Essays on the Stage - Preface to the Campaigners (1689) and Preface to the Translation of Bossuet's Maxims and Reflections on Plays (1699) by Thomas D'Urfey
page 45 of 76 (59%)
page 45 of 76 (59%)
|
an Absolver; I mean in a Case like you know what; but let us proceed.
The next is a swinger, and his Lash cuts even to the blood: for here _Sancho_, full of innocent simplicity, says, _A Bishop is no more than another Man, without Grace and good Breeding_. To which he presently darts out, _I must needs say, if the Poet had any share of either of these Qualities, he would be less bold with his Superiors, and not give his Clowns the liberty to Droll thus heavily upon a solemn Character_. [Footnote: Ibid.] Why, faith, now this is very hard, I have known a Country Wench name a _Bishop_ in the Burning-too of a Hasty-Pudding, and never heard that any of the Reverend took it ill, because it was a Common Saying, and below their notice. But poor _Sancbo_, or rather indeed _Sancho_'s Poet, my self, must be corrected for it, tho the Phrase be Moral, and no more than an honest truth: But come, since it must be so, let me ask the doctor why he does not shew me an example for this himself, and Practice better before he Accuses; for let the Reader look into his _Desertion Discuss'd_ (for he shall find that I have trac'd him through all his Writings), and page the 3d you will find him, I think, somewhat more guilty of this fault than I have been, for there you'll see he insolently affirms, _That the Succession cannot be interrupted by an Act of Parliament, especially when the Royal Assent is given by a King _de Facto_, and not _de Jure_. [Footnote: _Desertion Discuss'd_, Anno 1688.] And again; tho this next is hinted covertly, with the meaning disguis'd, yet Sir _William Temple_ in his Memoirs, page 295, and the aforesaid Vindicater of the Stage, as well as my self, have observed, that the _Absolver_ in the first Volume of his Essays, page 120, in his Chapter of the _A..._ tells us, _Whether the honesty or dishonesty are discernable in the face, is a question which admits of dispute; King _Charles_ the Second thought he could depend upon these Observations, but with submission, I believe an instance might be given, in which his Rules of Physiognomy fail'd_ [Footnote: _Essays_, |
|