The Project Gutenberg eBook of Are these Things So? by Anonymous

PUBLICATION NUMBER 153
WILLIAM ANDREWS CLARK MEMORIAL LIBRARY
University of California, Los Angeles
1972

William E. Conway, William Andrews Clark Memorial Library
George Robert Guffey, University of California, Los Angeles
Maximillian E. Novak, University of California, Los Angeles
David S. Rodes, University of California, Los Angeles

Richard C. Boys, University of Michigan
James L. Clifford, Columbia University
Ralph Cohen, University of Virginia
Vinton A. Dearing, University of California, Los Angeles
Arthur Friedman, University of Chicago
Louis A. Landa, Princeton University
Earl Miner, University of California, Los Angeles
Samuel H. Monk, University of Minnesota
Everett T. Moore, University of California, Los Angeles
Lawrence Clark Powell, William Andrews Clark Memorial Library
James Sutherland, University College, London
H. T. Swedenberg, Jr., University of California, Los Angeles
Robert Vosper, William Andrews Clark Memorial Library
Curt A. Zimansky, State University of Iowa

The two pamphlets reproduced here belong to the fierce heightening in the pamphlet campaign against Robert Walpole that took place at the end of 1740. They represent only two efforts within a brief but furious encounter that gave rise to the publication of no fewer than nine separate poems. On Thursday, 23 October 1740, Thomas Cooper, "one of the most prolific printers and publishers of the pamphlet literature of the eighteenth century," 1 published a savage denunciation of Walpole called Are these things so? 2 This pamphlet, which took the fictional form of an open letter from Alexander Pope, "An Englishman in his Grotto," to Robert Walpole, "A Great Man at Court," set off a round of verse writing among the party hacks of the day that vividly illustrates the close relationship between literature and politics in the first half of the eighteenth century. Within the space of two months eight further pamphlets directly related to this pamphlet and to Walpole's position as First Minister were published. Such a spate of literary activity is only remarkable, however, when compared with other ages. While it is inconceivable that the publication of any poem in our own day, even by a major writer, should arouse such a response, it is reasonably typical of the first half of the eighteenth century that the publication of an occasional poem by a minor, indeed anonymous, writer should do so.

On Saturday, 8 November, two weeks after the opening blast, Cooper delivered a second volley, an equally fierce (although largely repetitive) denunciation of Walpole entitled Yes, they are:. 3 A week later still, on Saturday, 15 November, the first pro-Government riposte, called What of That!, was published, 4 followed three days later, on 18 November, by a second reply, The Weather-Menders: A proper Answer to Are these things so? 5 The second edition of What of That! was published on the following Saturday, 22 November, 6 and a third pro-Walpole poem entitled They are Not, was also published at about this time. 7 At the end of November, or early in December, a reply to all three of these defences of Walpole appeared carrying the title, Have at you All. 8 On Tuesday, 2 December, the pro-Walpole forces returned to the attack again with a poem entitled What Things? 9 This was followed on Saturday, 6 December, by the second edition, "corrected, with the addition of twenty lines omitted in the former impressions" of Are these things so?, 10 and on Thursday, 18 December, by yet another anti-Walpole poem, The Great Man's Answer 11 purporting to be "by the author of Are these things so?." But the pro-Walpole forces were still not silenced and two days later on Saturday, 20 December, published A Supplement to Are these things so?, 12 an attack on the Patriot opponents of the Ministry. A month later still, on Friday, 23 January 1741, 13 the third edition of They are Not was published. Hereafter this particular controversy seemed to burn itself out, although an anonymous poem entitled The Art of Poetry, published on 17 March 1741, contains a long attack on Are these things so?.

This confused battle is most easily summarized by saying that four separate pamphlets (not counting second and third editions) were published which attacked Walpole, and five which defended him. The poems attacking Walpole are far more poetically versatile than those defending him and it is the two most interesting of these attacks that are reproduced here. Taken together, this series of nine pamphlets forms a separate battle within that much larger and continuing war waged by Lord Bolingbroke and the various supporters of the Patriot Opposition against Sir Robert Walpole and the defenders of his Whig Ministry. From the first publication of The Craftsman on 5 December 1726 to the final resignation of the "Great Man" on 11 February 1742 it is probably true to say that no English politician has ever been so continuously and so virulently attacked by so eminent an assemblage of literary persons. Gay, Swift, Pope, Arbuthnot, Chesterfield, Lyttleton, Thomson, Fielding, and Johnson each entered the fray at various stages. The fact that Walpole rode out these attacks for so long is more of a comment on the disorganized nature of the opposition politically and on the astute manoeuvring of Walpole himself, than on the ineffectiveness of the attacks.

During the protracted span of this campaign there were only two periods during which the supporters of the Patriot cause had any real chance of toppling Walpole. The first came in 1733 when sustained opposition forced Walpole to drop his proposed Excise Scheme, while the second occurred five years later in 1738 and sprang from a new deterioration in Anglo-Spanish relations. Although Walpole did not finally resign until 11 February 1742 his fall from power was a direct result of this deterioration. His position in the House of Commons, and in the country at large, was never as assured in the last four years of his "reign" as it had been in the first seventeen.

The pamphlets reproduced here deal with Walpole's declining reputation and especially with his handling of Spanish policy. The causes of the English differences with Spain go back to 1713 and the Treaty of Utrecht in which the South Sea Company had been granted, amongst other privileges, the right to send one trading vessel a year to the Spanish possessions. 14 This right had been grossly abused by English merchants eager to make large profits and a great number of English trading ships annually smuggled goods to Spanish America. The Spanish governors were only too pleased to accept such contraband trade for by it they avoided payment of duties to the King of Spain. In order to defend themselves against this illegal traffic the Spanish authorities established a fleet of guarda-costas to intercept, search, and, if necessary, punish the English ships. The guarda-costas did this with great effect and, on occasion, with considerable cruelty. The most notorious example concerned the capture, near Jamaica in 1731, of Captain Robert Jenkins' ship, the Rebecca, and the ensuing removal of one of Jenkins' ears. It was with Jenkins' presentation of this ear, which "wrapt up in cotton, he always carried about him," 15 before the House of Commons seven years later in March 1738 that Anglo-Spanish differences came to a head.

The Patriots demanded war and revenge: Walpole, however, was committed to a policy of peace. Accordingly, he spent the rest of the year trying to patch things up and the ill-fated Convention of Pardo concluded on 14 January 1739 was the result. The Convention involved compromise on both sides. England claimed that Spain owed her £343,277 by way of reparation for damages done to English vessels, and Spain claimed that England owed her £180,000 by way of arrears on duties due to the King of Spain. This left a balance of £163,277 and England agreed to accept £95,000 as a total discharge in return for payment within four months. 16

On 1 February Walpole laid this Convention before Parliament, and, despite vociferous opposition, it was eventually ratified on 9 March by a vote of 244 to 214. As a result of this ratification a considerable section of the opposition, under the leadership of Sir William Wyndham, immediately seceded from Parliament. Feelings had never been higher. On 15 May, one day after the payment had fallen due, Benjamin Keene, the British Minister in Madrid, was officially informed that the £95,000 would only be paid if Admiral Haddock removed his fleet from the Mediterranean. England had no intention of recalling Haddock, for both Gibraltar and Minorca would then remain defenceless, and Spain clearly had no real intention of paying the money. From this point on war became inevitable and on 19 October 1739 the declaration was made "and was received by all ranks and distinctions of men with a degree of enthusiasm and joy, which announced the general frenzy of the nation." 17 It was on hearing the church bells pealing at the news that Walpole made his famous remark: "They now ring the bells, but they will soon wring their hands. 18

One month later, on 22 November, Admiral Vernon captured Porto Bello, the port in which the guarda-costas had been fitted out. The news of this victory did not arrive in England until nearly four months later on 13 March 1740, but it brought with it great public excitement and jubilation. Thus by the end of 1740 the revenge on the Spanish had begun. Those who had demanded war seemed justified and Walpole had been discredited. This is the political background against which these pamphlets are set.

