THE VINDICATION OF THE DUKE OF GUISE." In the year of his Majesty's happy Restora IN tion, the first play I undertook was THE DUKE OF GUISE, as the fairest way which the Act of Indemnity had then left us of setting forth the rise of the late rebellion; and by exploding the villainies THE DUKE OF GUISE, Soon after its representation, was attacked in two pamphlets, one of which was entitled "A Defence of the Charter and Municipal Rights of the City of London, and the Rights of other Municipal Cities and Towns of England. Directed to the Citizens of London." By Thomas Hunt. The title of the other was-" Some Reflections on the pretended Parallel in the Play called THE DUKE OF GUISE." These, attacks gave rise to the following Advertisement, which was annexed to the play: "There was a Preface intended to this play in vindication of it, against two scurrilous libels lately printed; but it was judged that a defence of this nature would require more room than a Preface reasonably could allow. For this cause, and for the importunities of the stationers, of it upon the stage, to precaution posterity against the like errours. As this was my first essay, so it met with the fortune of an unfinished piece; that is to say, it was damned in private by the advice of some friends to whom I shewed it, who freely told me, that it was an excellent subject, but not so artificially wrought as they could have wished; and now let my enemies make their best of this confession. The scene of the Duke of Guise's return to Paris against the King's positive command,' was then written; I have the copy of it still by me, almost the same which it now remains, being taken verbatim out of Davila: for where the action is remarkable, and the very words related, the poet is not at liberty to change them much; and if he will be adding any thing for ornament, it who hastened their impression, it is deferred for some little time, and will be printed by itself. Most men are already of opinion that neither of the pamphlets deserve an Answer, because they are stuffed with open falsities, and sometimes contradict each other. But for once they shall have a day or two thrown away upon them, though I break an old custom, for their sakes, which was to scorn them."-Soon afterwards the present Vindication was published. 3 This scene (Act iv. sc. i.) was supposed to allude to the Duke of Monmouth's return from beyond seas without the permission of Charles the Second, in the year 1680, soon after the return of the Duke of York from Scotland '(Feb. 24, 1679-80). ought to be wholly of a piece. This do I take for a sufficient justification of that scene, unless they will make the pretended parallel to be a prophecy, as well as a parallel, of accidents that were twenty years after to come. Neither do I find that they can suggest the least colour for it in any other part of the tragedy. But now comes the main objection, Why was it stopped, then? To which I shall render this just account, with all due respects to those who were 'the occasion of it. Upon a wandering rumour (which I will divide betwixt malice and mistake) that some great persons were represented or personated in it, the matter was complained of to my Lord Chamberlain,+ who thereupon appointed the play to be brought to him, and prohibited the acting of it till further order; 'commanding me, after this, to wait upon his Lordship; which I did, and humbly desired him to compare the play with the history from whence the subject was taken, referring to the first scene of the fourth act, whereupon the exception was grounded, and leaving Davila (the original) with his Lordship. This was before Midsummer, and about two months after I received the play back again from his Lordship, but without any positive order whether it should be acted or not; neither was Mr. Lee or myself any 4 Henry, Earl of Arlington. 5 See note 3. way solicitous about it but this indeed I ever said, that it was intended for the King's service, and his Majesty was the best judge whether it answered that end or no; and that I reckoned it my duty to submit, if his Majesty, for any reason whatever, should deem it unfit for the stage. In the interim a strict scrutiny was made, and no Parallel of the great person designed could be made out. But this push failing, there were immediately started some terrible insinuations, that the person of his Majesty was represented under that of Henry the Third; which, if they could have found out, would have concluded, perchance, not only in the stopping of the play, but in the hanging up of the poets. But so it was, that his Majesty's wisdom and justice acquitted both the one and the other; and when the play itself was almost forgotten, there were orders given for the acting of it. This is matter of fact; and I have the honour of so great witnesses to the truth of what I have delivered, that it will need no other appeal. As to the exposing any person living, our innocency is so clear, that it is almost unnecessary to say-it was not in my thought; and as far as any one man can vouch for another, I do believe it was as little in Mr. Lee's. And now since some people have been so busy as to cast out false and scandalous surmises, how far we two agreed upon the writing of it, I must do a common right both to Mr. Lee and myself, to declare publickly, that it |