H O M E. 



But this* fcr of. How, M UM Mulhf n rent, 

 I met tfajr Mrwbfalp with u C*M| bate. 



The tragedy of Douglas, though the first play of Mr 

 Home's that was brought upon the stage, was not the 

 first of hit composition. He had before written Agit, 

 a tragedy, of which we shall have occasion to speak 

 hereafter. The plot of the tragedy of Douglas, as few 

 will probably need to be told, was suggested by the 

 ancient ballad of Gill or Child Morrice. Hearing a part 

 of that beautiful old song tung by a lady one evening 

 after a rapper party in Edinburgh, Mr Home remark, 

 ed, that he thought it contained the germs of a trage- 

 dy ; and very soon made good his opinion, by com- 

 mencing to dramatise the story. Douglas made its first 

 r on the Edinburgh theatre, which was then 



in no iiiA^iiahing condition, in the year 175& When 

 the managfrs received UM MS. they readily accepted 

 it, put it into rehearsal, and prepared for giving it a 

 magnificent representation. The transaction, however, 

 coming to the knowledge of UM elders of the kirk, they, 

 in their great seal, first remonstrated with the author 

 on the heinous am be wi 



Ant 



Failing in this 



Meavoured to t^ the perform- 

 it ; but with no better succasa. 



equally 



1 1 ; t ' i rr : ^* i ! . i . BJkj 

 t., ,1... |,,,t 



try, n 



hit derical friends as had been 



th,, 



h 



of 



" -- 



!,d 



of Satan, UM acton, who bad 

 or at least abetted in hia wandering. UM 

 of their nock. The preabytery of F.d.n- 

 id exhortation again* 

 was ordered to be read in all the 



In this prodamation, there was no mention of Mr 

 Home or his play, though it was evidently 

 that this spiritual artillery of obsolete law* 

 prejudices ware levelled. To avoid a 



Mr Home, in 1757. resigned his liv. 



in<r, .ml with it thr r, , V. 

 for ever after a lay habit. 



riv - ---- x " 



fron, the Scottish Kirk, far the 

 v. which did honour to UM 

 of the Mbwa. exerted aaaong UM morebkwl 



part of UM Scotch, and much more general 

 Lisla.rnseafindirMtionattlMinjuatin.andridJcWU 

 At the absurdity of the procadure. That leaven of bi- 

 gotry happily M now far extinct ; we believe the last 

 mark ufit is to be found in the arucle HOME in tea Bfe. 

 ' of Mr A. Cnaharrs. UM writer of 



war* far ever bound to 



the dead letter of prim 



n_ . ^ 



the clamour of the Athenian priests, or of the influ- 

 ence of the monks in Spain, when neither the patron- 

 age even of Philip IV. nor the orthodoxy of Lope de 

 Vega's works, were sufficient to screen him from the 

 personal virulence of the ecclesiastics. At no very dis- 

 tant period, indeed, during an epidemical disorder, the 

 inhabitants of Seville renounced the amusement of the 

 theatre, as the sorest mode of averting Divine ven- 

 geance. To return, however, to our author, his tra- 

 gedy of Douglas was extolled, on its first appearance, 

 by the literary circles of the North, in terms that were 

 perhaps rather unqualified. David Hume gave it as his 

 opinion, that it was one of the most interesting and pa- 

 tactic pieces ever exhibited on any theatre; he even gave 

 it a preference to the Mrrnpe of Msffei, and that of Vol- 

 taire. The rest of the philosopher's panegyric on our au- 

 thor, in which be alluded to Shakespeare, may. for the 

 credit of his taste, be left unquoted. The poet Cray, in 

 one of his letters to a friend, renders an homage to the 

 play of Douglas, that is perhaps not much lessened by his 

 fastidious allusion to its defect*. " I am greatly struck," 

 be says, " with the tragedy of Douglas, though it has in- 

 finite faults. The author seems to me to have retrieved 

 the true language of the stage, which had been loit 

 d years ; and there is one scene be- 

 tween Matilda and the old peasant, that strikes me 

 blind to all its defects." Jackson, in his Hulory of the 

 &ottua SUgt, informs as. that when this tragedy was 

 originally produced in Edinburgh, the title of the he- 

 roine was Lady Barnard. The alteration to Lady Ran. 

 dolph was made on its being transplanted to London. 

 Its tu mat at UM Edinburgh theatre induced Mr Home 

 to oier it to the London managers, where, notwith- 

 standing ita rising celebrity, and all the influence used 

 in its favour, it was refused by Mr Garrick. Mr Rich, 

 however, accepted it, and it wa acted for the first 

 time at Covent Garden. March 14. 1757. with some 

 applause, but by no meant such at indicated the future 

 cwlsbrity which it was to obtain. 



< hi resigning hit living, Mr Home repaired to Eng- 

 land, where UM usunigctnt patronage and unremitting 

 friendship of the Earl of Bute nude him ample amends 

 for the sbandonaBent nf his profession. Lord 

 having become first minister on the accession of his 

 present majesty, appointed him in March 176* a com- 

 aaiationcT for airk and iftnmrrd teamen, and for the 

 uwuunaaja or pntaners of war and HI UM next month 

 of the same year, be was nominated conservator '. tlir 

 Scotch privilege* at Catopvere in Zealand. From the 

 period of UM exhibition of Douglas, down to the year 

 1778, Mr Home brought five other tragedies before 

 UM public. Of these. Agu. as has been already men. 



\f , ( ,. .,, L v, , i r . r. I. 7i . 



air uurraai nao lormeriy refused IMP psace as wen as 



Douglas; {tat as h was now uamiidarably altered, and 

 the author's recitation established, UM manager brought 

 it forward ft Drury Unr in 1 758. The play is found- 

 ed on a story in Spartan hutory. It is pretended that 

 tha author hat kept up in the character of Agis a con- 

 tinued allusion to the misfortunes of Charles the First; 

 figurative retrospect of the conduct of the Scots 

 their sovereign, was charitably ascribed by the 

 res of English criticism to the author's vindic- 



towards 



tive feelings towards his countrymen. The allusion 

 wa in all probability either casual or imaginary 

 the imputed motive is inconsistent with all that is 

 known of the character of Home. Agis was cer- 

 tainly heard with impartiality, and even with that 

 partial disposition which the author of Douglas had a 



Home, 



