even were there not the old Ballad and the circumstance before mentioned (p. 315) existing to fix the story to a much earlier period. The dates of these letters should have been given, and the work mentioned in which they were originally inserted. It appears to me, to be a story built upon the play of George Barnwell, rather than as having given rise to the play. The account, if true, proves the very pernicious tendency of The Beggar's Opera. March 14. DOUGLAS.. AT p. 254 of my Preface to Douglas, I have said that "When the play was performed at Lady De Crespigny's "Private Theatre at Camberwell, in the year 1790, she "altered it to save the lives of Lady Randolph and her ❝ son." Wishing much to see that alteration; I applied to Lady De C. through a friend, for the perusal of it; and for permission to print it, should it appear to me to be de-sirable. This request was complied with in the most obliging manner; and I have now the pleasure of laying it before the reader and the performer, who may adopt either one or the other conclusion of the play, as may appear to him the best. V Mr. Pye, in the XIIth chapter of his Commentary Il ́lustrating the Poetic of Aristotle, Note v. p. 268,, seems to prefer a happy ending to Douglas, and alludes most probably to this: The catastrophe of King Lear "and of Douglas are both derived from accident. Tate "has altered the first by making the messenger arrive "only an instant sooner in the prison; in the original "he comes time enough to save the king. The other << may be altered, and I believe has been on a private "theatre, by making Douglas turn a moment sooner on "Glenalvon." Had I received this alteration sooner, I should have printed it in the place of the other conclusion, reserving that for the Appendix. The printing two terminations to the same play is a thing not altogether without precedent. Sir John Suckling so contrived his Aglaura, that, by means of an alteration in the fifth. act, it might be performed either as a tragic-comedy, or a perfect tragedy. Sir Robert Howard wrote two fifth acts to his Vestal Virgin, the one of which ends tra gically, the other successfully; " and it is not in the "least unlikely," (says the author of that article in the Biogr. Dram. Edn. 1812. Vol. III. p. 379) " that these "different acts might at different times be performed to "the play, to suit the various tastes of the audience; 66 as we find to have been expressly the practice with re(6 gard to Romeo and Juliet, as altered by Mr. James "Howard; which see under our account of that play." Same Vol. p. 222. See Aglaura, Vol. II. p. 9. This alteration of Douglas was performed at Lady De Crespigny's Private Theatre, April 4, 1789, not in the year 1790, as I have before stated. The Prologue spoken on the occasion is printed in the European Magazine for June 1789, Vol. XV. p. 492. Her Ladyship speaks of her work in these unassuming terms: "In the following alterations I have endeavoured to preserve such parts of each speech as tended to affect "the passions, which I think are more agreeably in"terested when joined to a ray of hope, than when ❝ united to despair. "I am conscious of my great inability to keep up to "the spirit of the author, but hope that the gratification 66 arising to our feelings from this more pleasing, and I "think more just, conclusion of the drama will com66 pensate for all deficiencies. "Those passages where I have taken the words or 16 sense of the author are given in Italics. "Being now, so many years after, called upon for "the alterations, I must observe, that however reluctant "I might have felt, or whatever objections there were "to my taking the liberty of altering a work of so "justly-celebrated an author as Mr Home, there was "one circumstance which obliged me to conquer that "reluctance, and to set aside any objections to my do ing so, which was the being to perform the part of "Lady Randolph with my own son as Douglas. I felt "certain that I could not have gone through the part in ❝ its usual form. I had neither abilities strong enough "to encounter such difficult scenes, nor feelings languid "enough not to be overcome by them from maternal sen"sations; and however deficient my other arguments 66 might be in favour of the alterations, my own feelings 66 must, in the above case, have excited attention, and will, I hope, plead my excuse for the liberty I ❝ took." 66 The same apology was made in the concluding lines of the PROLOGUE mentioned before, written by Mr. Fitz GERALD. "If in our Play some alter'd Scenes you find, "They owe their merit to a Female Mind, "Whose tender bosom, e'en in fictious grief, "Shrunk from the woe that can't admit relief; "And felt the DRAMA went beyond its art, "Rending the chords that nerve a MOTHER's heart! "Such motives might the sternest censure bend, "And change the Critic to th' approving Friend!" I have made some few alterations from the original maruscript with Lady De Crespigny's assent. DOUGLAS, Act V. page 315. Enter DOUGLAS with a sword in each hand.. Doug. My mother's voice! I can protect thee still. Lady Rand. He lives, he lives: For this, for this to Heaven eternul praise! But sure I saw thee fall? Doug. It was Glenalvon. Just as my arm had master'd Randolph's sword, The villain came behind me ;-but I slew him. Lady Rand. Thanks, gracious Heav'n! To see thee safe, my son, Fills with such boundless joy this grateful heart, That I can scarce give utterance to my transports. Enter OLD NORVAL. 0. Norval. Fly, Douglas, fly! Forgive me, noble Lady But, as your valiant son is dear to you, O send him hence! The time admits not now Of explanation.-Treach'ry seeks his life, And the next moment may be big with horrors. Lady Rand. Full well I know he is no welcome guest On these his own domains.-Alas, my child! Doug. Must I then perish by a villain's hand! Lady Rand. Olinger not, my son.-To Douglas' tent |