advance of its original, as it might very easily be in the hands of such a master of epigrammatic dialogue. Diplomacy, by Messrs. Rowe had far more original merit in it than is to be found in most adaptations; but these cases stood almost alone. But he contended that the author of a translated or adapted work, however, free the adaptation, should not be classed with the author of an original play, whose only stock-in-trade was a ream of paper, a bundle of quills, and such inventive faculty as God had endowed him with. As regards the unfortunate play which had succeeded in arousing only the bitterest feelings of animosity on the part of the audience, what was there to be said against it, except that the dialogue was dull? Was it blasphemous? Was it indecent? Was it coarse? Was there one word in it which a girl of fifteen might not listen to with moral safety? If such a word could be pointed out to him his defence was at an end, and he deserved all and much more than he had received at the hands of the audience. He was anxious that he should not be supposed to maintain that a dull play should be allowed to pass muster because it was original. By no means. But he did maintain that the extreme difficulty of writing an original play, which shall not only succeed, but which shall deserve to succeed, should be taken into account in estimating an author's punishment. It is easy to write an original play that will succeed. Every play which contains a house on fire, a sinking steamer, a railway accident, and a dance in a casino will (if it is liberally placed on the stage) succeed in spite of itself. In point of fact, nothing could wreck such a piece but
