, Sir John Suckling, and with him
the greater part of the courtiers, set our Shakspeare far above
him.

"Beaumont and Fletcher, of whom I am next to speak, had, with the
advantage of Shakspeare's wit, which was their precedent, great
natural gifts, improved by study. Beaumont, especially, being so
accurate a judge of plays, that Ben Jonson while he lived submitted
all his writings to his censure, and, 'tis thought, used his
judgment in correcting, if not contriving, all his plots. What
value he had for him appeared by the verses he writ to him, and
therefore I need speak no further of it. The first play that
brought Fletcher and him into esteem was their 'Philaster;' for
before that they had written two or three very unsuccessfully, as
the like is reported of Ben Jonson before he writ 'Every Man in his
Humour.' Their plots were generally more regular than Shakspeare's,
especially those which were made before Beaumont's death; and they
understood and imitated the conversation of gentlemen much better,
whose wild debaucheries and quickness of wit in repartee no poet
before them could paint as they have done. Humour, which Ben Jonson
derived from particular persons, they made it not their business to
describe; they represented all the passions very lively, but, above
all, love. I am apt to believe the English language in them arrived
to the highest perfection--what words have since been taken in are
rather superfluous than ornamental. Their plays are now the most
pleasant and frequent entertainments of the stage, two of theirs
being acted through the year for one of Shakspeare's or Jonson's;
the reason is, because there is a certain gaiety in their comedies,
and pathos in their more serious plays, which suits generally with
all men's humours. Shakspeare's language is likewise a little
obsolete, and Ben Jonson's wit comes short of theirs.

"As for Jonson, to whose character I am now arrived, if we look
upon him while he was himself, (for his last plays were but his
dotages,) I think him the most learned and judicious writer which
any theatre ever had. He was a most severe judge; of himself as
well as others. One cannot say he wanted wit, but rather that he
was frugal of it in his works; you find little to retouch or alter.
Wit and language, and h