106 
a&tually been exhibited on a London 
theatre! To the injury which Mrs. INcH- 
BALD has done Kotzebue, fhe has added 
an infult by ftigmatizing in, what ap- 
pears to me, a very vain and pert preface 
to her * Lovers Vows,” thofe perfons 
who, like myfelf, cannot enter into the 
{pirit of her alterations; but, on the con- 
trary, who feel difpofed to give a very 
decided and unqualified preference to the 
original play. Milfs PLUMPTRE, in her 
literal but fpirited tranflation of the 
« Natural Son,’ or Lover's Vows, has 
enumerated in her preface the chief points 
of variation between the play as repre- 
fented, and the play in its original form: 
the character of the Count vorrder Mulde, 
or Caffel, is in the original an highily- 
finifhed portrait of a German coxcomb ; 
the count is eternally babbling French, 
and the character is obvioufly intended to 
fatyrize the introduétion of French phrafes 
in common difcourfe. Mrs, INCHBALD 
has not fuffered a French phrafe to efcape 
him! no, not one! Kotzebue makes the 
count a very contemptible and infignifi- 
cant character: Mrs. INCHBALD has put 
fome fhrewd repartees into his mouth, not 
-at all confiftent with the utter infignifi-. 
cance which was intended. The cha- 
racer of Amelia is actually deftroyed: 
« the forward and unequivocal manner,” 
fays Mrs. INCHBALD in her preface, ¢¢ in 
which fie announces her affection to her 
Jover in the original would have been re- 
voltine to an Englifh audience :”’ this 
being the cafe, fne has endeavoured to 
render Amelia's annunciation of her jove 
retiring and equivocal. Xt is inconfittent, 
Mr. Editor, with the plan of your Ma- 
gazine to admit extracts; I mut content 
miyleli, therefore, with requefting your 
readers to perufe a portion of the dia- 
lorue (in Mrs. INCHBALD’s tranflation) 
between Anhalt and Amelia, from pige 
39.—** ANHALT. You mean to fay,” &c. 
to page 42, ‘6 Oh, liberty, dear liberty!” 
They will fee that nothing can be more 
forward and unequivocal than Amelia's 
annunciation to Anhalt of her love for 
him. Amelia in the original is all art- 
leffnefs, all innocence; in the fimplicity 
of her foul fhe reveals her love, becaufe 
fhe was ignorant of any neceffity, and had 
never learnt the art, of concealing it. Her 
forwardnefs is that of a child; iar from 
exciting difpuft, it is appropriate, it is 
gifential to her charaéter, and forms a 
very intereiting part of it: not fo in Mrs. 
INCHBALD’s tranflation; the fimplicity 
gf Amelia’s character is totally Jolt; the 
i Converted Inte a pert mus, triumphing 
Lranflations from Kotdebue. 
Feb: 
at the confufion into which fhe throws a4 
man who has more modefty than herfeltf.. 
Mrs. INCHBALD flanders, grofsly ilan- 
ders, an Englifh audience, when fhe afferts: 
that it would revolt from fo fimple and 
{co {weet a tale of love as that of Amelia’s. 
Although the public tafle has been in- 
jured, it is not utterly deftroyed: when 
the ‘* Stranger”? was offered to the ma- 
nagers of Drury-lane it was returned to 
the tranflator who fent it—2a gentleman: 
figning himfelf S****k—as unlikely to: _ 
fucceed in reprefentation. The managers, 
however, altered their opmion; the play 
was performed, and the poet was crowned: 
with tinexpected applaufe*. ‘Thefe cir- 
cumltances feem to confirm what I have 
faid: the ** Stranger” has nothing in it 
of thofe harlot embellifhments, nothing 
of that pantomimic nonfenfe, which of 
late has been confidered effential to fecure 
approbation: the public tafte has beem 
injured: the managers know this, for 
they have contributed to. injure it; at 
firft; therefore, they were of opinion that 
the *¢ Stranger” would not fucceed ix 
reprefentation.. ‘The fuccefs, however, 
which did aétually attend the reprefenta- 
tion of the ** Stranger, when the managers 
altered their opinion, and fuffered it te 
come upon the ftage, demonitrates that 
the public tafte zs not utterly defiroyed; 
and that we have not loft all relith for 
delineation of charaéter, for the charms 
of fimplicity and. nature. But to re- 
umn + 
Nothing better illuftrates the danger 
of making alterations, and the great pro- 
bability of injuring the author whoie 
work we prefume to amend, than this 
very tranflation, which in general is exe- 
cuted withmuch {pirit, of the ** Stranger.” 
Here, too, all the blame is thrown upon 
the Englith audience! What a happy 
way of fhuffling off refponibility, (cen- 
fure) and how highly complimentary to 
the audience whoie tafte is fo folicitoufly 
confultedt ‘* The tranfiator has ventured 
to deviate trom the original plot (I am 
ufing his own words) in one delicate par- 
ticular.—He has not made the wife ac- 
tually conimit that crime which is a fain 
to the female character, though fhe was 
on the brink of ruin, by eloping from 
her hufbands——T his lait liberty he trutts 
will be excufed; partly becaufe he feels 
that, according to the digtates of nature, 
reconciliation would in fuch circumitances 

* Mr. Surncx complains in his preface, 
and apparently with reafon, of unhandfome 
treatment from the managers. 
be 