Both pamphlets have been attributed to James Miller, but the evidence for such attribution is cumulative rather than definitive. 19 Are these things so? has been far more frequently attributed to Miller than The Great Man's Answer. The earliest attribution is found in D. E. Baker's Biographia Dramatica which, although it was not published till 1812, was originally compiled by Baker sometime before 1764. 20 Robert Watt also lists Are these things so? as Miller's work in his Bibliotheca Britannica, Edinburgh, 1824. 21 The entries under Miller in the CBEL and DNB both accept these attributions as does the British Museum Catalogue. The evidence for attributing The Great Man's Answer to Miller is far more slender and rests largely on the publisher's claim on the title page, which may well have been made for the sake of promotion, that it is "By the Author of Are these things so?".

James Miller, 1706-1744, is better known as a comic dramatist than as a poet. He was the son of a clergyman from Upcerne in Dorset, and was educated at Wadham College, Oxford, where he wrote a comedy, The Humours of Oxford, which was successfully performed at Drury Lane in January 1730. On leaving Oxford he had been expected by his relations to go into business, but "not being able to endure the servile drudgery it demanded," he took holy orders and continued to write plays "to increase his finances." 22 From 1730 until his death in 1744 he wrote ten plays, several of which were performed with considerable success. 23

But it is as a poet that we are primarily interested in Miller. He was the author of several occasional poems of which his Harlequin Horace, or the Art of Modern Poetry, 1731, was the best known. This poem, yet another imitation of Horace's Ars Poetica is an attack on John Rich, the manager of Lincoln's Inn Fields and Covent-Garden. The poem is ironically full of perverse modern advice on how to write poetry. Miller adopts the persona of a modern Grub Street poet who scorns the classical values. Consequently Pope, who insists on standards of excellence, is seen by the persona as the great enemy of modern poets. At the same time it is quite clear that for Miller himself Pope is the greatest of poets. The poem includes an attack on Walpole (ll. 209-216), and perhaps it was this that led the agents of the Ministry to make him the large offer referred to in the biography of Miller found in Cibber's Lives. But, as the anonymous writer of this life goes on to point out, Miller "had virtue sufficient to withstand the temptation, though his circumstances at that time were far from being easy." 24

A second verse satire in the manner of Horace, Seasonable Reproof, 1735, has also been attributed to Miller. The poem is a general satire on Britain's "State of Reprobation," and only makes a passing glance at Walpole. London has been so forsaken by people all rushing to the Italian opera that

By Excisemen, it might now be taken,
And great Sir Bob ride through, and save his Bacon (ll. 6-7).

But more significant in our context is that, as Maynard Mack has shown, the author creates a speaker "who by his careful echoings of the Epistle to Dr. Arbuthnot seems to labor to be mistaken for Pope." 25

If Miller was the author of both Seasonable Reproof and Are these things so? his fascination with the persona of the poet in his grotto emerges as no sudden whim of wit, but as a continuing concern with the symbolic significance of Pope's actual life. Furthermore, the poet who attacked Walpole so violently in October 1740 emerges as no upstart Patriot cashing in on Walpole's current unpopularity, but as a consistent and courageous opponent of Walpole since at least 1731.

In Are these things so? Pope is imagined to be speaking throughout, although he in turn imagines what Walpole might say at various points. The poem is full of allusions and references intended to support the pretense that Pope is speaking. In line eight the speaker says his luxury is "lolling in my peaceful Grot"; in lines fifteen and sixteen he echoes Pope's famous claim in To Fortescue that he is "TO VIRTUE ONLY and HER FRIENDS, A FRIEND," 26 when he says:

Close shut my Cottage-Gate, where none pretends
To lift the Latch but Virtue and her Friends;

and in lines seventeen and eighteen he shows that he knew Walpole had once visited Pope at Twickenham. 27

These allusions to Pope's actual life have been carefully chosen by the author in order to give dramatic credibility to his chosen spokesman rather than to persuade the reader that Pope was the real author. The impersonation of Pope is meant to be transparent: the poet is demonstrating his versatility at imitating Pope and has considerable fun in doing so. The only evidence that could be brought in to support an interpretation that stressed the author's serious intent to make Pope seem the real author concerns a Dublin reprint of the poem that actually carried Pope's name as author on the title page. But it is extremely unlikely that the true author had anything to do with this since the Dublin publisher did not even bother to incorporate the corrections and additions that the poet had made to the second edition.

To point out that the device of creating a spokesman is meant to be seen through is not the same thing, however, as saying that the author could afford to admit his authorship. There were good reasons why the author of a poem that was primarily an attack on the First Minister, and who was himself probably without any great influence or reputation, should need to hide the fact of his authorship. For such a person the choice of Pope as spokesman could hardly have been more appropriate. 28

In May and July 1738 Pope had published his devastating attacks on the state of the country known as The Epilogue to the Satires. On 31 January 1739 Paul Whitehead published his attack on the artificialities and disguises of Walpole's Ministry and the Court favourites in a poem (which Boswell refers to as "brilliant and pointed" 29 ) called Manners: A Satire. At this point the government decided that it was time they attempted to stop, or at least stem, these attacks. They were not keen to confront Pope himself, but Whitehead presented a less formidable opponent. 30 Consequently, in February 1739, he and his publisher Robert Dodsley were summoned before the bar of the House of Lords to account for the attacks on named individuals in Manners. On Monday, 12 February, the poem "was voted scandalous, etc. by the Lords, and the author and publisher ordered into custody, where Mr. Dodsley, the publisher, was a week; but Mr. Paul Whitehead, the author, absconds." 31 Whitehead anticipated this summons when he wrote in the poem:

Pope writes unhurt—but know, 'tis different quite
To beard the lion, and to crush the mite.
Safe may he dash the Statesman in each line,
Those dread his satire, who dare punish mine (p. 15).

