1808.] 
ton, to whom he dedicated his “ unpo- 
lisht lines.” As an admirer of Shak- 
speare, I should be sorry to suppose my 
favourite poct, an impostor. I shall 
therefore beg some of your correspon- 
dents to assist in clearing up this point. 
This can only be done by exhibiting a 
comparative view of the translations in 
question. Britaine’s Troy is not within 
* ay reach, nor have I the edition of 
Shakspeare by Malone and Steevens, 
and cannot therefore refer to what these 
learned gentlemen have said upon the 
subject. I think, however, that the 
plan which I rccommend, is the best 
that can be devised either to vindicate 
the character of Shakspeare, or to ren- 
der indelible the stain which Heywood 
has endeavoured to fix upon it. It may 
perbaps appear that Heywood was the 
impostor himself; for if my memory does 
not deceive me, the Poems of Shakspeare 
appeared in 1609—perhiaps before the 
publication of ritaine’s Troy. 
Ovid would seem from some passages 
in his dramas te have been a favourite poct 
with Shakspeare, He probably formed 
an acquaintance with him at school, 
Nor is it unlikely that he read Terence 
aud Plautus at the same time. As he did 
not leave school before he was fifteen or 
sixteen, he might have formed a still 
more extensive acquaintance with the 
classic writers. Dermody was a good 
classical scholar at ten years of age,— 
and certainly Dermo:!y was not as great 
a genius ag Shakspeare. Nor would 
the baré-legged cow-boys in the county 
-of Kerry, in Ireland, who, when young- 
er, quote Horace and Virgil fluently, 
bear a comparison in point of talents with 
the author of Lear and Macbeth, 
Chester, Your’s, &c. 
July 20, 1808. YiZ. 
} SEE 
To the Editor of the Monthly Mugazine. 
SIR, 
LATELY observed a tragedy enti- 
tled So/yman, announced in the Eng- 
lish prints. As I have not yet read this 
tragedy, may I beg of some of your cor- 
respondents to inform me whether or not 
it be an imitation, or translation of the So- 
limano of Bonarelli, asplendid tragedy, of 
whichsome account is givenin Hist. Me- 
moir on Ital. Trag. p. 156. I should 
be happy to see translations of some 
other tragedies mentioned in that work, 
particularly those of Alfieri, and Monti. 
Cork, Your's, &c. 
- Aug. 4, 1808. R.S. 
_ Menruazy Mas., No. 174, 
Bonarell.’s Solimano, 
121 
To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, 
SUBJECT which formerly em- 
ployed the pens of some of the 
political econotnists in, France, has 
been lately brought forward by a Mr, 
Spence, in two pamphlets, the first of 
which is entitled, “ Britain independent 
of Commerce,” and seems to have en- 
gaged much of the public attention; and 
the second, which is very lately pub- 
lished, is entitled, “ Agriculture,” and 
contains a repetition of his former opi- 
nions, with remarks on the strictures 
passed on them, in the Reviews, and in a 
pamphlet of a Mr. Mill, entitled, “ Com- 
merce defended.” 
The questiun discussed is, “ Whether 
land or manufactures should be cousider- 
ed as the source of revenue?” 
It appears to me that the difficulties 
which present theniselves to the solution 
of this question are occasioned solely by 
the ambiguity of soime of the terms used ; 
and that if I can ofer a statement of the 
question in which this ambiguity shall be 
removed, I shall go near to accommodate 
both parties, . 
Mr. Spence’s second pamphlet con- 
tains a recapitulation of his former opi- 
nign (sée p. 14) in these words:— 
“T will here briefly recapitulate the 
politico-economical creed which it. was 
the object of my pamphlet to establish, 
and which I bave as yet seen:no reason 
to abjure, Believing then that wealth is 
solely created by agriculture, I set the 
highest value upon manufactures, as be- 
ing essential to transmute the wealth 
produced from the soil to another shape; 
and to the accumulation of capital as 
having been the great stimulus to the 
agricultural improvements of this coun- 
try, and as being still requited progres- 
sively to forward these improvements.” 
To this the Edinburgh Review (No. 
Xxll. p. 431) opposes Dr. Smith’s opi- 
nion, with which it prefesses tu agree. 
This opinion is, : 
That the real revenue of the whole so- 
ciety is to be estimated, not only by all 
the food which is consumed, but also by 
all the’ manufactures and commodities 
of all kinds that are produced during 
that consumption, or what ainounts near- 
ly to the same thing, by the value of all 
that each individual in the country con- 
sumes, which evidently consists nut only 
in a certain portion of food, but in-a cer- 
tain quantity of manufactures, and ether 
comimo Jities ip addition to it. 
- I believe, 
7 
