" In this
pamphlet Shadwell seems to have been assisted by a gentleman of the
Temple, so zealous for the popular cause, that Dryden says he was
detected disguised in a livery-gown, proffering his vote at the
Common-hall. Thomas Hunt, a barrister,[38] likewise stepped forth on
this occasion; and in his "Defence of the Charter of London," then
challenged by the famous process of _Quo Warranto_, he accuses Dryden of
having prepared the way for that arbitrary step, by the degrading
representation of their magistrates executed in effigy upon the stage.
Dryden thought these pamphlets of consequence enough to deserve an
answer, and published, soon after, "The Vindication of the Duke of
Guise." In perusing the controversy, we may admire two circumstances,
eminently characteristical of the candour with which such controversies
are usually maintained: First, the anxiety with which the critics labour
to fix upon Dryden a disrespectful parallel between Charles II. and
Henry II. [III.] of France, which certainly our author did not propose
to carry farther than their common point of situation; and secondly, the
labour with which he disavows what he unquestionably did intend,--a
parallel between the rebellious conduct of Monmouth and of Guise. The
Vindication is written in a tone of sovereign contempt for the
adversaries, particularly for Shadwell. Speaking of Thomas Hunt, Dryden
says,--"Even this their celebrated writer knows no more of style and
English than the Northern dictator; as if dulness and clumsiness were
fatal to the name of _Tom_.
Pages:
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267