Pope was then the ideal spokesman for our author's purposes: the mite must dress up as the lion. It was admittedly almost two years since Whitehead's original summons, but the incident was well enough remembered to spur a gossip columnist writing in The Daily Gazetteer on 11 November 1740 to suggest that Whitehead was the author of Are these things so? Whitehead, too, evidently felt the danger of the situation for he deemed it necessary to publish a denial four days later. 32

In choosing Pope for his spokesman the author of Are these things so? showed a full awareness of the political realities. He also showed a detailed familiarity with Pope's life and work. There is nothing, however, to indicate that such knowledge was reciprocal, or even to indicate that Pope knew of the poem's existence. The only evidence that Pope knew anything about Miller's work, if indeed Miller was the author, comes in a letter Pope wrote to Caryll on 6 February 1731 in which he praises Harlequin Horace although he does not seem to know the author's name. 33

Are these things so? opens with Pope challenging Walpole to explain why Britain has fallen as low as she has and why France and Spain have been allowed "to limit out her sea." Walpole is then imagined defending his measures, especially the Excise Scheme, the Convention of Pardo, Placement and the Secret Service. In the second half of the poem the satirist repeats the charges and invites Walpole to turn his eyes inward and imagine that he dies guilty. Pope then begs Walpole to resign and, failing that, begs the King to intervene. The poem closes in a positive way by turning from Walpole and listing other persons (all members of the Opposition) that George II might appoint to a new Ministry.

In the first edition (23 October) these persons were given fictitious names. The second edition (6 December) not only substituted their real names but also added twenty lines at the end which included Cobham and Argyle in the list of worthies. It is this edition,which carries an Advertisement explaining these changes, that we have reproduced here.

Finally it seems helpful to append a few notes to help identify some of the allusions. In line 63 (p. 4) the "ONE more noble than the rest" is presumably Henry St. John, Viscount Bolingbroke who was stripped of his title by Act of Attainder in 1725. In line 73 (p. 5) the "brave and honest Adm'ral" is Vernon who captured Porto Bello on 22 November 1739. The "sturdy Beggars" mentioned in line 100 (p. 6), was the appelation used by Walpole in referring to the mob outside the door of Parliament on 14 March 1733, and was taken up by the Opposition as pertaining to all the merchants and individuals opposed to the Excise. 34 In line 129 (p. 8) the "C—n——n" is the Convention of Pardo described earlier in this introduction. In line 139 (p. 8) the "BROTHER" referred to is Horatio Walpole who was a frequent ambassador abroad for Robert Walpole's government. In line 218 (p. 12) "HE whose Fame to both the Poles is known" is George II.

The persons named at the end of the poem as possible replacements for Walpole are all persons who were at one time members of the Whig party but who had joined the opposition because of their dislike for Walpole. John Carteret, Earl Granville (ll. 231-236, p. 13, and referred to as Camillus in the first edition), had a long struggle with Walpole for control of the Whig party and joined the Opposition Whigs after he returned from the lord lieutenancy of Ireland in 1730. It was Carteret who was to move the unsuccessful resolution on 13 February 1741, requesting the King to remove Walpole from his "presence and counsels for ever." William Pulteney, Earl of Bath (ll. 237-242, p. 13, and referred to as Demosthenes in the first edition) was also an early ally of Walpole's who later broke with him to form the Patriot party. He became one of the editors of The Craftsman. Philip Stanhope, Earl of Chesterfield (ll. 243-245, p. 13, and referred to as Atticus in the first edition) was also a lifelong Whig who joined Carteret in leading the opposition to Walpole in the Lords. Hugh Hume, Lord Polwarth and Earl of Marchmont (ll. 246-257, p. 14, and referred to as "that fam'd Caledonian Youth" in the first edition), had been a persistent and relentless opponent of Walpole in the Commons, but on the death of his father in February 1740 had acceded to the Earldom of Marchmont and been unable to get elected as a representative peer. Although twenty years younger than Pope (he was only 32 in 1740) he became a close friend and was appointed an executor of his will. Pope refers to his friendship in his Verses on a Grotto: "And the bright Flame was shot thro' MARCHMONT'S Soul." 35 Sir Richard Temple, Viscount Cobham (ll. 258-261, p. 14), was also a staunch Whig who broke with Walpole and joined the Patriots. He, too, was an intimate friend of Pope's who addressed the first moral essay to him and praised his famous gardens at Stowe in the fourth. John Campbell, Duke of Argyle (ll. 262-265, pp. 14-15) was a distinguished soldier who joined the Opposition during the discussion of Spanish affairs. Both Pope and Thomson had celebrated his eloquence, and ll. 262-263 here are a direct recollection of lines 86-87 in Pope's Epilogue to the Satires: Dialogue II:

ARGYLE, the State's whole Thunder born to wield,
And shake alike the Senate and the Field.

With the exception of Carteret each of the persons named at the end of the poem was either an acquaintance or a close friend of Pope's. We have here one last example of the remarkable degree to which the author of this pamphlet had assimilated the true facts of Pope's life into his fictional re-creation.

According to the title page, The Great Man's Answer is by the same author as Are these things so?. Once again, the setting is Pope's grotto, but this time the poet engages Walpole in a direct dialogue. The poem begins with the poet being disturbed in his retreat by someone "thundering at the gate." It is Walpole who has come to answer the questions asked in Are these things so?. He maintains that Britain has not fallen as low as Pope claims and that the Honour of the Fleet is still intact. He defends his handling of Parliament, his fiscal policies, his appointment of Placemen and Pensioners, his attitude to Commerce, and the self-aggrandisement involved in many of his contracts. These defences, which only bring out a severer irony in Pope, lead up to Walpole's version of his own epitaph in contrast to that given him in Are these things so?. Where Pope had stressed his role as the grave-digger of British Liberty, Walpole sees himself as the healer of factions. Finally he falls back on his ultimate weapon of bribery. But his offers of money, pension, place, title, and honour are turned down by the poet with increasing scorn, and the poem ends with appropriate focus on Pope's incorruptibility.

The following notes are offered to help with the topical allusions. 36 The poem opens with Pope directing his servant, John Serle (1. 7, p. 1), to see who is thundering at his gate. This is a playful allusion to the famous opening of An Epistle to Dr. Arbuthnot where Serle had been urged to an exactly opposite course of action. The "Gazetteer Abuse" scornfully mentioned by Pope (1. 37, p. 3) is a reference to The Daily Gazetteer, a pro-Government newspaper which ran from 30 June 1735-20 June 1745. The incomplete words, "Se—s" (1. 66, p. 4) and "P———ts!" (1. 79, p. 5) refer to Senates and Parliaments respectively. Walpole's claim (1. 89, p. 5) that "Gin would then be drank without control" refers to the government's Gin Act of 1736, which placed an excise of five shillings a gallon on gin. His later claim that there would be "No License on the Press, or on the Stage" (1. 98, p. 6) refers to the Stage Licensing Act of 1737, which placed the theatre under the control of the Lord Chamberlain.

For Pope's ironic application of the epithet "sturdy" (1. 164, p. 9) to the London Merchants see the notes to Are these things so?. Pope's mention of "Angria" (1. 204, p. 11) is a comparison of Walpole to a Mahrattan pirate chief of the early part of the century. Walpole's introduction to his own epitaph, "They best can speak it, who will feel it most" (1. 223, p. 12) is an allusion to Pope's Eloisa to Abelard (1. 366): "He best can paint 'em who shall feel 'em most."

NOTES TO THE INTRODUCTION

1 H. R. Plomer, A Dictionary of the Printers and Booksellers Who Were at Work in England. 1726-1775 (Oxford, 1932), p. 61.

