To this display of contemporary evidence must be added the information derivable from the posthumous publications enumerated in the former part of this article. The publication of 1723 was made by direction of the duchess of Buckingham. The couplet, "Tho' prais'd," &c., and the appended note, were omitted. In 1726 Mr. alderman Barber republished the volumes "with several additions, and without any castrations," restoring the couplet and note as they were printed in 1717. In the _Original poems_ of Dryden, as collectively published in 1743, the joint authorship is stated without a word of evidence in support of it. If we turn to the earlier writers on Dryden, we meet with no facts in favour of his claim to the poem in question. Anthony a Wood says, "the earl of Mulgrave was generally thought to be the author." This was written about 1694. The reverend Thomas Birch, a man of vast information, repeated this statement in 1736. Neither Congreve nor Giles Jacob allude to the poem. The witnesses on the other side are, 1. The publisher of the _State poems_. 2. Dean Lockier. And 3. The reverend Thomas Broughton. The _State poems_, in which the essay is ascribed to Dryden, may be called a surreptitious publication: it carries no authority. The testimony of Lockier, which is to the same effect, was never published by himself. It was a scrap of conversation held thirty years after the death of Dryden, and reported by another from memory. The reverend Thomas Broughton, who asserts the joint authorship of the poems, cites as his authority the _Original poems_, &c. Now Kippis assures us that he edited those volumes. On the question at issue, he could discover no authority but himself! Dryden _may_ have revised the _Essay on satire_. Is that a sufficient reason for incorporating it with his works? Do we tack to the works of Pope the poems of Wycherly and Parnell? We have authority for stating that Pope revised the _Essay on poetry_. Is it to be added to the works of Pope? Be it as it may, the poem was published, in substance, six years before Pope was born! As the evidence is very brief, there can be no necessity for recapitulation; and I shall only add, that if about to edit the poetical works of Dryden, I should reject the _Essay on satire_. BOLTON CORNEY. [Footnote 2: Mr. _Dryden_.] [Footnote 3: A famous satyrical poem of his.] [Footnote 4: A copy of verses called, _An essay on satyr_, for which Mr _Dryden_ was both applauded and beaten, tho' not only innocent but ignorant, of the whole matter.] [Footnote 5: A poem call'd, _The hind and panther_.] * * * * * MACKLIN'S ORDINARY AND SCHOOL OF CRITICISM.