Mr. Dryden is not ſatiſfied with his Apology from Authority: He does as good as own that this may be conſtrued no better than defending one ill practiſe by another. To prevent this very reaſonable objection he endeavours to vindicate his Precedents from the Reaſon of the Thing. To this purpoſe he ''makes a wide difference between the Rules of Tragedy and Comedy. That Vice muſt be impartially proſecuted in the firſt, becauſe the Perſons are Great &c.''

It ſeems then Executions are only for Greatneſs; and Quality. Juſtice is not to ſtrike much lower than a Prince. Private People may do what they pleaſe. They are too few for Miſchief, and too Little for Puniſhment! This would be admirable Doctrine for Newgate, and give us a general Goal-Delivery without more ado. But in Tragedy (ſays the Mock Aſtrologer.) the Crimes are likewiſe Horrid, ſo that there is a neceſſity for Severity and Example. And how ſtands the matter in Comedy? Quite otherwiſe. There the Faults are but the follies of Youth, and the Frailties of Human Nature. For Inſtance. There is nothing but a little Whoring, Pimping, Gaming, Profaneſs &c, And who could be ſo hard hearted to give a Man any Trouble for This? Such Rigours would be ſtrangely Inhumane! A Poet is a better natur'd Thing I can aſſure you. Theſe little Miſcarrages move Pity and Commiſeration, and are not ſuch as muſt of neceſſity be Puniſh'd. This is comfortable Caſuiſtry! But to be Serious. Is Diſſolution of Manners ſuch a Peccadillo? Does a Profligate Conſcience deſerve nothing but Commiſeration? And are People damn'd only for Humane Frailties? I perceive the Laws of Religion and thoſe of the Stage differ extreamly! The ſtrength of his Defence lies in this choice Maxim, that the Cheif End of Comedy is Delight. He queſtions whether Inſtruction has any thing to do in Comedy; If it has, he is ſure &apos;tis no more then its ſecondary end: For the buſineſs of the Poet is to make you laugh. Granting the Truth of this Principle, I ſomewhat queſtion the ſerviceableneſs of it. For is there no Diverſion to be had unleſs Vice appears proſperous, and rides at the Head of Succeſs. One would think ſuch a prepoſterous, diſtribution of Rewards, ſhould rather ſhock the Reaſon, and raiſe the Indignation of the Audience. To laugh without reaſon is the Pleaſure of Fools, and againſt it, of ſomething worſe. The expoſing of Knavery, and making Lewdneſs ridiculous, is a much better occaſion for Laughter. And this with ſubmiſſion I take to be the End of Comedy. And therefore it does not differ from Tragedy in the End, but in the Means. Inſtruction is the principal Deſign of both. The one works by Terror, the other by Infamy. 'Tis true, they don't move in the ſame Line, but they meet in the ſame point at laſt. For this Opinion I have good Authority, beſides what has been cited already.

1ſt. Monſieur Rapin affirms 'That Delight is the End that Poetry aims at, but not the Principal one. For Poetry being an Art, ought to be profitable by the quality of it's own nature, and by the Eſſential Subordination that all Arts ſhould have to Polity, whoſe End in General is the publick Good. This is the Judgment of Ariſtotle and of Horace his chief Interpreter. Ben Johnſon in his Dedicatory Epiſtle of his Fox has ſomewhat conſiderable upon this Argument; And declaims with a great deal of zeal, ſpirit, and good Senſe, againſt the Licentiouſneſs of the Stage. He lays it down for a Principle, 'That 'tis impoſſible to be a good Poet without being a good Man. That he (a good Poet) is ſaid to be able to inform Young Men to all good Diſcipline, and enflame grown Men to all great Virtues &c.—That the general complaint was that the Writers of thoſe days had nothing remaining in them of the Dignity of a Poet, but the abuſed Name. That now, eſpecially in Stage Poetry, nothing but Ribaldry, Profanation, Blaſphemy, all Licence of Offence to God and Man, is practiſed. He confeſſes a great part of this Charge is over-true, and is ſorry he dares not deny it. But then he hopes all are not embark'd in this bold Adventure for Hell. For my part (ſays he) I can, and from a moſt clear Conſcience affirm; That I have ever trembled to think towards the leaſt Profaneſs, and loath'd the Uſe of ſuch foul, and unwaſh'd Bawdry, as is now made the Food of the Scene.—The encreaſe of which Luſt in Liberty, what Learned or Liberal Soul does not abhor? In whole Enterludes nothing but the Filth of the Time is utter'd—with Brothelry able to violate the Ear of a Pagan, and Blaſphemy, to turn the Blood of a Chriſtian to Water. He continues, that the Inſolence of theſe Men had brought the Muſes into Diſgrace, and made Poetry the loweſt ſcorn of the Age. He appeals to his Patrons the Univerſities, that his Labour has been heretofore, and moſtly in this his lateſt Work, to reduce not only the antient Forms, but Manners of the Scene, the Innocence and the Doctrine, which is the of Poeſy, to inform Men in the beſt Reaſon of Living.' Laſtly he adds, that 'he has imitated the Conduct of the Antients in this Play, The goings out (or Concluſions) of whoſe Comedies, were not always joyful but oft-times the Bawds, the Slaves, the Rivals, ye and the Maſters are multed, and fitly, it being the Office of a Comick Poet (mark that!) to imitate Juſtice, and Inſtruct to Life &c.&apos; Say you ſo! Why then if Ben Johnſon knew any thing of the Matter, Divertiſment and Laughing is not as Mr. Dryden affirms, the Chief End of Comedy. This Teſtimony is ſo very full and clear, that it needs no explaining, nor any enforcement from Reaſoning, and Conſequence.