2 The London Daily Post and General Advertiser, 23 October 1740. "This Day is Published. Are these things so? The previous question from an Englishman in his Grotto, to a Great Man at Court."

3 The London Daily Post and General Advertiser, 8 November 1740. "This Day is Published. Yes, they are: Being an answer to Are these things so?"

4 The Daily Gazetteer, 15 November 1740. "This Day is Published. What of That! Occasioned by a Pamphlet intituled Are these things so? And its Answer, Yes, They are:"

5 The London Daily Post and General Advertiser, 17 November 1740. "Tomorrow will be published. The Weather-Menders. A proper Answer to Are these things so? By Mr. Spiltimber."

6 The Daily Gazetteer, 22 November 1740. "This Evening will be Published; The Second Edition of What of That!"

7 I have been unable to find an advertisement for this pamphlet, but it must have been published at the end of November or very early in December since Have at you All (see following footnote) lists it as one of the pamphlets it is replying to.

8 The London Magazine, December 1740. The Monthly Catalogue. Item 13. "Have at you all. By the Author of Yes they are."

This listing can only be taken as giving a terminal date. The pamphlet may well have been published in late November. Are these things so?, for example, is listed in the Monthly Catalogue for November.

9 The London Daily Post and General Advertiser, 1 December 1740. "Tomorrow, at Noon, will be published. What Things? or, An Impartial Inquiry What Things are so, and What Things are not so. Occasion'd by two late Poems, the one entitled Are these things so? And the other entitled Yes, they are."

10 The Daily Post, 6 December 1740. "This Day is Published. (The Second Edition, corrected; with the Addition of twenty lines omitted in the former Impressions) Are these things so? The previous question from an Englishman in his Grotto to a Great Man at Court."

11 The Daily Post, 18 December 1740. "This Day is Published. The Great Man's Answer. In a Dialogue between his Honour and the Englishman in his Grotto. By the author of Are these things so?"

12 The London Daily Post and General Advertiser, 20 December 1740. "This Day is Published. A Supplement to a late excellent Poem, entitled Are these things so?"

13 The Daily Post, 23 January 1741. "This Day is Published. The Third Edition. They are Not."

14 At the same time the South Sea Company agreed to pay a duty of 25% on all profits to the King of Spain. It was the question of the payment of this duty for illegal trips that became the basis of Spain's later claim for reparation. These details are taken from William Coxe, Memoirs of the Life and Administration of Sir Robert Walpole, Earl of Orford, 3 vols. (London, 1798), I, 589.

16 These figures are taken from H.W.V. Temperley, "Chapter II, The Age of Walpole and the Pelhams," The Cambridge Modern History, ed. A. W. Ward, G. W. Prothero, and Stanley Leathes (Cambridge, 1909), VI, 66.

19 I have been unable to do any more to settle the authorship and have had to be content here with presenting the evidence.

20 D. E. Baker, I. Reed, and S. Jones, Biographia Dramatica, 3 vols. (London, 1812), I, ii, 512-515.

22 Most of the details in this brief biography, including these quotations, are taken from "The Life of the Revd. Mr. James Millar," The Lives of the Poets of Great-Britain and Ireland, By Mr. Theophilus Cibber, and other hands (London, 1753), V, 332-334.

23 One of these, The Man of Taste, 1735, has sometimes been mistakenly confused with a pamphlet written three years earlier, Mr. Taste, The Poetical Fop, which viciously attacked Pope. See James T. Hillhouse, "The Man of Taste," MLN, XLIII (1928), 174-176. There is no evidence that Miller ever attacked Pope and, indeed, his political and literary sympathies put him strongly on Pope's side.

25 Maynard Mack, The Garden and the City (Toronto, 1969), p. 190. Mack is the first critic to pay any attention to these pamphlets and this reprint is largely offered to supplement his illuminating and suggestive book.

26 A. Pope, The First Satire of the Second Book of Horace Imitated (London, 1733), l. 121. It is perhaps interesting to note that according to J. V. Guerinot, Pamphlet Attacks on Alexander Pope 1711-1744 (London, 1969), p. xlviii, "No other line more infuriated the dunces, it was for them Pope's ultimate hypocrisy."

27 Walpole visited Pope sometime in the summer of 1725. See Pope's letter to Fortescue, 23 September 1725. The Correspondence of Alexander Pope, ed. G. Sherburn (Oxford, 1956), II, 323.

28 For a full account of the ways in which Pope's actual retired life in his Twickenham villa, garden, and grotto became, in the 1730's, emblematic of the ideal of cultivated virtue, see Maynard Mack, The Garden and the City, especially Chapter VI. According to Mack, Pope becomes "spiritual patron of the poetical opposition to Walpole" (p. 190).

30 This assumption is based on Johnson's comment in his life of Pope that "the whole process was probably intended rather to intimidate Pope than to punish Whitehead." S. Johnson, Lives of the English Poets, ed. G. Birkbeck Hill (Oxford, 1905), III, 181.

32 The London Daily Post and General Advertiser, Saturday, 15 November 1740. "WHEREAS it has been generally reported that I am the Author of a Poem, lately publish'd, entitled ARE THESE THINGS SO? I think it necessary to assure the Public, that the said Report is without any Foundation, being entirely a Stranger both to that Piece and the Author of it. P. Whitehead."

33 "There is just now come out another imitation of the same original [Ars Poetica], Harlequin Horace, which has a good deal of humour." Sherburn, III, 173.

36 It should be noted that the pamphlet is full of typographical errors. Lines 104-106, p. 6, should be prefixed by "G.M.," since Walpole must be the speaker, as should the last two lines in the poem, lines 251-252, p. 13. Page ten mistakenly carries the number twelve at the top of the page.

The facsimiles of Are these things so? (1740; the Second Edition, corrected; 163.n.57) and of The Great Man's Answer (1740; 11630.h.50) are reproduced from copies in the British Museum by kind permission of the Trustees.

Are these Things So?

THE

Previous QUESTION,

FROM AN

Englishman in his GROTTO,

TO A

Great Man at COURT.

The Second Edition corrected:
With the Addition of Twenty Lines omitted in the former Impressions.

A Some great and erudite Criticks, instead of Bibisti, read Bribisti in this Place. Which of the two is the most applicable, our Querist does not pretend to determine.

Are these Things So?

The Second Edition.

With great Additions and Corrections.

ADVERTISEMENT.

The first Publication of the following Poem having been entrusted to the Care of the Printer, it came, thro' either his Ignorance or Timorousness, extremely mutilated, and incorrect from the Press. The twenty last Lines were left out, which made the Conclusion very abrupt, and in a great measure destroy'd the Intention, as well as Unity, of the whole Piece. The Characters of some great Personages were entirely omitted, and fictitious Names placed to others, instead of the real ones inserted by the Author, who was always of Opinion, that deserved Praise, as well as just Satire, should disdain a Mask. As to the Pointing, it was false in almost every Line, and there were many Words either mis-plac'd or mis-spell'd in almost every Page. Notwithstanding its appearing under these many Disadvantages, the Public were pleas'd to shew their Approbation of it in general, and to give it such a generous and uncommon Reception, that a large Number were obliged to be printed off, to supply the present Demand, before there was Leisure to restore or correct any thing. The following Edition was at length undertaken by the Author Himself, and is entirely agreeable to the Manuscript which he at first put into the Hands of the Printer.

