Now it lies upon the Adversaries of the Stage to prove, That the Theatre is against Law or Scripture.

'Tis unfair to take the advantage of the present Corruptions, and cry down the Stage, because Men make an ill use of it. The Priests Won't allow this Argument in another Case; and I think an ill Poet is no more an Objection against the Stage, than a Clergyman's being a Blockhead, is to the Pulpit. 'Tis our Misfortune to have too many in both Vocations; tho', as bad as the Stage is, I don't doubt but the World has receiv'd a great many Advantaged from it. I shall name you some, and the first may be the reclaiming the Manners of the Clergy.

'Tis certain, since the Stage has used the Gown freely, and the Laity have not been afraid to look into their Faults, that they are more humble, and less publickly vicious: They know if Tom D'urfey can light upon a frail Priest, he won't scruple to expose his Infirmities, tho' he is not the only Whipping Tom of the Stage; if they had not others to fear, they wou'd soon grow too many for him. I believe they wou'd be angry, if they thought the People gave the Honour of their Reformation to the Stage; tho' you can't believe otherwise, if you consider the difference of the former and present Clergy, what a strange alteration there is where the Knowledge of Plays have come (I wou'd be understood only of those who needed a Reformation) There are now, and have always been, Men among them able and fit to give Laws, and from whom the World was glad to receive them, who appear'd as burning and shining Lights in their Generation; and it was from them we learnt the difference; it was their Light which expos'd the other, and the Stage only took their evil Deeds, to shew them truly the Evils of them. But besides their Reforming of Manners, the Stage has taught them to speak English, and preach more like Ambassadors of their great Master. It has taught them to argue rationally, and at once mended their Stile, and Form of their Sermons. How did Religion labour under heavy Language, and how many People rather absented the Church, than come to hear the Word of God Burlesqu'd? In what a ridiculous Dress did Religion appear? When to spin out the time in old Proverbs, and wretched Puns, a Fellow wou'd run it up to Six and thirtiethly, before he came to his Use and Applications. In short, the Drunkenness, Whoring, Insolence, and Dulness that has appear'd under a Black Coat on the Stage, have made the Men of the same Colour of it keep within Bounds: And that a Man might not teize them with the Representation, they have endeavour'd to appear in as differing a Form as possible.

If what Mr. Collier says was true, That when a Clergyman is brought on the Stage, it is with a design to ridicule the Function, it wou'd be abominable, and as bad as the Town is, wou'd be hiss'd off the Stage. I dare say, whatever the Intention of the Poet is, 'tis not receiv'd so by the Audience. For at this rate, every foolish Peer who Is brought on the Stage, must be suppos'd to intend a Reflection on all the Men of Condition; and an Alderman, who is a Cuckold, must be look'd on as the Representative of his Brethren. 'Tis absurd to make no distinction; as if a particular Vice in a particular Man, cou'd not be expos'd without a design'd Reflection on all who belong to him. It ought to touch no body but whom it concerns; and it has its end, if it reclaims where it was design'd, and prevents others, by shewing the Danger: And this is the Design of Comedy. But the Question is, Whether our Poets have managed it as they ought? Whether they have not pick'd out a particular Person, and expos'd the Character in general, under the Notion of one Man? I answer to this, That whatever the Design of the Poet has been, it has not had the effect with the People: For who disbelieves the Authority of their Function, or thinks the worse of Good, Learned, and Ingenious Men among them? Are not the Religious very much reverenc'd? Has any Body thought the worse of Stillingfleet, Tillotson, and Burnet, upon this Account? Who can believe, that when Mr. Vanbroug disguises a Parson, that he thought of these Men, or any who lives soberly, and makes Religion their Business, and at the same time, don't make it inconsistent with good Manners? The Good among them know the People love them, and that nothing but their own mis-behaviour draws them into Contempt. Any Minister, tho' he was but of mean Understanding, yet if he had other good Qualities, if he liv'd soberly, and did his Duty religiously, that ever such a Man was pickt out to be the Scandal of his Neighbours, or a Ridicule of the Stage. Whence is it then, that the Clergy are so angry? If you hook but one of them, all the rest are upon your Back, and you can't expose his Vices without being an Enemy to the Church: And in this, Priests of all Religions are the same.

But after all, why shou'd Mr. Collier blame Mr. Dryden for making Dorax exclaim against the Mahometan Priest? Or how can that be a Prejudice to the Character of the Christian Clergy? Is it not natural for such a one as Dorax to say as much, and especially against such a one as the Mufti in the Play? And does Mr. Collier blame Mr. Dryden for writing naturally? I think it is a Fault throughout Mr. Collier's Book, that in his Criticisms of the Plays, he never considers the Person who speaks; that is, Whether 'tis not natural for a Man of such a Character, to say such a thing? It wou'd have been of more Service to have proved, That no Person is to be brought on the Stage to say an ill thing, and then he had thrown away all the Profaneness, which is so much an Offence, at once. But if such Persons are to be represented, there is not so much Reason against any of our present Plays, as is urg'd by Mr. Collier; for you must allow a Coquett to talk like her self, a Lover to vent his Passion in Raptures, and a Rake to speak the Language of the Town.