And becauſe Laughing and Pleaſure has ſuch an unlimited Prerogative upon the Stage, I ſhall add a Citation or two from Ariſtotle concerning this Matter. Now this great Man 'calls thoſe Buffoons, and Impertinents, who rally without any regard to Perſons or Things, to Decency, or good Manners. That there is a great difference between Ribaldry, and handſom Rallying. He that would perform exactly, muſt keep within the Character of Virtue, and Breeding. He goes on, and tells us that the old Comedians entertain'd the Audience with Smut, but the Modern ones avoided that Liberty, and grew more reſerv'd. This latter way he ſays was much more proper and Gentile then the other. That in his Opinion Rallying, no leſs than Railing, ought to be under the Diſcipline of Law; That he who is ridden by his Jeſts, and minds nothing but the buſineſs of Laughing, is himſelf Ridiculous. And that a Man of Education and Senſe, is ſo far from going theſe Lengths that he wont ſo much as endure the hearing ſome ſort of Buffoonry.'

And as to the point of Delight in general, the ſame Author affirms, 'that ſcandalous Satiſfactions are not properly Pleaſures. 'Tis only Diſtemper, and falſe Appetite which makes them palatable. And a Man that is ſick, ſeldom has his Taſt true. Beſides, ſuppoſing we throw Capacity out of the Queſtion, and make Experiment and Senſation the Judge; Granting this, we ought not to chop at every Bait, nor Fly out at every Thing that ſtrikes the Fancy. The meer Agreableneſs muſt not overbear us, without diſtinguiſhing upon the Quality, and the Means. Pleaſure how charming ſoever, muſt not be fetched out of Vice. An Eſtate is a pretty thing, but if we purchaſe by Falſhood, and Knavery, we pay too much for't. Some Pleaſures, are Childiſh and others abominable; And upon the whole, Pleaſure, abſolutely ſpeaking, is no good Thing.' And ſo much for the Philoſopher. And becauſe Ribaldry is uſed for Sport, a paſſage or two from Quintilian, may not be unſeaſonable. This Orator does not only Condemn the groſſer Inſtances, but cuts off all the Double-Entendre's at a Blow. He comes up to the Regularity of Thought, and tells us 'that the Meaning, as well as the Words of Diſcourſe muſt be unſullied.' And in the ſame Chapter he adds that 'A Man of Probity has always a Reſerve in his Freedoms, and Converſes within the Rules of Modeſty, and Character. And that Mirth at the expence of Virtue, is an Over-purchaſe,' Nimium enim riſus pretium eſt ſi probitatis impendio conſtat.

