formed, or stated this matter carelessly and inaccurately, confiding perhaps in his memory, which deceived him; for Dryden himself, speaking of his patron's munificence at that period, mentions it in such a manner as proves, beyond a doubt, that Dorset's bounty did not supply him with any stated and certain income, but was merely temporary and occasional. "Being (says he, in his Discourse on Satire, addressed to that nobleman in August, 1692,) encouraged only with fair words by King Charles the Second, my little salary ill paid, and no prospect of a future subsistence, I was then discouraged in the beginning of my attempt: and now age has overtaken me; and want, a more insufferable evil, through the change of the times,

has wholly disenabled me. Though I must ever acknowledge, to the honour of your Lordship, and the eternal memory of your charity, that since this Revolution, wherein I have patiently suffered the ruin of my small fortune, and the loss of that poor subsistance which I had from two Kings, whom I had served more faithfully than profitably to myself, then your Lordship was pleased, out of no other motive but your own nobleness, without any desert of mine, or the least solicitation from me, to make me A MOST BOUNTIFUL PRESENT; which at that time, when I was most in want of it, came most seasonably and unexpectedly to my relief. That favour, my Lord, is of itself sufficient to bind any grateful man to a perpetual acknowledgment, and to all the future service which one

of my mean condition can be ever able to perform." Five years afterwards we find him addressing Sheffield, Marquis of Normanby, in the same strain. "Will you give me leave to acquaint the world, that I have many times been obliged to your bounty since the Revolution. Though I never was reduced to beg a charity, nor ever had the impudence to ask one, either of your Lordship, or your noble kinsman, the Earl of Dorset, much less of other; yet when I least expected it, you

any

have both remembered me: so inherent it is in your family, not to forget an old servant. It looks rather like ingratitude on my part, that where I have been so often obliged, I have appeared so seldom, to return my thanks; and where I was also so sure of being well received. Somewhat of laziness was in the case, and somewhat too of modesty; but nothing of disrespect or of unthankfulness."Both these passages plainly denote occasional acts of munificence, and are entirely inconsistent with Prior's statement. He who received a certain annual income from the liberality of his patron, would surely not have thanked him for a bountiful present; nor have alluded to frequent obligations, which imply intermission, and something of casualty, if those obligations had been of such a kind as must have recurred during every remaining year of his life.

Of this nobleman's occasional bounty to Dryden, the following instance is recorded by Jacob. "Towards the latter part of his life, (the person

spoken of is Tom Brown,) I am informed, he was in favour with the Earl of Dorset; who invited him to dinner on a Christmas-day, with Mr. Dryden and some other gentlemen famous for learning and ingenuity (according to his lordship's custom); when Mr. Brown, to his agreeable surprise, found a bank-note of £.50. under his plate, and Mr. Dryden at the same time was presented with another of £.100." Lord Dorset, it is well known, delighted in such acts of munificence, and this mode of dispensing pecuniary favours was not uncommon in the last age :3 but it is somewhat extraordinary, that he should have brought together two persons who could have had so little

2 Historical Account of the most considerable English Poets, 8vq. 1720, p. 16.-It appears from one of our author's letters, that he had received a visit from Lord Dorset, and had dined with him, early in Nov. 1699.

3 In Sir Bulstrode Whitelocke's Account of the splendid Masque given by the four Inns of Court, Feb. 2, 1633-4, which cost twenty thousand pounds, (a manuscript formerly in the possession of the late Dr. Moreton of the British Museum, and quoted by Dr. Burney, HIST. OF MUSICK, iii. 376,) speaking of the musicians, he says, "For the musicke, which was particularly committed to my charge, I gave to Mr. Ives and to Mr. Lawes 100l. a peece for their rewards. For the four French gentlemen, the Queen's servants, I thought that a handsome and liberall gratifying of them would be made known to the Queen, their mistris, and be well taken by her. I therefore invited them one morning to a collation at St. Dunstan's taverne, in the great room, the Oracle of Apollo, where each of them

cordiality towards each other, as Brown and our author. Dryden, however, must have been flattered by the great difference between the two donations; and he appears to have entertained no illwill towards Brown, speaking of him in one of his letters with perfect unconcern, as a mere pamphleteer, who wrote against him solely for the purpose of getting a little money.

From the month of August, 1689, to the time of his death, a period of near eleven years, we must, it appears, consider Dryden possessed of no

other income but that which was derived from his own small estate, aided by the occasional bounty of his noble friends, and his own literary exertions. In this period he brought out five plays, the profits of which amounted probably to five hundred pounds the author's third night' producing

had his plate layd by him, covered, and the napkin by it; and when they opened their plates, they found in each of them forty pieces of gould, of their master's coyne, for the first dish; and they had cause to be much pleased with this surprisall."

4 We can hardly suppose that Lord Dorset was induced to invite Brown to his table, by the following lines in "The [pretended] Petition of Tho. Brown to the Lords of the Council," written some years before:

"Then pardon Tom Brown,

“And let him write on;

"But if you had rather convert the poor sinner, "His foul railing mouth may be stopp'd with a dinner." s When the house was quite full, an author gained somewhat more; for at this time the theatre in Drury

usually about seventy pounds, and the play itself being sold to the bookseller for thirty guineas.

Lane held such a number of persons as produced a hundred and thirty pounds (the price of admission to the boxes being half a crown; see Dryden's Prologue to THE MISTAKES, 1690); and the nightly charges of the house, as they are called, did not exceed thirty pounds. In 1709 the charges were £.40. In 1750 they were £.60.; and at present they are £.200.

Southerne is supposed to have been the first dramatick author, who had two benefits, on the production of a new play. In the Dedication of Sir ANTONY LOVE, a comedy, in 1691, he speaks of his being interested in the third and sixth representation of that piece. The custom, however, docs not appear to have been immediately established, for in 1696 the author of THE TREACHEROUS BROTHERS should seem, from his Epilogue, to have had only one benefit:

"See't but three days, and fill the house the last, "He shall not trouble you again in haste."

Yet in the very next year in the Prologue to BOADICEA, the sixth night is mentioned, as belonging to the poet as well as the third.

Whether, however, Dryden had the advantage of two representations of his ARTHUR, CLEOMENES, and Love TRIUMPHANT, or not, (for DON SEBASTIAN and AMPHITRYON preceded this regulation,) his profits should seem not to have exceeded the sum mentioned in the text; for in a letter to his son in 1697, he mentions that he was employed on a play called THE CONQUEST OF CHINA BY THE TARTARS, which had been put into his hands by the author, Sir Robert Howard. "It will cost me," he adds, " six weeks study, with the probable be.