Are these Things So?

THE

Previous QUESTION,

From an Englishman in his GROTTO,

To a Great Man at COURT.

ead to the World's each Scene of Pomp or Care,
Wrapp'd up in Apathy to all that's there;
My sole Ambition o'er myself to reign,
My Avarice to make each Hour a Gain;
My Scorn—the Threats or Favours of a Crown,
A Prince's Whisper, or a Tyrant's Frown;
My Pride—forgetting and to be forgot;
My Lux'ry—lolling in my peaceful Grot.
All Rancour, Party, Pique, expung'd my Mind,
Free or to laugh at, or lament Mankind;
Here my calm Hours I with the Wise employ,
And the great Greek, or Roman Sage enjoy;
Or, gayly bent, the Mirth-fraught Page peruse,
Or, pensive, keep a Fast-Day with the Muse.
Close shut my Cottage-Gate, where none pretends
To lift the Latch, but Virtue and her Friends;
Tho' pardon me—a Word, Sir, in your Ear,
Once, long ago, I think I saw You here.

Yet to the World, all Hermit as I live,
From all its vain Regards a Fugitive;
Still in my Breast my Country claims a Part,
And Love of Britain clings about my Heart:
Then tell me, Sir, for You, 'tis said, best know,
Is She, as Fame reports her, fall'n so low?
Is She, who for so many Ages rode
Unquestion'd Monarch of the Water-Flood;
Whose freighted Barks were hail'd in ev'ry Zone,
And made each India's envy'd Wealth her own;
Protected still by such a Guardian Force,
That were they e'er molested in their Course,
Sure Vengeance on th' Aggressor straight was pour'd,
Unless Seven-fold was for the Wrong restor'd?
Is She now sunk to such low Degree,
That Gaul or Spain must limit out her Sea?
That She must ask what Winds her Sails shall fill,
And steer by Bounty who once steer'd at Will?
Whilst the vast Navies rais'd for her Support,
Nod on the Main, or rot before the Port;
With Hands ty'd up vain Menaces retail,
Or try by meek Perswasion to prevail?

And is there—What!—So many Millions gone,
So many,—Heavens! yet nothing, nothing done?
Do then her Pow'rs this drowsy Sabbath keep?
Is there no Trump will rouse 'em from their Sleep?
Are they, quite lost to Empire and Renown,
Bemus'd at Home, or sunk in foreign Down?
Or, is it true, what Fame pretends to say,
That You, Sir, are the Author of To-day?
That You're the fatal Cause of Britain's Shame,
The Spend-thrift of her Freedom and her Fame?
That Albion's Sons are, by your Arts, become
The Dupes of Foreigners, and Slaves of Home;
That her fam'd S—te, on whose sage Debate,
And free Resolves, depended Europe's Fate,
Now meanly on your Nod dependent sit,
And Yea or No but just as you think fit;
Nay, that the Chiefs of even Levi's Tribe,
Bow down to you, the Converts of a Bribe?
Whilst our trim Warriors, deaf to Honour's Call,
Now wage no War but in the Senate-Hall;
There wait your Generalissimo Command,
To fight your Battles 'gainst the Patriot Band?

And that should One more noble than the rest,
Disdain to truckle to your high Behest,
Speak what he thinks, and freely plead the Cause
Of Britain's Commerce, Liberty, and Laws;
Exert his Pow'r to check Corruption's Swing,
And serve, at once, his Country and his King,
His dang'rous Virtues are discarded straight,
As sure as they are Vertues of your Hate;
Stripp'd of all Honour, Dignity, and Rule,
To cloath some Kindred Oaf, or Titled Tool.

Or should a brave and honest Adm'ral dare
To make one Conquest tho' in Time of War,
Without your Leave to risk a vig'rous Blow,
And shew what Britons, if they might, could do,
Whilst ev'ry raptur'd Voice resounds his Praise,
And grateful Hands triumphal Columns raise,
Your venal Scribes are order'd all they can
To lessen and prophane the godlike Man.

That thus the Fountain of Britannia's Health,
Source of her Grandeur, Liberty, and Wealth,
Polluted by your all-corrupting Hand,
With rank Infection deluges the Land;
Parent at once of Want and Luxury,
Of open Rapine and dark Treachery;
The Knaves Elixir, and the Just Man's Bane,
Food to the Locust, Mildew to the Swain;
Pouring on those who once in Goshen dwelt;
More deadly Plagues than Ægypt ever felt,
And worse than Israel's heaviest Task inflicts
Tho' gone our Straw yet claiming double Bricks
Whilst Commerce flies before th' oppressive Weight,
And seeks in Gaul a more indulgent Fate;
Where, Shame to Britain! the fair Stranger Guest
Is hail'd with Raptures, and her Wrongs redress'd.

"What then?" I'm told you say, "we nothing lose,
"If they've our Commerce we've their wooden Shoes;
"And since our Merchants are so fancy grown,
"'Tis Time to pull sturdy Beggars down;
"They mutiny'd for War, and War they have,
"But such a one that soon a Peace they'll crave;
"Peace shall be Theirs, but such a Peace, that then
"They'll curse their Prayers and wish for War again;
"Thus pois'ning to 'em what they ask as best,
"I'll ruin 'em by granting their Request.

Are these Things so? Or is it Fiction all?
A sland'rous Picture drawn in Soot and Gall?
Offspring of Disappointment or Disgrace,
Of Those who want or who have lost a Place?
If so, why lives the Scandal? up for Shame,
Confront your Foes, and vindicate your Fame;
For, trust me Sir, to wink at such Offence,
Rather proclaims a Fear than Innocence;
"No one is guilty 'till he's guilty prou'd——
Come then, be this wild Clamour strait remov'd;
In conscious Justice cloath'd assert your Right,
Shake off this Load of Obloquy and Spite,
Like Samuel dauntless cry, Lo here I am!
"Witness against me if I'm ought to blame.
"Before the Lord and his Anointed say
"Whose Rights or Honours have I ta'en away?
"Whom, speak, have I defrauded or oppress'd,
"Or ever pilfer'd Forage from whose Beast?
"Of what vile Contract was I e'er the Scribe,
"Or of whose Hands have I receiv'd a Bribe?
"What Scheme did ever I at Home propose
"But whence some nameless Profit would have rose?
"Or what C—n——n e're devise abroad
"But such as Britain's Se——e did applaud?
"What of my Country's Money e'er bestow'd
"Except in secret Service for her Good?
"Or what Incumbrance on her Commerce laid,
"But for th' Increase of our Revenues made?
"In my dear Country's Service now grown gray
"Spotless I've walk'd before you to this Day
"My Thoughts laid out my precious Time all spent
"In the hard Slavery of Government;
"My Brother too the fruitless Bondage shares,
"And all your Peace is owing to his Cares,
"Girding his Loins he Travels far and near
"And brings home some rare Treaty ev'ry Year.
"You have my Sons too with you who bow down
"Beneath the weighty Service of the Crown;
"My Cousins and their Cousins too—hard Fate!
"Are loaded with the Offices of State;
"And not one Soul of all my Kindred's free
"From sharing in the Public Drudgery:

"Why then these Shafts of Calumny you throw,
"This groundless Odium cast on all I do?
"Speak out with Freedom what you have to say,
"Aside all Influence, Pow'r, and Skreen I lay, }
"And put my Conduct on the Proof To-day." }
This Sir, if you dare stand the Inquest, do,
And then if you've but Samuel's Answer too,
If all this heavy Charge is void of Ground,
And by the publick Voice you're guiltless found,
Resume your Power, with Terrors arm'd go forth,
And blast the Villains that traduc'd your Worth;
Who basely durst your Righteous Course Arraign,
And Soil the Glory's of great Brunswick's Reign.