Thus we ſee how theſe great Maſters qualify Diverſion, and tie it up to Proviſoes, and Conditions. Indeed to make Delight the main buſineſs of Comedy is an unreaſonable and dangerous Principle. It opens the way to all Licentiouſneſs, and Confounds the diſtinction between Mirth, and Madneſs. For if Diverſion is the Chief End, it muſt be had at any Price, No ſerviceable Expedient muſt be refuſed, tho' never ſo ſcandalous. And thus the worſt Things are ſaid, and beſt abus'd; Religion is inſulted, and the moſt ſerious Matters turn'd into Ridicule! As if the Blindſide of an Audience ought to be careſs'd, and their Folly and Atheiſm entertain'd in the firſt Place. Yes, if the Palate is pleas'd, no matter tho' the Body is Poyſon'd! For can one die of an eaſier Diſeaſe than Diverſion? But Raillery apart, certainly Mirth and Laughing, without reſpect to the Cauſe, are not ſuch ſupreme Satiſfactions! A man has ſometimes Pleaſure in loſing his Wits. Frenſy, and Poſſeſſion, will ſhake the Lungs, and brighten the Face; and yet I ſuppoſe they are not much to be coveted. However, now we know the Reaſon of the Profaneſs, and Obſcenity of the Stage, of their Helliſh Curſing, and Swearing, and in ſhort of their great Induſtry to make God, and Goodneſs Contemptible: 'Tis all to Satiſfie the Company, and make People Laugh! A moſt admirable juſtification! What can be more engaging to an Audience, then to ſee a Poet thus Atheiſtically brave? To ſee him charge up to the Canons Mouth, and defy the Vengeance of Heaven to ſerve them? Beſides, there may be ſomewhat of Convenience in the Caſe. To fetch Diverſion out of Innocence is no ſuch eaſy matter. There's no ſucceeding it may be in this method, without Sweat, and Drudging. Clean Wit, inoffenſive Humour, and handſom Contrivance, require Time, and Thought. And who would be at this Expence, when the Purchaſe is ſo cheap another way? 'Tis poſſible a Poet may not alwaies have Senſe enough by him for ſuch an Occaſion. And ſince we are upon ſuppoſals, it may be the Audience is not to be gain'd without ſtraining a Point, and giving a Looſe to Conſcience: And when People are ſick, are they not to be Humour'd? In ſine, We muſt make them Laugh, right or wrong, for Delight is the Cheif End of Comedy. Delight! He ſhould have ſaid Debauchery: That's the Engliſh of the Word, and the Conſequence of the Practiſe. But the Original Deſign of Comedy was otherwiſe: And granting 'twas not ſo, what then? If the Ends of Thing are naught, they muſt be mended. Miſchief is the Chief end of Malice, would it be then a Blemiſh in Ill Nature to change Temper, and relent into Goodneſs? The Chief End of a Madman it may be is to Fire a Houſe, muſt we not therefore bind him in his Bed? To conclude. If Delight without Reſtraint, or Diſtinction without Conſcience or Shame, is the Supream Law of Comedy, 'twere well if we had leſs on't. Arbitrary Pleaſure, is more dangerous than Arbitrary Power. Nothing is more Brutal than to be abandon'd to Appetite; And nothing more wretched than to ſerve in ſuch a Deſign. The Mock-Aſtrologer to clear himſelf of this Imputation, is glad to give up his Principle at Laſt. Leaſt any Man ſhould think (ſays He) that I write this to make Libertiniſm amiable, or that I cared not to debaſe the end, and Inſtitution of Comedy. (It ſeems then Delight is not the Chief end.) I muſt farther declare that we make not Vitious Perſons Happy, but only as Heaven makes Sinners ſo. &c. If this will hold, all's well. But Heaven does not forgive without Repentance. Let us ſee then what Satiſfaction he requires from his Wild-Blood, and what Diſcipline he puts him under. Why, He helps him to his Miſtreſs, he Marries him to a Lady of Birth and Fortune. And now do you think He has not made him an Example, and puniſh'd him to ſome Purpoſe! Theſe are frightful Severities! Who would be vitious when ſuch Terrors hang over his Head? And does Heaven make Sinners happy upon theſe Conditions? Sure ſome People have a good Opinion of Vice, or a very ill one of Marriage, otherwiſe they would have Charged the Penance a little more. But I have nothing farther with the Mock-Aſtrologer.

And now for the Concluſion of a Chapter, I ſhall give ſome Inſtances of the Manners of the Stage, and that with reſpect to Poetry, and Ceremony. Manners in the Language of Poetry, is a Propriety of Actions, and Perſons. To ſucceed in this buſineſs, there muſt always be a regard had to Age, Sex, and Condition: And nothing put into the Mouths of Perſons which diſagrees with any of theſe Circumſtances. 'Tis not enough to ſay a witty Thing, unleſs it be ſpoken by a likely Perſon, and upon a Proper occaſion. But my Deſign will lead me to this Subject afterwards, and therefore I ſhall ſay no more of it at preſent, but proceed to apply the Remark.

