owing to his ufual indulgence in the cir culation of the glafs, it was univerfally faid that he died a martyr to Bacchus, This happened about the year 1750. Every Man in his Humour, notwithstanding the lofs of fo many capital performers, who played in it on its revival, continues still to be a play to which the public pays attention. Many of the characters are well adapted to the abilities of the actors, particularly Mr. Smith in Kitely, who, in this part, is not an unworthy fucceffor of our great Rofcius; Mr. Palmer in Bobadil, Mr. Dodd in Mafter Stephen, and Baddeley in Brainworm, are much approved. Their merit appears to greater advantage, as they could not have the fame inftructions which their predeceffors had. Mr. Henderson, when at Drury-lane, tried his skill in Bobadil. Though different in his manner from Woodward, he drew a good portrait of the coward and the bully. -Were he to act it oftener, he would certainly be more warm in his colouring. The The fuccefs of Every Man in his Humour encouraged Ben to write Every Man out of his Humour. This he, very judiciously, I think, calls a comic fatire. It consists of a variety of characters, exhibiting manners rather in loose and independent scenes than in a regular fable. Downs places this comedy in the lift of plays which were revived by the king's company of comedians. But I believe he is guilty of the fame mistake which he fell into with respect to Every Man in his Humour, which I have fufficiently proved was acted by Betterton's company. Whether Ben Jonfon was the first dramatist who introduced upon our stage a grex, who comment upon the action of the feveral characters in the play, is not very material. He has been followed in this by the Duke of Buckingham and others, and by Mr. Foote lately in fome of his farces, in which fome of his actors have fpoken to others on the stage from the the gallery and the boxes, to the no fmall entertainment of the fpectators. This piece has, in my opinion, a great share of comic pleasantry, and, with fomejudicious alterations, would now afford rational amufement. Some of the characters, it is true, are obfolete through age; others, such as the Envious Man and the Parafite, are of all times and all nations. Macilente and Carlo Buffone will laft till doomfday: they are admirably well drawn. The objection of Dr. Hurd, who terms the play a hard delineation of a groupe of fimply-existing paffions, wholly chimerical, is ill-founded. Some of thefe parts are to be feen now in fome shape or other; fashionable fhadows of foppery and cuftom vary with times and circumftances. Who does not fee every day a Sogliardo and Fungofo, differently modified, in our metropolis at this instant? In a rude unpolished age, when the people were juft emancipated from barbarism by the renovation of literature and the light of reformation, a groupe of new and ab furd furd characters must naturally spring up which would furnish ample materials of ridicule to the comic writers; and who can deny that Jonfon has, in this play, laid hold of many growing follies of the times in which he lived? With fubmiffion to fo juftly-celebrated a writer as Dr. Hurd, I would ask, what is it that constitutes character ? Is it not that distinguished paffion, or peculiar humour, which feparates a man from the rest of his fpecies ? Characters are formed from manners, and these are derived from paffions. When they are indulged to a certain distinguishing degree, so as to make a man ridiculous or remarkable, we then call him a character. The Mufes' LookingGlass cannot be paralelled with Every Man in his Humour; because in this we have action, which the other wants. Jonfon has, in one part, delineated a character which did not exift perhaps in that full force in his own days, and with fuch eclat and additional force from cer tain tain circumstances, as it has done fince. Many ftriking features of Carlo Buffone will, if I mistake not, be acknowledged to have existed in a late fhining comic genius. Let us read Buffone's character given by Cordato: • He is one whom the author calls Carlo Buffone, an impudent common jefter, a violent railer, and an incomprehenfible epicure; one whofe company is defired of all men, but beloved of none; he will fooner lofe his foul than a jest, and profane even the most holy things to excite laughter; no honourable or reverend perfonage whatfoever, that comes within the reach of his eye, but is turned into all manner of variety by bis adulterous fimilies." We must grant Jonfon the merit of being the first who could fix that uncertain and wandering thing, called humour, by a juft and accurate definition: When fome peculiar quality Doth fo poffefs a man, that it doth draw |