But if you know your Cause is not the best
Know that you have Defrauded and Oppress'd,
That you have ta'en and giv'n many a Bribe,
And of a wicked Contract been the Scribe.
That you have pilfer'd Forage from the Beast,
And with the Publick Wealth your own encreas'd;
That a dire Scheme you laid t' Excise the Land,
And to a vile C—v——n set your Hand;
That you've Monopoliz'd each Post and Place,
To aggrandize your self and Mushroom Race,
That all your Kindred—Brother, Sons, and Cousins,
Have Titles and Employments by the Dozens;
And for as many Sidesmen as are wanted,
New Places are contriv'd, new Pensions granted.
If you are travell'd in these crooked Ways
With a long Train of black et Cetera's;
Whilst the whole Nation loaths your very Name,
And Babes and Sucklings your Dispraise proclaim;
Turn your Eyes inward, on yourself reflect,
Think what you are, then what you're to expect:
Pass a few Years the Sisters cut your Thread,
And rank you in the Number of the Dead;
But of what Dead? not those whose Memory,
Bloom with sweet Savour through Posterity.
Those deathless Worthies, who, as Good as Great,
Or rais'd a fall'n, or prop'd a sinking State;
Or in the breach of Desolation stood,
And for their Country's Welfare pledg'd their Blood.
No! with the Curs'd your Tomb shall foremost stand,
The Gaveston's and Wolsey's of the Land.

Your Epitaph—In this foul Grave lies HE,
Who dug the grave of British Liberty.

Since then your Glass has but few Hours to run,
Quit quit the Reins before we're quite undone.
Why should you torture out your Dregs of Life,
In publick Tumult, Infamy and Strife?
To the last gasp maintain a baneful Power
Only to see your Country die before?
If not for us—for your own Family,
And as you've made 'em Great, pray leave 'em Free.

But if there's nothing that can bribe your Will,
From this perverse Propensity to Ill;
If to the Grave you are on Mischeif bent.
By growth in Crimes too harden'd to Repent.
If, whilst perhaps you may, you won't Retreat,
Resolv'd the Nations Ruin to compleat,
On Britain's Downfall to erect a Name,
And trust to an immortal Guilt for Fame,
May'nt the Just Vengeance of an injur'd Land,
Thus greatly urg'd, exert a glorious Stand?
Drive not the Brave and Wretched to Despair,
For though of Freedom, Wealth and Power left bare,
The Plunder'd still have Tongues—and they may rear,
Their loud Complaints to reach their Sovereign's Ear,
Lay, with one Voice, their Wrongs before the Throne,
Whilst HE whose Fame to both the Poles is known,
All Europe's Arbiter, all Asia's Theme,
Affrick's Delight, America's Supreme;
HE who does still express his Royal Care,
His loving Subjects Injuries to repair;
To their Addresses graciously attends,
And above all their Liberty defends,
Who is as Wise as Pious, Mild as Great,
And whose sole Business is to nurse the State;
May judge their Cause and, greatly rous'd, command,
The Staff of Power from thy polluted Hand,
And to some abler Head and better Heart,
His long dishonour'd Stewardship impart.

Perhaps to Thee! great Carteret, who can'st boast.
Talents quite equal to the arduous Post;
A keen Discernment; strong, yet bridled Thought,
One Natures Dow'r, one by just Learning taught:
Calm Fortitude, unwarp'd Integrity,
And Flame divine to keep thy Country Free.

Or to thy Conduct, Pultney! whose just Zeal,
Is still exerted for the publick Weal;
Whose boundless Knowledge and distinguish'd Sense,
Flow in full Tides of rapid Eloquence;
And to the native Treasures of whose Mind,
We see form'd Worth, and wide Experience join'd.

With these the darling Chesterfield may sit
An able Partner—if his rebel Wit }
Can to such Pains and Penalties submit. }

And that fam'd Caledonian Youth, whose Morn
Propitious Skies, and Noon-tide Rays adorn,
Who rose so early in his Country's Cause,
Shone, though so Young, so bright, that our Applause
Was lock'd in Wonder—gazing Senates hung
On the divine Enchantment of his Tongue;
Hark with what Force he pleads in our Defence!
How just he speaks an injur'd People's Sense!
Half lost to Britain now, He chides his Fate,
For stealing him, by Titles, from the State;
Whilst we, lov'd Polwarth! with thy Titles more,
As might such Virtues to the State restore.

Then too the noble Cobham, first of Men!
May leave his Garden for the Camp again;
Call'd, like old Rome's Dictator from the Plough,
To plant once more the Laurel on his Brow.

And Brave Argile, who's form'd alike to wield
The Rhet'rick of the Senate and the Field,
So tun'd whose Eloquence, whose Breast so Mann'd,
None can the Speaker or the Chief withstand.

Yet feign Methink's I'd hope that you were clear
From this high Charge that eccho's in my Ear;
Trust that some Demon envious of my Rest
With visionary Wrongs distracts my Breast,
Or that this Blazon of enormous Crimes
Springs from the wanton Licence of the Times.
Therefore I put this Question to your Heart,——
Speak, Culprit—Are you Guilty? Nay, don't Start,
This is a Question all have right to ask,
To answer it with Honour is your Task;
That, If you dare unbosom, I expect,
Till when, I'm Yours, Sir, with all due Respect.

THE

GREAT MAN's

ANSWER

Are these Things So?

THE

GREAT MAN'S

ANSWER

Are these Things So?

IN A

DIALOGUE

BRTWEEN

His Honour and the Englishman

in His GROTTO.

THE

GREAT MAN's

ANSWER

Are these Things So?

E.M.ail blest Elizium! sweet, secure Retreat;
Quiet and Contemplation's sacred Seat!
Here may my Life's last Lamp in Freedom burn,
Nor live to light my Country to her Urn:
Die 'ere that huge Leviathan of State
Shall swallow all.—Who thunders at my Gate!
See John—But hah! what Tempest shakes my Cell?
Whence these big Drops that Ooze from ev'ry Shell?
From this obdurate Rock whence flow those Tears?
Sure some Ill Power's at hand—Soft! it appears.

E. M. What's That approaches, John? J. Why Sir, 'tis He.

E. M. What He? J. Why He Himself, Sir; the great He.

E. M. Enough. G. M. Your Slave, Sir. E. M. No Sir, I'm your Slave,
Or soon shall be.—How then must I behave?
Must I fall prostrate at your Feet? Or how—
I've heard the Dean, but never saw him Bow.