One Inſtance of Impropriety in Manners both Poetical and Moral, is their making Women, and Women of Quality talk Smuttily. This I have proved upon them already, and could cite many more places to the ſame Purpoſe were it neceſſary.

But I ſhall go on, and give the Reader ſome other examples of Decency, Judgment, and Probability. Don Sebaſtian will help us in ſome meaſure. Here the Mufti makes a fooliſh Speech to the Rabble, and jeſts upon his own Religion. He tells them, tho' your Tyrant is a Lawful Emperour, yet your Lawful Emperour is but a Tyrant,——That your Emperour is a Tyrant is moſt Manifeſt, for you were born to be Turks, but he has play'd the Turk with you. And now is not this Man fit to Manage the Alcoran, and to be ſet up for an Oracle of State? Captain Tom ſhould have had this Speech by right: But the Poet had a farther Deſign, and any thing is good enough for a Mufti.

Sebaſtian after all the violence of his Repentance, his graſping at ſelf Murther, and Reſolutions for the Cell, is ſtrangely pleaſed with the Remembrance of his Inceſt, and wiſhes the Repetition of it: And Almeida out of her Princely Modeſty, and ſingular Compunction, is of the ſame mind. This is ſomewhat ſurpriſing! Oedipus and Jocaſta in Sophocles don't Repent at this rate. No: The horror of the firſt Diſcovery continues upon their Spirits: They never relapſe into any fits of Intemperance, nor entertain themſelves with a lewd Memory. This ſort of Behaviour is not only more Inſtructive but more Natural too. It being very unlikely one ſhould wiſh the Repeating a Crime, when He was almoſt Diſtracted at the thoughts on't, At the thoughts on't, tho' 'twas comitted under all the Circumſtances of excuſe. Now when Ignorance and meer Miſtake are ſo very diſquieting, 'tis very ſtrange if a Man ſhould plague his Mind with the Aggravations of Knowledge; To carry Averſion, and Deſire, in their full ſtrength upon the ſame Object; To fly and purſue with ſo much eagerneſs, is ſomewhat Unuſual.

If we ſtep to the Spaniſh Fryar He will afford us a Flight worth the obſerving. 'Tis part of the Addreſſes of Torriſmond to Leonora.

You are ſo Beautiful So wondrous Fair, you juſtifie Rebellion; As if that faultleſs Face could make no Sin, But Heaven by looking on it muſt forgive.

Theſe are ſtrange Compliments! Torriſmond calls his Queen Rebel to her head, when he was both her General and her Lover. This is powerful Rhetorick to Court a Queen with! Enough one would think to have made the Affair deſperate. But he has a Remedy at hand. The Poets Noſtrum of Profaneſs cures all. He does as good as tell Her, ſhe may Sin as much as ſhe has a mind to. Her Face is a Protection to her Conſcience. For Heaven is under a neceſſity to forgive a Handſom Woman. To ſay all this ought to be paſs'd over in Torriſmond on the ſcore of his Paſſion, is to make the Excuſe more ſcandalous than the Fault, if poſſible. Such Raptures are fit only for Bedlam, or a place which I ſhan't name. Love Triumphant will furniſh another Rant not altogether inconſiderable. Here Celadea a Maiden Lady when ſhe was afraid her Spark would be married to another, calls out preſently for a Chaos. She is for pulling the World about her ears, tumbling all the Elements together, and expoſtulates with Heaven for making Humane Nature otherwiſe than it ſhould have been.

Great Nature break thy chain that links together The Fabrick of this Globe, and make a Chaos, Like that within my Soul.——

Now to my fancy, if ſhe had call'd for a Chair inſtead of a Chaos, trip'd off, and kept her folly to her ſelf, the Woman had been much wiſer. And ſince we have ſhown our Skill in vaulting on the High Ropes, a little Tumbling on the Stage, may not do amiſs for variety.

Now then for a jeſt or two. Don Gomez ſhall begin: And here he'le give us a Gingle upon the double meaning of a word.

I think, ſays Dominick the Fryar, it was my good Angel that ſent me hither ſo opportunely. Gomez ſuſpects him brib'd for no creditable buſineſs and anſwers.

Gom. Ay, whoſe good Angels ſent you hither, that you know beſt, Father.

