[ 34 ] 



I HAVE now gone through every thing in this ingenious efTay 

 which appears to bear upon the matter in queftion. I dare not 

 promife myfelf that what I have offered will be deemed an 

 anfwer. The hmits of fuch an effay as I now prefent to the 

 academy would not allow me to treat it more at large ; and 

 what is a more important difEculty, the advocates are not fairly 

 matched. I have only one or two obfervations more to offer on 

 the fubjed. 



The firft I would make has, indeed, occafionally occurred, 

 and was pretty conftantly in my view in the courfe of the effay, 

 viz. in what manner each hypothefis would affed the effential 

 qualities of Falftaff's character. I have endeavoured to fhew 

 that a great and delightful portion of his wit and humour would 

 be loft if we were to adopt the writer's idea; and, indeed, he 

 himfelf has facrificed them to his theory in one of the moft 

 perfedt fcenes of the whole charader. This 1 confider as a radical 

 error, for which all his ingenuity cannot atone. I muft next 

 obferve, that to accommodate his theory, falfe opinions of Poins, 

 Lancafter and others, muft be reforted to, and fyftems of malice 

 intermixed in the plot, which certainly the poet never defigned. 

 Thefe are not only in themfelves miftakes of charader, but 

 have a powerful influence on the plot, and fuch an one as I 

 think takes away a great deal from its real pleafantry and good 

 humour. Another ftrong objedion to the writer's criticifm is, 

 that he often miftakes the true intent of thofe fcenes where 

 Falftaff is introduced. The occafions are contrived as produdive 

 of mirth ; every incident confiftent with the plot which con- 

 duced bcft to this end is chofen by the poet ; but the critic 



feems 



