circumftance of the bat is only introduced to defign the time of night in which fairies travel; I must observe, that Ariel does not seem to be one of those kind of fairies, that, as Puck fays, By the triple Hecat's team, run Following darkness like a dream. On the contrary, he appears to execute the commands of Profpero by day-light. Nor is this inconfiftent with his character, as a fairy of a fuperior kind. For thus, Oberon, the fairy king, on Puck's telling him of the approach of morning, which haftens away those fpirits that for aye confort with black-brow'd night, replies; But we are spirits of another fort; I with the morning light have oft made fport; THE TWO GENTLEMEN OF VERONA. This play is not numbered, as Dr. Johnfon obferves, among the moft powerful of Shakespeare's effufions. Our editor, indeed, conceives it was not very fuccessful on the stage; and that it has escaped corruption, only because, being feldom played, it was lefs expofed to the hazards of tranfcription. Among a few other remarks of equal importance, however, which he thinks proper to make on this play, his critical acumen hath difcovered a corruption of the text, in Launce's conversation with his dog. Scene VI. A& IV. LAUNCE.O, 'tis a foul thing, when a cur cannot keep himself in all companies! I would have, as one fhould fay, one that takes upon him to be a dog indeed, to be, as it were, a dog at all things. On On this paffage our learned editor thus fagaciously remarks. I believe we fhould read I would have, &c. one that takes upon him to be a dog, to be a dog indeed, to be, &c.' Is not this a curious and important emendation? It is, however, not quite ingenious enough to be true, or even to deferve to be true. What can Dr. Johnson mean by a dog's taking upon him to be a dog? This, every cur that's whelp'd, is, of course; but he that would be a dog indeed, as Launce fays (that is, one who would be thought to be poffeffed of all the effential good qualities of his fpecies) fhould be as it were a dog at all things. -What curft curs are crabbed critics, and carping commentators; who are ever contentious for a bone to pick; yet, when they have got one, cannot help fnarling at those who afford it them! MIDSUMMER NIGHT'S DREAM, Vol. I. p. 112. QUEEN. Full often fhe hath goffipt by my fide; And fat with me, on Neptune's yellow fands, To fetch me trifles, and return again As from a voyage rich with merchandize. Dr. Warburton, and our editor, have both attempted to illuftrate this paffage, without fuccefs. The difficulty lies in the fixth, feventh and eighth lines. Dr. Warburton fays, "Fol lowing what? he did not follow the fhip, whose motion "the imitated; for that failed on the water, fhe on the land. "If by following we are to understand imitating, it will be a "mere pleonafm-imitating would imitate. From the poet's defcription of the actions it plainly appears we should read σε "FOLLYING Would imitate. 1 ❝ i. e. مند “i. e. wantoning in sport and gaiety. Thus the old English "writers and they beleeven FOLYLY and falfely -- fáys Sir "J. Mandeville, from and in the sense of folatrer, to play the "wanton. This exactly agrees to the action described.— "full often has fhe goffipt by my fide-and-when we have " laughed to fee." This note, Dr. Johnfon tells us, is very ingenious; but, continues he, fince follying is a word of which I know not any example; and the fairy's favourite might, without much licentiousness of language, be faid to follow a fhip that failed in the direction of the coaft, I think there is no fufficient • reason for adopting it. The coinage of new words is a violent remedy, not to be used but in the last neceffity.' I will not difpute with our editor the ingenuity of Dr. Warburton's note, or that of his own; but it is certainly an ingenuity of a different kind to that which is neceffary to illaftrate Shakespeare. The former of thefe gentlemen, I remember, affected to ridicule the bookfellers for believing a filly maxim, that none but a poet should presume to meddle with a poet. The event, however, hath proved this maxim to have fome truth in it. If either Dr. Warburton, or Dr. Johnfon, had, in criticifing this paffage, exercised their ingenuity as poets, inftead of their ingenuity as philologers, I am perfuaded they would have foon difcovered its meaning. But they were too intent upon words, to attend to the images defigned to be conveyed by them. The former talks of an action defcribed in two lines, wherein nothing is spoken of but goffipping and laughing. Do thefe imitate a hip under fail? To have been merely playful and wanton, is not the imitation here mentioned: nor does it confift in merely following the object imitated, as Dr. Johnfon conceives; for fhe did not only fail upon land, in the fame direction along the coaft as the fhips did in the fea; but the returned again, which muft have been in a different direction. So that it appears neither of these ingenious critics had any idea of the poetical beauty of this paffage. I fhall endeavour to explain it, therefore, by a very different different mode of investigation.If the reader hath ever seen a fhip fcudding before the wind, with its fore-fail grown bigbellied, as the poet expreffes it, with the swelling breeze; he muft recollect that, in fuch a cafe, the fail projects fo far forward, that it seems, to a fpectator on fhore, to go in a manner before the rest of the veffel; which, for the fame reason, appears to follow, though clofely, after, with an eafy, fwimming motion. This was the moving image, which the fairy's favourite, taking the hint from, and the advantage of, her pregnancy, endeavoured to imitate; and this fhe did, by wantonly displaying before her the convexity of her swelling belly, and moving after it, as the poet defcribes," with pretty and with swimming gate. Such being the fenfe of the paffage, the text is eafily afcertained, by pointing and reading thus ; Which fhe, with pretty and with swimming gate Following her womb, then rich with my young fquire, This is the method a critic should take with the poets. Trace out their images, and you will foon find how they expreffed themselves, without perplexing yourself either about the meaning of antiquated words, or the coinage of new ones. PHILIST. Vol. I. Page 162. I have heard it over, And it is nothing, nothing in the world; * Thus all the copies. But as I know not what it is to · ftretch and con and intent, I fufpect a line to be loft.' It is very common with Dr. Johnfon, when his critical fa gacity is at fault, to fuppofe a chaẩm in the text, to excufe his having loft fcent of the poet's meaning. There is no need, however, for fuch a fuppofition here. By intents is plainly meant the defign or scheme of the piece intended for reprefentation; the conceit of which being far-fetched or improbable, it might be with propriety enough called extremely fretched. As to this scheme or defign being conn'd (if any objection be made to the fuppofition of its having been written, penn'd) it is no wonder fuch players as these are reprefented to be, such A crew of patches, rude mechanicals, Should con their feveral parts with cruel pain. Vol. I. Page 163. HIP, I love not to fee wretchedness o'ercharged, THE. Why, gentle fweet, you fhall fee no fuch thing. Our sport shall be, to take what they mistake; And what poor duty cannot do, Noble refpect takes it in might not merit.. * The sense of this paffage [the apprehended difficulty of which lies in the two laft lines] as it now ftands, if it has any fenfe, is this: What the inability of duty cannot perform, regardful generofity receives as an act of ability, though not of 'merit. The contrary is rather true. What dutifulness tries • to perform without ability, regardful generofity receives as hav•ing the merit, though not the power, of complete performance. "We should therefore read, And what poor duty cannot do 'Noble respect takes not in might but merit." That is, fays our editor, we fhould read directly contrary to what the poet has written! Nothing, however, I think, can be more plain, or more confiftent with truth, than the paffage as it now ftands. Is it not a common thing for the lords, and other owners of eftates, in many countries where the peasants are poor, and cannot pay their rent in cash, to take it in cattle, or in corn? Doth not the parson, tho' he fometimes takes his tythes in a modus, frequently take them alfo in kind? 3 Is |