en 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."

I proceed to the second extract.--Who wrote the _Prologue to Julius
Caesar_? To what master-hand are we to ascribe this twofold specimen of
psychologic portraiture? Take up the dramatic histories of Langbaine and
Baker; take up the _Theatrical register_ of the reverend Charles Burney;
take up the voluminous _Some account_ of the reverend John Genest;
examine the mass of commendatory verses in the twenty-one-volume
editions of Shakspere; examine also the commendatory verses in the
nine-volume edition of Ben. Jonson. Here is the result: Langbaine calls
attention to the prologue in question as an _excellent prologue_, and
Genest repeats what had been said one hundred and forty years before by
Langbaine. There is not the slightest hint on its authorship.

{96}
I must therefore leave the stronghold of facts, and advance into the of
conjecture. _I ascribe the prologue to John Dryden._

It appears by the list of plays altered from Shakspere, as drawn up by
Steevens and Reed, that _Julius Caesar_ had been altered by sir William
D'Avenant and Dryden jointly, and acted at the Theatre-royal in
Drury-lane. It would therefore seem probable that one of those poets
wrote the _prologue_ on that occasion. Nevertheless, it does not appear
in the works of either poet.

The _Works_ of sir William D'Avenant were edited by Mr. Herringman, with
the sanction of lady D'Avenant, in 1673; and its exclusion so far
decides the question.

The non-appearance of it in the _Poems_ of Dryden, as published by Mr.
Tonson in 1701, is no disproof of the claim which I advocate. The volume
contains only twenty prologues and epilogues--but Dryden wrote _twice_
that number!

I shall now produce some circumstantial evidence in favour of Dryden. It
is derived from an examination of the vo