Nour laft initial Chapter, we may be fupposed to have treated that formidable Set of

IR

Men, who are called Critics, with more Freedom than becomes us; fince they exact, and indeed generally receive, great Condefcenfion from Authors. We fhall in this, therefore, give the Reasons of our Conduct to this auguft Body; and here we shall perhaps place them in a Light, in which they have not hitherto been seen.

This Word Critic is of Greek Derivation, and fignifies Judgment. Hence I prefume some Perfons who have not understood the Original, and

D 6

have

have feen the English Translation of the Primitive, have concluded that it meant Judgment in the legal Senfe, in which it is frequently ufed as equivalent to Condemnation.

I am the rather inclined to be of that Opinion, as the greateft Number of Critics hath of late Years been found amongst the Lawyers. Many of thefe Gentlemen, from Defpair, perhaps, of ever rifing to the Bench in Westminster-hall, have placed themselves on the Benches at the Playhoufe, where they have exerted their judicial Capacity, and have given Judgment, i. e. condemned without Mercy.

The Gentlemen would perhaps be well enough pleafed, if we were to leave them thus compared to one of the most important and honourable Offices in the Commonwealth, and, if we intended to apply to their Favour, we would do fo; but as we defign to deal very fincerely and plainly too with them, we must remind them of another Officer of Juftice of a much lower Rank; to whom, as they not only pronounce, but execute their own Judgment, they bear likewise some remote Refemblance.

But in reality there is another Light, in which thefe modern Critics may with great Justice and Propriety be feen; and this is that of a common Slanderer. If a Perfon, who, prys into the Charaders of others, with no other Defign but to difcover their Faults, and to publish them to the World, deferves the Title of a Slanderer of the Reputations of Men; why fhould not a Critic, who reads with the fame malevolent View, be as properly filed the Slanderer of the Reputation of Books

Vice

Vice hath not, I believe, a more abject Slave; Society produces not a more odious Vermin; nor can the Devil receive a Gueft more worthy of him, nor poffibly more welcome to him, than a Slanderer. The World, I am afraid, regards not this Monster with half the Abhorrence which he deserves; and I am more afraid to affign the Reafon of this criminal Lenity fhewn towards him; yet it is certain that the Thief looks innocent in the Comparifon; nay, the Murderer himfelf can feldom ftand in Competition with his Guilt: For Slander is a more cruel Weapon than a Sword, as the Wounds which the former gives are always incurable. One Method, indeed, there is of killing, and that the basest and most execrable of all, which bears an exact Analogy to the Vice here difclaimed againft, and that is, Poifon. A Means of Revenge fo bafe, and yet fo horrible, that it was once wifely diftinguished by our Laws from all other Murders, in the peculiar Severity of the Punishment.

Befides the dreadful Mifchiefs done by Slander, and the Baseness of the Means by which they are effected, there are other Circumftances that highly aggravate its atrocious Quality: For it often pro-:. ceeds from no Provocation, and feldom promifes itself any Reward, unlefs fome black and infernal Mind may propofe a Reward in the Thoughts of having procured the Ruin and Mifery of another. Shakespear hath nobly touched this Vice, when he fays,

Who fteals my Purfe fteals Trafb, 'tis fomething, nothing;

'Twas mine, 'tis his, and hath been Slave to Thousands:

But

But he that filches from me my good Name,
Robs me of that WHICH NOT ENRICHES HIM,
BUT MAKES ME POOR INDEED.

With all this my good Reader will doubtlefs agree; but much of it will probably feem too fevere, when applied to the Slanderer of Books. But let it here be confidered, that both proceed from the fame wicked. Difpofition of Mind, and are alike void of the Excufe of Temptation. Nor fhall we conclude the Injury done this Way to be very flight, when we confider a Book as the Author's Offspring, and indeed as the Child of his Brain.

The Reader who hath fuffered his Mufe to continue hitherto in a Virgin State, can have but a very inadequate Idea of this Kind of paternal Fondness. To fuch we may parody the tender Exclamation of Macduff. Alas! Thou haft written no Book. But the Author whofe Mufe hath brought forth, will feel the pathetic Strain, perhaps will accompany me with Tears (efpecially if his Darling be already no more) while I mention the Uneasiness with which the big Mufe bears about her Burden, the painful Labour with which the produces it, and laftly, the Care, the Fondness, with which the tender Father nourishes his Favourite, till it be brought to Maturity, and produced into the World.

Nor is there any paternal Fondness which feems lefs to favour of abfolute Inftinct, and which may fo well be reconciled to worldly Wifdom, as this. Thefe Children may most truly be called the Riches of their Father; and many of them have with true filial Piety fed their Parent in his old Age: fo that not only the Affection,

but

fe to have patere tenhaft Mufe train, pecihile I

Mufe with

the

ifhes and

hich

and

Nify be

yof

rent

ion,

but

but the Intereft of the Author may be highly injured by thefe Slanderers, whofe poisonous Breath brings his Book to an untimely End.

I

Laftly, the Slander of a Book is, in Truth, the Slander of the Author: For as no one can call another Baftard, without calling the Mother a Whore; fo neither can any one give the Names of fad Stuff, horrid Nonfenfe, &c. to a Book, without calling the Author a Blockhead; which tho' in a moral Senfe it is a preferable Appellation to that of Villain, is perhaps rather more injurious to his worldly Interest.

Now however ludicrous all this may appear to fome, others, I doubt not, will feel and acknowledge the Truth of it; nay, may, perhaps, think I have not treated the Subject with decent Solemnity; but furely a Man may speak Truth with a fmiling Countenance. In reality, to depreciate a Book maliciously, or even wantonly, is at least a very ill-natured Office; and a morofe fnarling Critic may, I believe, be fufpected to be a bad

Man.

I will therefore endeavour in the remaining Part of this Chapter, to explain the Marks of this Character, and to fhew what Criticism I here intend to obviate: For I can never be understood, unless by the very Perfons here meant, to infinuate, that there are no proper Judges of Writing, or to endeavour to exclude from the Commonwealth of Literature any of thofe noble Critics, to whofe Labours the learned World are fo greatly indebted. Such were Ariftotle, Horace, and Longinus among the Antients, Dacier and Boffu among the French, and fome perhaps among us, who have certainly been duly authorised to

execute