"After the Iliad, he undertook (faith

MIST'S JOURNAL, June 8. 1728.)

"the fequel of that work, the Odyssey; and having "fecured the fuccefs by a numerous fubfcription, he "employed fome underlings to perform what, accord

ing to his proposals, fhould come from his own. "hands." To which heavy charge we can in truth oppose nothing but the words of

Mr POPE'S PROPOSAL for the ODYSSEY,

(printed by J. Watts, Jan. 10. 1724.)

"I take this occafion to declare, that the fubfcription "for Shakespear belongs wholly to Mr Tonfon: And "that the benefit of this Proposal is not folely for my 66 own use, but for that of two of my friends, who have "affifted me in this work.” But these very gentlemen are extolled above our poet himself in another of Mist's Journals, March 30. 1728, faying, "That he would "not advise Mr Pope to try the experiment again of getting a great part of a book done by affiftants, "left those extraneous parts should unhappily afcend "to the fublime, and retard the declension of the "whole." Behold! thefe Underlings are become

good writers!

If any fay, that before the faid Proposals were printed, the fubfcription was begun without declaration of such assistance; verily those who set it on foot, or (as their term is) fecured it, to wit, the right honourable the Lord Viscount HARCOURT, were he living, would

teftify, and the right honourable the Lord BATHURST, now living, doth testify the fame is a falfhood.

Sorry I am, that perfons profeffing to be learned, or of whatever rank of authors, fhould either falfely tax, or be falfely taxed. Yet let us, who are only reporters, be impartial in our citations, and pro-ceed.

MIST'S JOURNAL, June 8. 1728.

"Mr Addison raised this author from obfcurity, ob. "tained him the acquaintance and friendship of the "whole body of our nobility, and transferred his power"ful interests with thofe great men to this rising bard, "who frequently levied by that means unusual con"tributions on the public." Which furely cannot be, if, as the author of The Dunciad diffected reporteth; Mr Wycherley had before "introduced him into a fa"miliar acquaintance with the greateft Peers and "brightest Wits then living."

"No fooner (faith the fame Journalist) was his bo"dy lifeless, but this author, reviving his refentment, li"belled the memory of his departed friend; and "what was ftill more heinous, made the scandal pub"lic." Grievous the accufation! unknown the accufer, the perfon accused no witness in his own cause; the perfon, in whose regard accused, dead! but if there be living any one nobleman whofe friendship, yea any one gentleman whofe fubfcription Mr Addifon procured to our author; let him stand forth, that truth may appear! Amicus Plato, amicus Socrates, fed magis

amica veritas. In verity, the whole story of the libel is a lye; witnefs thofe perfons of integrity, who, feveral years before Mr Addifon's deceafe, did fee and approve of the faid verses, in no wife a libel, but a friendly rebuke fent privately in our author's own hand to Mr Addison himself, and never made public, till after their own Journals, and Curl had printed the fame. One name alone, which I am here authorised to declare, will fufficiently evince this truth, that of the right honourable the Earl of BURLINGTON.

Next is he taxed with a crime (in the opinion of fome authors, I doubt, more heinous than any in morality) to wit, Plagiarifm, from the inventive and quaint-conceited

JAMES-MOORE SMITH, Gent.

"z Upon reading the third volume of Pope's Mif"cellanies, I found five lines which I thought excel"lent and happening to praife them, a gentleman "produced a modern comedy (the Rival Modes) pu"blished last year, where were the fame verfes to a ❝ tittle.

"These gentlemen are undoubtedly the first plagia"ries, that pretend to make a reputation by ftealing "from a man's works in his own life-time, and out of (6 a public print." Let us join to this what is written by the author of the Rival Modes, the faid Mr James-Moore Smith, in a letter to our author himself, who had informed him, a month before that play was acted, Jan. 27. 1726-7, that "These verses, which he had

z Daily Journal, March 18. 1728.

*before given him leave to infert in it, would be "known for his, fome copies being got abroad. He de"fires, nevertheless, that since the lines had been read "in his comedy to feveral, Mr P. would not deprive "it of them," &c. Surely, if we add the teftimonies of the Lord BOLINGBROKE, of the Lady to whom the faid verfes were originally addreffed, of Hugh Bethel, Efq; and others, who knew them as our author's, long before the faid gentleman compofed his play; it is hoped, the ingenuous, that affect not error, will rectify their opinion by the fuffrage of fo honourable perfonages.

And yet followeth another charge, infinuating no less than his enmity both to Church and State, which could come from no other informer than the said

Mr JAMES-MOORE SMITH.

"a The Memoirs of a Parish clerk was a very dull ❝and unjust abuse of a person who wrote in defence "of our Religion and Constitution, and who has been "dead many years." ." This feemeth alfo moft untrue; it being known to divers that these Memoirs were written at the feat of the Lord Harcourt in Oxford

fhire, before that excellent perfon (Bishop Burnet's) death, and many years before the appearance of that history, of which they are pretended to be an abuse. Most true it is, that Mr Moore had such a design, and

VOL. III.

F

a Daily Journal, April 3. 1728.

was himself the man who preft Dr Arbuthnot and Mr Pope to affift him therein; and that he borrowed thofe Memoirs of our author, when that history came forth, with intent to turn them to fuch abuse. But being able to obtain from our author but one fingle hint, and either changing his mind, or having more mind than ability, he contented himself to keep the faid Memoirs, and read them as his own to all his acquaintance. A noble person there is, into whose company Mr Pope once chanced to introduce him, who well remembereth the conversation of Mr Moore to have turned upon the "Contempt he had for the "work of that reverend prelate, and how full he was "of a design he declared himself to have of expo"fing it." This noble Perfon is the Earl of PETER

BOROUGH.

Here in truth fhould we crave pardon of all the forefaid right honourable and worthy perfonages, for having mentioned them in the fame page with fuch weekly riff-raff railers and rhymers; but that we had their ever-honoured commands for the fame; and that they are introduced not as witnesses in the controversy, but as witnesses that cannot be controverted; not to difpute, but to decide.

Certain it is, that dividing our writers into two claffes, of fuch who were acquaintance, and of fuch who were strangers to our author; the former are those who fpeak well, and the other those who speak evil of him. Of the first class, the most noble

JOHN Duke of BUCKINGHAM

fums up his character in these lines: