"In country beauties as we often see Something that takes in their simplicity, Yet while they charm they know not they are fair, And take without their spreading of the snare-- Such artless beauty lies in _Shakespear's_ wit; 'Twas well in spite of him whate'r he writ. His excellencies came, and were not sought, His words like casual atoms made a thought; Drew up themselves in rank and file, and writ, He wondering how the devil it were, such wit. Thus, like the drunken tinker in his play, He grew a prince, and never knew which way. He did not know what trope or figure meant, But to persuade is to be eloquent; So in this _Cæsar_ which this day you see, _Tully_ ne'er spoke as he makes _Anthony_. Those then that tax his learning are to blame, He knew the thing, but did not know the name; Great _Iohnson_ did that ignorance adore, And though he envied much, admir'd him more. The faultless _Iohnson_ equally writ well; _Shakespear_ made faults--but then did more excel. One close at guard like some old fencer lay, T'other more open, but he shew'd more play. In imitation _Iohnson's_ wit was shown, Heaven made _his_ men, but _Shakespear_ made his own. Wise _Iohnson's_ talent in observing lay, But others' follies still made up his play. He drew the like in each elaborate line, But _Shakespear_ like a master did design. _Iohnson_ with skill dissected human kind, And show'd their faults, that they their faults might find; But then, as all anatomists must do, He to the meanest of mankind did go, And took from gibbets such as he would show. Both are so great, that he must boldly dare Who both of them does judge, and both compare; If amongst poets one more bold there be, The man that dare attempt in either way, is he." _Covent Garden drolery_, London, 1672. 8^o p. 9. A short historical comment on the above extracts is all that must be expected. The rest shall be left to the critical discernment of those persons who may be attracted by the heading of this Note--_Dryden on Shakspere_. When Johnson wrote his preface to Shakspere, he quoted the _first_ of the above extracts to prove that the plays were once admired without the aid of comment. This was written in 1765. In 1769 Garrick placed the same extract at the head of his collection of _undeniable_ prose-testimonies to the genius of Shakspere. Johnson afterwards pronounced it to be "a perpetual model of encomiastic criticism;" and Malone quoted it as an _admirable character_ of Shakspere. Now, _admirable_ as it is, I doubt if it can be considered as expressive of the deliberate opinion of Dryden. The essayist himself, in his epistolary address to lord Buckhurst, gives a caution on that point. He observes, "All I have said is problematical." In short, the essay _Of dramatick poesie_ is in the form of a dialogue--and a dialogue is "a chace of wit kept up on both sides."