G. M. Hoh! hoh! you make me laugh. E. M. So Nero play'd,
Whilst Rome was by his Flames in Ashes laid.

G. M. Well, solemn Sir, I'm come, if you think fit,
To solve your Question. E. M. Bless me! pray, Sir, sit.

G. M. The Door! E. M. No Matter, Sir, my Door won't shut:
Stay here, John; we've no Secrets. G. M. Surly Put!
How restiff still! but I have what will win him
Before we part, or else the Devil's in him.

E. M. I wait your Pleasure, Sir. G. M. Why Fame, you say,
Reports that I'm the Author of To-Day:
I am—But not the Day that you describe,
Black with imagin'd Ills—Your Patriot Tribe,
Those growling, restless, factious Malecontents,
Who blast all Schemes, and rail at all Events;
Whom Ministers, nor Kings, nor Gods can please;
Whose Rage my Ruin only can appease;
That motley Crew, the Scum of ev'ry Sect,
Who'd fain destroy, because they can't direct;
Wits, Common-Council-Men, and Brutes in Fur,
Knights of the Shire, and of the Post.—E.M. This, Sir,
Is Gazetteer Abuse. G. M. These Miscreants dire
Apply the Torch themselves, then cry out Fire;
In Rhime, in Prose, in Prints, and in Debate,
They falsly represent the Nation's State.
Go forth, and see if Britain's fall'n so low;
Fly to her Coasts, and mark the glorious Show:
See Fleets how gallant! See Marines how stout! }
That wait but till the Wind shall turn about. }

E. M. What a whole Twelvemonth! G. M. Pray Sir, hear me out. }
See all their Sails unfurl'd, their Streamers play;
You'd think old Neptune's Self kept Holiday:
These shall protect our Commerce, scour the Main,
The Honour of the British Flag maintain;
Pour the avenging Thunder on the Foe, }
And—E. M. Mighty well; but when are they to go? }

G. M. When? Psha! why look'ee, Sir, that Time will show. }
Next view the martial Guardians of the Land:
Lo! her gay Warriors redden all the Strand:
Cockade behind Cockade, each Entrance keep,
Whilst in their Sheaths ten thousand Falchions sleep.

E. M. But, Sir, 'tis urg'd that these are needless quite,
Kept only for Review, and not for Fight:
That Fleets are Britain's Safety—G. M. Stupid Elves!
Why these, Sir, are to save you from yourselves:
Ye're prone, ye're prone to murmur and rebel,
And when mild Methods fail, we must compel:
Besides, consider Sir, th' Election's near—

E. M.—O, Sir, I'm answer'd—Now the Case is clear.

G. M. Ay,—I shall answer all the rest as well.

E. M. I doubt it not. G. M. On Se—s next you fell:
Fie! that was paw—Se—s are sacred Things,
And no more capable of Ill than—Kings.

E. M. 'Tis granted. G. M. Yet at them your Gall is spit;
You're told they Yea and No as I think fit;
And that if some brave One Rebellious prov'd,
From his Lord's Banquet he was strait remov'd;
Cast into utter Darkness, like the Guest,
Who was not in a Wedding Garment Dress'd.

Well, What of that? should not the Blind be led?
Should not so vast a Body have a Head?
And if one Finger's gangreen'd, sure 'tis best
To lop it off 'ere it infect the rest.
Free P——ts! mere stuff—What would be done?
Let loose, five hundred diff'rent Ways they'd run;
They'd Cavil, Jarr, Dispute, O'return, Project,
And the great Bus'ness of Supply Neglect;
On Grievances, not Ways and Means would go;
Nor one round Vote of Credit e're bestow:
The sinking Fund would strangely be apply'd,
And secret service Money quite denied:
Whilst Soap and Candles we untax'd should rue,
And Salt itself would lose it's Savour too:
Ev'n Gin would then be drank without controul,
And the poor civil List be ne're lick'd whole.
Down go all Pensioners, all Placemen down.
Those lov'd and trusty Servants of the Crown,
Who're always ready at their Chief's Command,
Would have no Vote to save the sinking Land:
Ev'n Levy's Bench might lose it's sacred Weight,
Remov'd, O sad Translation! from the State.
Then Pen's like yours would freely vent their Rage,
No License on the Press, or on the Stage;
Whilst loyal Gazetteer's, tho' ne're so witty,
No more might chasten the Rebellious City:
No more sage Freeman trumpet out my Fame,
Nor unstamp'd Farthing-Posts my worth proclaim.

E. M. Indeed—such dire Calamities attend!
O worse, Sir, worse—Heav'n knows where it might end.
Perhaps Ourself and our dear Brother too,
No longer might our Country's Business do—

E. M. That, Sir, you've done already—rather, then,
Your Business would be done. G. M. Ungrateful Men!
We that have serv'd you at such vast Expence, }
And gone thro' thick and thin. E. M. There's no Defence, }
Would serve your Purpose—Hence, then, good Sirs, Hence; }
Fly, for the Evil Days at Hand, Pray fly—

G. M. What leave my Country to be lost?—Not I;
The Danger's yet but in Imagination,
I hope one Seven Years more to save the Nation.

In vain you Patriot Oafs pronounce my Fall,
Like the great Laureat, S'Blood I'll stand you all.
What tho' you've made the People loath my Name,
I live not on such slender Food as Fame;
And yet that People's mine—My Will obey, }
Implicit Bow beneath my sovereign Sway, }
Whilst these my Messengers prepare my Way; }
These all your Slanders will at Sight refute,
They're sterling Evidence which none dispute.
For these, Content, or to be Damn'd or Sav'd—

E. M.—Nay if they will, why let 'em be enslav'd:
If they will barter all that's Good and Great,
For present Pelf, nor Mind their future State;
If none Thy baleful Influence will withstand,
Go forth, Corruption, Lord it o'er the Land;
If they are Thine for better and for worse,
On Them and on their Children light the Curse.

G. M. Corruption, Sir!—pray use a milder Term;
'Tis only a Memento to be firm;
The Times are greatly alter'd—Years ago,
A Man would blush the World his Price should know:
Scruple to own his Voice was to be bought;
And meanly minded what the Million thought;
Our Age more Prudent, and Sincere is grown,
The Hire they wisely take, they bravely own;
Laugh at the Fool, who let's his Conscience stand,
To barr his Passage to the promis'd Land;
Or, sway'd by Prejudice, or puny Pride,
Thinks Right and Int'rest of a different Side.

E. M. O Nation lost to Honour and to Shame!
So, then, Corruption now has chang'd its Name:
And what was once a paultry Bribe, to Day
Is gently stil'd an Honourable Pay.
Blessings on that great Genius who has wrought
This strange Conversion—Who has bravely bought
Our Liberty from Virtue—Pray go on.