Theſe Spaniards will entertain us with more of this fine Raillery. Colonel Sancho in Love Triumphant has a great ſtroak at it. He ſays his Bride Dalinda is no more Dalinda, but Dalilah the Philiſtine. This Colonel as great a Soldier as he is, is quite puzzled at a Herald. He thinks they call him Herod, or ſome ſuch Jewiſh Name. Here you have a good Officer ſpoil'd for a miſerable jeſt. And yet after all, this Sancho tho' he can't pronounce Herald, knows what 'tis to be Laconick, which is ſomewhat more out of his way. Thraſo in Terence was a man of the ſame ſize in Senſe, but for all that he does not quibble. Albanact Captain of the Guards, is much about as witty as Sancho. It ſeems Emmeline Heireſs to the Duke of Cornwal was Blind. Albanact takes the riſe of his Thought from hence; And obſerves that as Blind as ſhe is, Coſwald would have no blind Bargain of her. Carlos tells Sancho he is ſure of his Miſtreſs, and has no more to do but to take out a Licenſe.

Sancho replies, Indeed I have her Licenſe for it. Carlos is ſomewhat angry at this Gingle, and cries, what quibling too in your Proſperity? Adverſity it ſeems is the only time for punning. Truly I think ſo too. For 'tis a ſign a Man is much Diſtreſs'd when he flies to ſuch an Expedient. However, Carlos needed not to have been ſo touchy: For He can ſtoop as low himſelf upon occaſion. We muſt know then that Sancho had made Himſelf a Hunch'd Back, to counterfeit the Conde Alonzo. The two Colonels being in the ſame Diſguiſe, were juſt upon the edg of a Quarrel. After ſome Preliminaries in Railing, Sancho cries, Don't provoke me; I am miſcheivouſly bent.

Carlos replies, Nay, you are enough in Conſcience, but I have a  Fiſt for Boxing. Here you have a brace of Quibbles ſtarted in a Line and a half. And which is worſt of all, they come from Carlos, from a Character of Senſe; And therefore the poet, not the Soldier, muſt anſwer for them.

I ſhall now give the Reader a few Inſtances of the Courtſhip of the Stage, and how decently they treat the Women, and Quality of both Sexes. The Women who are ſecured from Affronts by Cuſtom, and have a Privilege for Reſpect, are ſometimes but roughly ſaluted by theſe Men of Addreſs. And to bar the Defence, this Coarſeneſs does not alwaies come from Clowns, and Women-haters; but from Perſons of Figure, neither ſingular, nor ill Bred. And which is ſtill worſe, The Satir falls on blindly without Diſtinction, and ſtrikes at the whole Sex.

Enter Raymond a Noble-man in the Spaniſh Fryar.

''O Vertue! Vertue! What art thou become?'' That men ſhould leave thee for that Toy a woman, Made from the droſs and refuſe of a Man; Heaven took him ſleeping when he made her too, Had Man been waking he had nee'r conſented.

I did not know before that a Man's Droſs lay in his Ribs; I believe ſometimes it lies Higher. But the Philoſophy, the Religion, and the Ceremony of theſe Lines, are too tender to be touched. Creon a Prince in Oedipus, railes in General at the Sex, and at the ſame time is violently in Love with Euridice. This upon the Matter, is juſt as natural, as 'tis Civil. If any one would underſtand what the Curſe of all tender hearted Women is, Belmour will inform him. What is it then? 'Tis the Pox. If this be true, the Women had need lay in a ſtock of ill Nature betimes. It ſeems 'tis their only preſervative. It guards their Virtue, and their Health, and is all they have to truſt to. Sharper another Man of Senſe in this Play, talks much at the ſame rate. Belinda would know of him where he got that excellent Talent of Railing?

Sharp. Madam the Talent was Born with me.——I confeſs I have taken care to improve it, to qualifie me for the Society of Ladies. Horner, a Topping Character in the Country Wife, is adviſed to avoid Women, and hate them as they do him. He Anſwers.

Becauſe I do hate them, and would hate them yet more, I'll frequent e'm; you may ſee by Marriage, nothing makes a Man hate a Woman more than her Conſtant Converſation. There is ſtill ſomething more Coarſe upon the Sex ſpoken by Dorax but it is a privileged Expreſſion, and as ſuch I muſt leave it. The Relapſe mends the Contrivance of the Satir, refines upon the Manner, and to make the Diſcourſe the more probable, obliges the Ladies to abuſe themſelves. And becauſe I ſhould be loath to tire the Reader, Berenthia ſhall cloſe the Argument. This Lady having undertook the Employment of a Procureſs, makes this remark upon it to her ſelf.