I have already told you, That I am far from vindicating the present Stage. I don't know a regular Play, or that ought to be represented on a regular Stage; yet I know a great many Plays that I would not loose for want of that Regularity. Who wou'd not have Sir G. Etheridge, Mr. Wicherly, and even some of Mr. Dryden's Plays? Who would reject the Orphan, because Mr. Collier objects against a loose Speech in it.

But Mr. Collier has laid other things to the Poet's Charge besides the Abuse of the Clergy; and that the profane Characters in the Play, has had an ill Effect on the Age, by promoting of Immorality and Vice. This I very much question; for I can't apprehend so much danger even in the present Stage as Mr. Collier wou'd suggest. The greatest Faults of our Plays are their being generally, in one part or other, unnatural: That which is regular in any of them can never be an Offence; and where that Monster appears, it rather frightens than allures; so that we are not in so much danger, even from our very bad Plays: For the more monstrous, the less Power it has to please; and whatever looses the Power, can never do much damage. So that if Mr. Collier should make a Collection of D'urfey's Works, who is there that wou'd become a Convert? And who wou'd turn Parson to be drunk and beat the Watch? Or who wou'd be proud of an Imitation of any of his Heroes? Has any Body brought themselves under his Character, in hopes to recommend them to the World? It would be happy if the World had learnt no more Irreligion from the Pulpit than it has from the Stage; at least, the Consequence of the first has been more fatal. What dismal Effect has the holy Cant had upon the Multitude: What Rebellion, Blood-shed and Mischief have been encourag'd under the Name of Sanctity, Religion, and the Good old Cause. Whoever learnt to cut a King's Throat by seeing of Plays? But by going to Church, the People were instructed to bind the King in Chains, and his Nobles in Fetters of Iron, That the Kingdom ought to be taken away, and given to the Saints; And who wou'd not be a Saint for such an Inheritance? Who cou'd refuse resisting of Authority, when instead of Damnation, it was coming forth to the Help of the Lord against the Mighty? But this is but one Mischief of the Pulpit; this is only putting a Kingdom in Civil Broils, intestine Wars, and unnatural Murthers. But when Men of debauch'd Principles shall become the Teachers of the Nation, what may we not expect from their Industry and Sedition.

After all, my Lord Foppington was never design'd to teach People to speak or act like him; nor was it intended that the Ladies shou'd be byass'd by the Example of Berinthia to turn Coquetts. These and the like Characters in other Plays, are not propos'd as a Direction for the Gallant Man, or the Vertuous Lady; but that seeing how such Persons behave themselves on the Stage, that they may not make the like Figure in the World; but if any body shou'd rather be in love than terrified by these Examples, 'tis their Fault, and not the Poets, since the best things are liable to Corruptions. But it may be objected, That our Poets don't make Persons speak like themselves. That indeed is a Fault, and I can't say any thing to excuse it but this; That they who, have the Judgment to know when a Poet speaks improperly, ought to have so much Judgment, as not to be byassed by his Irregularities: The People who don't understand it, generally suppose, that what is Vertuous is to be imitated, and what is Vicious is to be avoided. That this is the general Observation of those who frequent Plays, may justly be inferr'd from the Practice of the Town: For I challenge any Man to prove, That any one Vice, now in being, took its Rise from the Stage. The Stage takes Examples from the Town. The Scene must be really acted in the World before it comes to be expos'd: So that whatever appears Vicious or Ridiculous, is owing to the Wickedness of the Times, and not to the Theatre. It may be objected, That what is generally acted on the Stage, if it was done before; yet it was done in private, but the Stage publishes it. To this I answer, That it does not intend to license it, only to set it in a true Light, that it may be expos'd and shunn'd.

As to those Objections, That the Actors are generally debauch'd, and of leud Conversation; and that no Person who is a known Adulterer, or Profane, ought to be encouraged. That the Play-house is a Resort of vicious Persons, and gives Opportunity to such who have wicked Inclinations. All these wou'd fall upon the advancement of a regular Stage; but as 'tis, the Objections are not levell'd Right; for the State is chargeable with the Immoralities. There are Laws for the Punishment of Vice; and if the Magistrate neglect his Duty, he must answer for it. I don't know that any body is oblig'd to a Conversation with the Players; and their Lives can influence only their Associates; and such they wou'd find, whether they are Players or not. When they are on the Stage they are confin'd to the Poets Language: And if we shou'd see Mr. Powel acting a Brave, Generous and Honest Part; or Mrs. Knight, a very Modest and Chaste one, it ought not to give us Offence; because we are not to consider what they are off the Stage, but whom they represent: We are to do by them as in Religion we do by the Priest, mind what they say, and not what they do. Tho' the Stage is not so abandon'd but that there are some Honest and Vertuous, for any thing the Town can say to the contrary. And I wou'd leave it to themselves, whether they don't find their Account in it; whether the Town is not more favourable on any Occasion; so that it ought to be an Encouragement to persist in their Vertue.

The Objection against the Play-House it self, because it gives Opportunities for Wickedness, is so trifling, it is hardly worth answering, for they who are viciously inclin'd will find an Opportunity; and as long as the Toleration Act is in force, there is never a Meeting in Town but will afford extraordinary Hints of that kind; the Morning and Evening Lectures are precious Seasons, Mr. Doelittle may thresh his Heart out, there will be Tares among the Wheat; and those Houses are haunted with a sort of Spirits that are not to be cast out with Prayer and Fasting.