the Right Honourable J. Monck Mason, who appears to have a genuine sense of the excel lencies of the old dramatists, had edited previ ously the plays of Massinger, with what suc cess may be learnt from the late edition of his successor, Mr Gifford. He had also commented with rather better success on Shakspeare; and, in the year above-mentioned, he published "Comments on the Plays of Beaumont and Fletcher," unfortunately abounding in the gross. est printer's mistakes, probably occasioned by his distance from the press. His notes are of very different degrees of merit. In many instances he has proved the propriety of the text successfully, and he has pointed out several very necessary corrections overlooked by the former editors. In general, however, he is too much attached to verbal emendations, which are proved unneces sary by recurring to parallel passages in the other contemporary dramatic poets, the due study of which is one of the most essential qua lifications of an editor of old plays.

It remains to explain the principles upon which the present editor has proceeded in preparing a new edition of these authors for the public. Strict fidelity to the oldest text, whereever it affords sense, he has considered as his

first and most obvious duty. For this purpose, a careful collation of the text has been instituted with all the old copies of each play, when ever he has been able to obtain a sight of them ; but, in a few instances, all his endeavours have proved unavailing. There is a lamentable degree of avarice and caution in some of the black, letter collectors of our days. On the continent, a literary work is no sooner announced to have been undertaken, than communications are made with the utmost liberality; valuable editions, and even manuscripts, are sent to a great distance; and every one vies to contribute his share to the perfection of the undertaking, for the cause of literature alone. But the envied possessor of an unique quarto in this country too frequently guards his treasure with the vigilance of Argus, and only takes it down to grant a single glance to the curious inquirer, and then to replace it, and enjoy the envious distinction of possessing what no other mortal possesses, regardless of the accidents which may at once deprive literature of the only copy in existence. Fortunately some of the collectors, most illustrious for genius and erudition, adopt a different and more liberal

$ Philaster and the Maid's Tragedy.

1

course, disdaining the petty pride and avarice which merely lets the world know that their shelves are adorned with a scarce or unique blackletter book, but, on the contrary, liberally allows the public to enjoy the only real value it contains.

In regulating the text, a considerable difference will be perceived from the edition of 1778; but if the reader will turn to the original copy, very few variations will be found. On perusing the modern editions, we continually meet with lines of ten syllables indeed, but of the most inaccurate modulation, and in the highest degree offensive to the ear; whereas, by a reference to the old copies, the same lines will generally be found to have the true cadence of the ancient dramatic versification, though the verses sometimes exhibit an unusual number of syllables, with other irregularities, which are observable in most of the old plays, and which peculiarly abound in those produced by Fletcher singly. For a still more obvious reason, the prose which occurs in the old copies has been every where restored, excepting in those scenes which evidently resolve themselves into metre without the violent and arbitrary abbreviations, contraçtions, omissions, and additions, of the editors of 1750, or the boundless irregularity of the state

in which they appear in the edition of 1778, where dactyls, anapests, trochaics and iambics alternate in the most variegated confusion, and where they frequently conclude with an unimportant conjunctive or adjective, contrary to the almost uniform practice of our poets. Many vulgar contractions, which these editors have suffered to remain from the mint of Seward and Sympson, have also been removed.

Another, and a most important desideratum, was the almost total want of stage-directions, and of indications of the place of action, which will be found supplied in the present edition, as well as the division into scenes, which in most of the plays has been hitherto entirely neglected. Indeed, the former editors have almost entirely confined their ambition to the task of writing notes, and introducing their impertinent alterations of the metre, without any attention to those points, so requisite in a critical edition of dramatic writings.

As to the notes, a middle course has been adopted between the profusion which incumbers the pages of the Variorum Shakspeare, and the meagreness of some other editions. some other editions. In general,

For instance ;-h'has, sh'had, within's, in's, y'had, wh'has, &c. &c.

one apposite parallel instance has been adduced to support the explanation of an obsolete word, and particular care has been taken to notice the state of manners during the lifetime of the authors, whenever it varied from our own. This is cer tainly one of the most useful, as it is one of the most amusing and instructive, duties of an editor.

Short introductions have been prefixed to all the plays, in which every thing which has come to the knowledge of the editor respecting their dramatic history, has been mentioned, and in which he has constantly endeavoured to ascer tain, if possible, the date when they were originally produced, and to decide upon the curious question whether they were the work of our úni, ted authors, or of Fletcher singly. In this par ticular, the editor, like all commentators on the old dramatists; must acknowledge his great obligations to the researches of Mr Malone.

As it is peculiarly interesting to trace the sources from which the poets derived the outlines of their plays, abstracts of the novels from which they borrowed their plots have been subjoined, whenever the works containing them could be procured. The valuable publication of Langbaine contains a great many references of this kind; several, however, which he was not