ページの画像
PDF
ePub

our author in this work appeareth by declaration thereof in the preface to the Iliad, printed fometime before his death, and by his own letters of October 26, and November 2, 1713, where he declares it is his opinion, that no other perfon was equal to it.

Next comes his Shakespear on the stage; Let him (quoth one, whom I take to be

Mr. THEOBALD, Mist's Journal, June 8, 1728) publish such an author as he has least studied, and for"get to discharge even the dull duty of an editor. In 'this project let him lend the book feller his name (for a competent fum of money) to promote the credit of an exorbitant fubfcription.' Gentle reader, be pleased to caft thine eye on the Propofal below quoted, and on what follows (fome months after the former affertion) in the fame Journalist of June 8, The bookfeller pro

pofed the book by fubfcription, and raised fome 'thousands of pounds for the fame : I believe the gen"tleman did not fhare in the profits of this extravagant fubfcription.'

'After the Iliad, he undertook (faith

MIST'S JOURNAL, June 8, 1728.) " the fequel of that work, the Odyssey; and having fe"cured the fuccefs by a numerous fubfcription, he em'ployed fome underlings to perform what, according

to his propofals, fhould come from his own hands.' To this heavy charge, we can in truth oppofe nothing but the words of

Mr. POPE'S PROPOSAL for the ODYSSEY,

(printed by J. Watts, Jan. 1o, 1724.)

'I take this occafion to declare that the fubfcription

'for Shakespear belongs wholly to Mr. Tonfon: And that the benefit of this Propofal is not folely for my $ own use, but for that of two of my friends, who have af· fifted me in this Work.' But these very gentlemen are extolled above our poet himself in another of Mist's Journals, March 30, 1728, faying, "That he would not advise Mr. Pope to try the experiment again of getting a great part of a book done by affiftants, left ⚫ thofe extraneous parts fhould unhappily ascend to the fublime, and retard the declenfion of the whole.' Behold! thefe Underlings are become good writers!

[ocr errors]

If any fay, that before the said Proposals were printed, the fubfcription was begun without declaration of fuch affiftance; verily those who set it on foot, or (as their term is) fecured, to wit, the right honourable the Lord Viscount HARCOURT, were he living, would teftify, and the right honourable the Lord BATHurst, now living, doth testify, the fame is a falfhood.

Sorry I am, that perfons profeffing to be learned, or of whatever rank of authors, should either falfely tax, or be falfely taxed. Yet let us, who are only reporters, be impartial in our citations, and proceed.

MIST'S JOURNAL, June 8, 1728.

'Mr. Addison raised this author from obfcurity, ⚫ obtained him the acquaintance and friendship of the • whole body af our nobility, and transferred his power⚫ful interefts with those great men to this rising bard, ' who frequently levied by that means unusual contri⚫butions on the public.' Which furely cannot be, if, as the author of the Dunciad diffected reporteth; 'Mr. Wycherley had before introduced him into a fami

[ocr errors]

liar acquaintance with the greatest peers and brightest ' wits then living.'

'No fooner (faith the same Journalist) was his boC dy lifeless, but this author, reviving his resentment, libelled the memory of his departed friend; and what was still more heinous, made the scandal public. Grievous the accufation! unknown the accufer! the perfon accused ro witness in his own caufe; the perfon, in whofe regard accused, dead! But if there be living any one nobleman whose friendship, yea any one gentleman whofe fubfcription Mr. Addifon procured to our author; let him stand forth, that truth may ap pear! Amicus Plato, amicus Socrates, fed magis amica veritas In verity, the whole story of the libel is a lye; witness those persons of integrity, who feveral years before Mr. Addifon's deceafe, did fee and approve of the said verses, in no wife a libel, but a friendly rebuke fent privately in our author's own hand to Mr. Addifon himself, and never made public, 'till after their own Journals, and Curl had printed the fame. One name alone, which I am here authorised to declare, will fufficiently evince this truth, that of the right honourable the Earl of BURLINGTON.

Next he is taxed with a crime (in the opinion of fome authors, I doubt, more heinous than any in morality) to wit, plagiarism, from the inventive and quaint-conceited

JAMES-MOORE SMITH Gent.

Upon reading the third volume of Pope's Mif

• Daily Journal, March 18, 1728,

D 3

cellanies, I found five lines which I thought excellent and happening to praise them, a gentleman • produced a modern comedy (the Rival Modes) published last year, where were the fame verfes to a tittle. • These gentlemen are undoubtedly the first plagiaries, that pretend to make a reputation by stealing ⚫ from a man's works in his own life-time, and out of

a public print.' Let us join to this what is written by the author of the Rival Modes, the said Mr. JamesMoor Smith, in a letter to our author himself, who had informed him, a month before that play was acted, Jan. 27, 1726-7, that Thefe verfes, which he had before given him leave to infert in it, would be known for his, fome copies being got abroad. He defires, nevertheless, that fince the lines had been read in his comedy to feveral, Mr. P. would not deprive it ' of them,' &c. Surely, if we add the teftimonies of the Lord BOLINGBROKE, of the Lady to whom the faid verfes were originally addressed, of Hugh Bethel Efq; and others, who knew them as our author's, long before the faid gentleman compofed his play; it is hoped, the ingenuous that affect not error, will rectify their opinion by the fuffrage of fo honourable perfonages.

And yet followeth another charge, infinuating no lefs than his enmity both to church and state, which could come from no other informer than the faid Mr. JAMES-MOOR SMITH.

The Memoirs of a Parish clerk was a very dull

⚫ and unjust abuse of a perfon who wrote in defence of

Daily Journal, April 3, 1728.

[ocr errors]

our religion and conftitution, and who has been dead many years.' This feemeth also most untrue; it be ing known to divers that thefe Memoirs were written at the feat of the Lord Harcourt in Oxfordshire, before that excellent perfon (bishop Burnet's) death, and many years before the appearance of that history, of

which they are

pretended to be an abuse. Most true it

is, that Mr. Moore had fuch a defign, and was himfelf the man who preft Dr. Arbuthnot and Mr. Pope to affift him therein; and that he borrowed thofe Memoirs of our author, when that hiftory came forth, with intent to turn them to fuch abufe. But being able to obtain from our author but one fingle hint, and either changing his mind, or having more mind than ability, contented himself to keep the faid Memoirs, and read them as his own to all his acquaintance. A noble perfon there is, into whofe company Mr. Pope once chanced to introduce him, who well remembereth the converfation of Mr. Moore to be turned upon the 'Contempt he had for the work of that reverend pre'late, and how full he was of a defign he declared 'himself to have of expofing it.' This noble Perfon is the Earl of PETERBOROUGH.

Here in truth fhould we crave pardon of all the forefaid right and honourable worthy perfonages, for having mentioned them in the fame page with fuch weekly riff-raff railers and rhymers; but that we had their ever-honoured commands for the fame; and that they are introduced not as witnesses in the controverfy, but as witneffes that cannot be controverted; not to difpute, but to decide.

« 前へ次へ »