for they are generally much more dangerous friends than enemies) the paffages I fend you. I folemnly protest 1 have added nothing to the malice or abfurdity of them; which it behoves me to declare, fince the vouchers themselves will be fo foon and fo irrecoverably loft. You may in some measure prevent it, by preserving at least their Titles, and discovering (as far as you can depend on the truth of your information) the Names of the concealed authors.

The first objection I have heard made to the Poem is, that the perfons are too obfcure for fatire. The perfons themselves, rather than allow the objection, would forgive the fatire; and if one could be tempted to afford it a serious answer, were not all affaffinates, popular infurrections, the infolence of the rabble without doors, and of domestics within, moft wrongfully chastised, if the Meanness of offenders indemnified them from punishment? On the contrary, Obfcurity renders them more dangerous, as lefs thought of: Law can pronounce judgment only on open facts: Moralityalone can pafs cenfure on intentions of Mischief; so that for fecret calumny, or the arrow flying in the dark, there is no public punishment left, but what a good Writer inflicts.

The next objection is, that these fort of authors are poor. That might be pleaded as an excuse at

Which we have done in a Lift printed in the Appendix,

the Old Baily, for leffer crimes than Defamation, (for 'tis the cafe of almost all who are tried there) but fure it can be none here: For who will pretend that the robbing another of his Reputation fupply the want of it in himself? I question not but fuch authors are poor, and heartily wish the objection were removed by any honeft livelihood. But Poverty is here the accident, not the subject: He who defcribes Malice and Villany to be pale and meagre, expreffes not the least anger against Paleness or Leannefs, but against Malice and Villany. The Apothecary in Romeo and Juliet is poor; but is he therefore juftified in vending poifon? Not but Poverty itself becomes a just subject of fatire, when it is the confequence of vice, prodigality, or neglect of one's lawful calling; for then it increases the public burden, fills the streets and highways with Robbers, and the garrets with Clippers, Coiners, and Weekly Journalists.

But admitting that two or three of these offend lefs in their morals, than in their writings; muft Poverty make nonfenfe facred? If fo, the fame of bad authors would be much better confulted than that of all the good ones in the world; and not one of an hundred had ever been called by his right name.

They mistake the whole matter: It is not charity to encourage them in the way they follow, but to get them out of it; for men are not bunglers because they are poor, but they are poor because they are bunglers.

Is it not pleasant enough, to hear our authors crying out on the one hand, as if their perfons and characters were too facred for Satire; and the pub-` lic objecting on the other, that they are too mean even for ridicule? But whether Bread or Fame be their end, it must be allowed, our author, by and in this Poem, has mercifully given them a little of both.

There are two or three, who by their rank and fortune have no benefit from the former objections, fuppofing them good, and thefe I was forry to see in fuch company. But if, without any provocation, two or three Gentlemen will fall upon one, in an affair wherein his intereft and reputation are equally embarked; they cannot certainly, after they have been content to print themselves his enemies, complain of being put into the number of them.

Others, I am told, pretend to have been once his Friends. Surely they are their enemies who fay fo, fince nothing can be more odious than to treat a friend as they have done. But of this I cannot perfuade myself, when I confider the conftant and eternal averfion of all bad writers to a good one.

Such as claim a merit from being his Admirers I would gladly afk, if it lays him under a perfonal obligation? At that rate he would be the most obliged humble fervant in the world. I dare fwear for these in particular, he never defired them to be his

7

admirers, nor promised in return to be theirs: That had truly been a fign he was of their acquaintance; but would not the malicious world have fufpected such an approbation of fome motive worse than ignorance, in the author of the Effay on Criticism? Be it as it will, the reasons of their Admiration and of his Contempt are equally fubfifting, for his works and theirs are the very fame that they were.

One, therefore, of their affertions I believe may be true, "That he has a contempt for their writings." And there is another, which would probably be fooner allowed by himself than by any good judge befide, "That his own have found "too much fuccefs with the public." But as it cannot confift with his modefty to claim this as a Justice, it lies not on him, but entirely on the public, to defend its own judgment.

There remains what in my opinion might seem a better plea for these people, than any they have made ufe of. If Obfcurity or Poverty were to exempt a man from fatire, much more should Folly or Dulness, which are still more involuntary; nay, as much so as perfonal Deformity. But even this will not help them: Deformity becomes an object of Ridicule when a man fets up for being handfome; and fo muft Dulnefs when he fets up for a Wit. They are not ridiculed because Ridicule in itself is, or ought to be, a pleasure; but because it is just to undeceive and vindicate the honeft and unpretending part of mankind from impofition, be

cause particular intereft ought to yield to general, and a great number who are not naturally Fools, ought never to be made fo, in complaifance to a few who are. Accordingly we find that in all ages, all vain pretenders, were they ever fo poor or ever fo dull, have been conftantly the topics of the most candid fatirifts, from the Codrus of JUVENAL to the Damon of BOILEAU.

Having mentioned BOILEAU, the greatest Poet and moft judicious Critic of his age and country, admirable for his Talents, and yet perhaps more admirable for his judgment in the proper application of them; I cannot help remarking the refemblance betwixt him and our author, in Qualities, Fame, and Fortune; in the diftinctions shewn them by their Superiors, in the general esteem of their Equals, and in their extended reputation amongst Foreigners; in the latter of which ours has met with the better fate, as he has had for his Tranflators perfons of the most eminent rank and abilities in their respective nations b. But the re

b Effay on Criticism in French verfe, by General Hamilton; the fame, in verse also, by Monfieur Roboton, Counsellor and Privy Secretary to King George I. after by the Abbé Reynel, in verfe, with notes. Rape of the Lock, in French, by the Princefs of Conti, Paris 1728. and in Italian verfe, by the Abbé Conti, a Noble Venetian; and by the Marquis Rangoni, Envoy Extraordinary from Modena to King George II. Others of his works by Salvini of Florence, &c. His Eflays and Differtations on Homer, feveral times tranflated into French. Effay on Man, by the Abbé Reynel, in verfe; by Monfieur Silhouet, in profe, 1737. and fince by others in French, Italian, and Latin.