G. M. Of Commerce next you talk—pretend 'tis gone,
To Foreign Climes—Amen, for what I care,
Perdition on the Merchants—They must dare!
To thwart my Purpose—I detest them—E. M. How!
G. M. Yes—And I think I'm even with 'em now.
They would not be convention'd, nor excis'd,
But they shall feel the Scourge themselves advis'd;
They shall be swingingly bewarr'd, I'll swear;
And since they'd not my little Finger bear,
My Loins shall press 'em 'till they guilty plead,
And sue for Mercy at my Feet. E. M. Indeed!
G. M. Aye, trust me, shall they——E. M. But don't tell 'em so; }
For they're a stubborn sturdy Gang you know, }
G. M. O! they'll be supple when their Cash runs low.
Their Purse, which makes them proud and insolent,
A trav'ling with their Commerce shall be sent—
E. M. Take Care they don't send you a trav'ling first;
G. M. No, Sir, I dare 'em now to do their Worst.
Seven Sessions more I am at least secure—
E. M. Nay then you'll crush 'em quite?—But are you sure,
There is a Spirit, Sir? G. M. What Spirit pray?
A Spirit that the Treasury can't lay.
E. M. I'm answer'd Sir,—G. M. Next, Friend, one Word about
Those spiteful Innuendoes you throw out,
That squint at Contracts, Forage, and what not,
'Tis more than Time that those Things were forgot.
You should not link the present with the past—
E. M. Yes when they make one glorious Whole at last;
When, tho' Times differ, Actions still agree,
And what Men were they are—What they will be,
We safely may pronounce—G. M. Well, Sir, but why
On my dear Family and Friends this Cry?
Suppose they've Places, Wealth, and Titles too,
Merit like Ours should surely have its Due.
That squaemish Steward's of all Fools the worst,
That lays not up for his own Houshold first;
Nor takes a proper Care of those staunch Friends,
By whose good Services he gains his Ends.
Besides, who'd drudge the Mill-Horse of the State;
Curst by the Vulgar, envy'd by the Great;
In one fastidious Round of Hurry live,
And join, in Toil, the Matin with the Eve;
Be hourly plagu'd 'bout Pensions, Strings, Translations,
Or, worse! that damn'd Affair of Foreign Nations.
Make War and Treaties with alternate Pain:
First sweat to build, then to pull down again.
Who'd cringe at Levees, or in Closets—Oh!
Stoop to the rough Remonstrance of the Toe?
Did not some Genius whisper, "That's the Road
"To Opulence, and Honours bless'd Abode;
"Thus you may aggrandize yourself, and Race;
"Pension this Knight, or give that Peer a Place."

E. M. So Angria, Sir, as justly might declare,
He plunder'd only to enrich his Heir;
Nor longer would his Piracies pursue,
Than 'till he had provided for his Crew.

G. M. Your Servant, Sir, I think you're pretty free— }
E. M. Why Truth is Truth, Sir, and will out, you see; }
G. M. Yes, s'death! but couple Angria with me!
E. M. I'll say no more on't—G. M. No you've said enough;
And what you next advise, is canting Stuff.

Turn my Eyes inward! not quite so devout;
They've Task sufficient to look sharp without:
And should the fatal Sisters cut my Thread
Some score Years hence—I trouble not my Head }
Where I'm entomb'd, or number'd with what Dead; }
I want no Grave-Stone to promulge my Fame,
Nor trust to breathless Marble for a Name,
Britannia's self a Monument shall stand
Of the bless'd Dowry I bequeath my Land:
Her Sons shall hourly my dear Conduct boast;
They best can speak it, who will feel it most.
But if some grateful Verse must grace my Urn,
Attend ye Gazeteers—Be this the Turn—

Weep, Britons, weep—Beneath this Stone lies He,
Who set your Isle from dire Divisions free, }
And made your various Factions all agree. }

E. M. That's right, G. M. You'd have me quit too—No, I'll still
Drive on, and make you happy 'gainst your Will.

As for your may and may, Sir,—may be Not,
Can my vast Services be There forgot?

As for those lauded Successors you name,
If once in Pow'r, they'd act the very same.
E. M. That's Cobweb Sophistry—Did they not fill
The noblest Posts? And had they not, pray, still,
But that they greatly scorn'd to league with those,
Who were at once their King's and Country's Foes?
G. M. Well, Sir, as there is nothing I can say
Will with your starch'd unbending Temper weigh;
My last best Answer I'll in Writing leave;
Pray mark it—E. M. How! May I my Eyes believe?
G. M. You may—I thought I should convince you, E. M. Yes,
That Fame for once spoke Truth—And as for This—
G. M. Furies! My thousand Bank, Sir, E. M. Thus I Tear,
Go, blend, Corruption, with corrupting Air.
G. M. Amazing Frenzie! Well, if this won't do,
What think you of a Pension? E. M. As of You.
G. M. A Place—E. M. Be gone, G. M. A Title—E. M. is a Lie
When ill conferr'd G. M. A Ribband—E. M. I defie
Farewell then Fool—If you'll accept of Neither,
You and your Country may be damn'd together.

The Augustan Reprint Society

PUBLICATIONS IN PRINT

The Augustan Reprint Society

PUBLICATIONS IN PRINT

18. Anonymous, "Of Genius," in The Occasional Paper, Vol. III, No. 10 (1719), and Aaron Hill, Preface to The Creation (1720).

22. Samuel Johnson, The Vanity of Human Wishes (1749), and two Rambler papers (1750).

31. Thomas Gray, An Elegy Wrote in a Country Churchyard (1751), and The Eton College Manuscript.

109. Sir William Temple, An Essay Upon the Original and Nature of Government (1680).

114. Two Poems Against Pope: Leonard Welsted, One Epistle to Mr. A. Pope (1730), and Anonymous, The Blatant Beast (1742).

123. Edmond Malone, Cursory Observations on the Poems Attributed to Mr. Thomas Rowley (1782).

125. Anonymous, The Scribleriad (1742). Lord Hervey, The Difference Between Verbal and Practical Virtue (1742).

129. Lawrence Echard, Prefaces to Terence's Comedies (1694) and Plautus's Comedies (1694).

133. John Courtenay, A Poetical Review of the Literary and Moral Character of the Late Samuel Johnson (1786).

136. Thomas Sheridan, Discourse ... Being Introductory to His Course of Lectures on Elocution and the English Language (1759).

140. A Learned Dissertation on Dumpling (1726) and Pudding Burnt to Pot or a Compleat Key to the Dissertation on Dumpling (1727).

142. Anthony Collins, A Discourse Concerning Ridicule and Irony in Writing (1729).

143. A Letter From A Clergyman to His Friend, With An Account of the Travels of Captain Lemuel Gulliver (1726).

144. The Art of Architecture, A Poem. In Imitation of Horace's Art of Poetry (1742).

145-146. Thomas Shelton, A Tutor to Tachygraphy, or Short-writing (1642) and Tachygraphy (1647).

150. Gerard Langbaine, Momus Triumphans: or, the Plagiaries of the English Stage (1687).

Publications of the first fifteen years of the Society (numbers 1-90) are available in paperbound units of six issues at $16.00 per unit, from the Kraus Reprint Company, 16 East 46th Street, New York, N.Y. 10017.

Publications in print are available at the regular membership rate of $5.00 for individuals and $8.00 for institutions per year. Prices of single issues may be obtained upon request. Subsequent publications may be checked in the annual prospectus.