Berinth. ''So here is fine work! But there was no avoiding it.——Beſides, I begin to Fancy there may be as much Pleaſure in carrying on another Bodies Intrigue, as ones own. This is at leaſt certain, It exerciſes almoſt all the Entertaining Faculties of a Woman. For there is Employment for Hypocriſie, Invention, Deceit, Flattery, Miſchief, and Lying.''

Let us now ſee what Quarter the Stage gives to Quality. And here we ſhall find them extreamly free, and familiar. They dreſs up the Lords in Nick Names, and expoſe them in Characters of Contempt. Lord Froth is explain'd a Solemn Coxcomb; And Lord Rake, and Lord Foplington give you their Talent in their Title. Lord Plauſible in the Plain Dealer Acts a ridiculous Part, but is with all very civil. He tells Manly he never attempted to abuſe any Perſon, The other anſwers; ''What? you were afraid? Manly goes on and declares He would call a Raſcal by no other Title, tho' his Father had left him a Dukes''. That is, he would call a Duke a Raſcal. This I confeſs is very much Plain Dealing. Such Freedoms would appear but odly in Life, eſpecially without Provocation. I muſt own the Poet to be an Author of good Senſe; But under favour, theſe jeſts, if we may call them ſo, are ſomewhat high Seaſon'd, the Humour ſeems overſtrain'd, and the Character puſh'd too far. To proceed. Muſtapha was ſelling Don Alvarez for a Slave. The Merchant aſks what Virtues he has. Muſtapha replies. ''Virtues quoth ah! He is of a great Family and Rich, what other Virtues would'ſt thou have in a Nobleman? Don Carlos in Love Triumphant ſtands for a Gentleman, and a Man of Senſe, and out-throws Muſtapha'' a Bars Length. He tells us Nature has given Sancho an empty Noddle, but Fortune in revenge has fill'd his Pockets: juſt a Lords Eſtate in Land and Wit. This is a handſom Compliment to the Nobility! And my Lord Saliſbury had no doubt of it a good Bargain of the Dedication. Tereſa's general Deſcription of a Counteſs is conſiderable in its Kind: But only 'tis in no Condition to appear. In the Relapſe, Sir Tunbelly who had Miſtaken Young Faſhion for Lord Foplington, was afterwards undeceiv'd; and before the ſurprize was quite over, puts the Queſtion, is it then poſſible that this ſhould be the true Lord Foplington at Laſt? The Nobleman removes the ſcruple with great Civility and Diſcretion! Lord Fopl. ''Why what do you ſee in his Face to make you doubt of it? Sir without preſuming to have an extraordinary Opinion of my Figure, give me leave to tell you, if you had ſeen as many Lords as I have done you would not think it Impoſſible A Perſon of a worſe Taille then mine might be a Modern Man of Quality.''

I'm ſorry to hear Modern Quality degenerates ſo much. But by the way, theſe Liberties are altogether new. They are unpractiſed by the Latin Comedians, and by the Engliſh too till very lately, as the Plain Dealer obſerves. And as for Moliere in France, he pretends to fly his Satir no higher than a Marquis.

And has our Stage a particular Privilege? Is their Charter inlarg'd, and are they on the ſame Foot of Freedom with the Slaves in the Saturnalia? Muſt all Men be handled alike? Muſt their Roughneſs be needs play'd upon Title? And can't they laſh the Vice without pointing upon the Quality? If as Mr. Dryden rightly defines it, a Play ought to be a juſt Image of Humane Nature; Why are not the Decencies of Life, and, the Reſpects of Converſation obſerv'd? Why muſt the Cuſtomes of Countries be Croſs'd upon, and the Regards of Honour overlook'd? What neceſſity is there to kick the Coronets about the Stage, and to make a Man a Lord, only in order to make him a Coxcomb. I hope the Poets don't intend to revive the old Project of Levelling and Vote down the Houſe of Peers. In earneſt, the Play-houſe is an admirable School of Behaviour! This is their way of managing Ceremony, diſtinguiſhing Degree, and Entertaining the Boxes! But I ſhall leave them at preſent to the Enjoyment of their Talent, and proceed to another Argument.