"The best good man with the worst-natured muse;"
and Pope says he was
"The scourge of pride, though sanctified or great, Of fops in learning and of knaves in state."
Our sailors still sing the ballad which he is said to have written on the eve of the naval engagement between the Duke of York and Admiral Opdam, which begins--
"To all you ladies now on land We men at sea indite."
With a fine cla.s.sical taste and a courageous spirit, he had in early days been guilty of as much iniquity as any of Charles"s profligate court. He was one of a band of young libertines who robbed and murdered a poor tanner on the high-road, and were acquitted, less on account of the poor excuse they dished up for this act than of their rank and fashion. Such fine gentlemen could not be hanged for the sake of a mere workman in those days--no! no! Yet he does not seem to have repented of this transaction, for soon after he was engaged with Sedley and Ogle in a series of most indecent acts at the c.o.c.k Tavern in Bow-street, where Sedley, in "birthday attire," made a blasphemous oration from the balcony of the house. In later years he was the pride of the poets: Dryden and Prior, Wycherley, Hudibras, and Rymer, were all encouraged by him, and repaid him with praises. Pope and Dr. King were no less bountiful in their eulogies of this Maecenas. His conversation was so much appreciated that gloomy William III. chose him as his companion, as merry Charles had done before. The famous Irish ballad, which my Uncle Toby was always humming, "Lillibullero bullen-a-lah," but which Percy attributes to the Marquis of Wharton, another member of the Kit-kat, was said to have been written by Buckhurst. He retained his wit to the last; and Congreve, who visited him when he was dying, said, "Faith, he stutters more wit than other people have in their best health." He died at Bath in 1706.
Buckhurst does not complete the list of conspicuous members of this club, but the remainder were less celebrated for their wit. There was the Duke of Kingston, the father of Lady Mary Wortley Montagu; Granville, who imitated Waller, and attempted to make his "Myra" as celebrated as the court-poet"s Saccharissa, who, by the way, was the mother of the Earl of Sunderland; the Duke of Devonshire, whom Walpole calls "a patriot among the men, a gallant among the ladies," and who founded Chatsworth; and other n.o.blemen, chiefly belonging to the latter part of the seventeenth century, and all devoted to William III., though they had been bred at the courts of Charles and James.
With such an array of wits, poets, statesmen, and gallants, it can easily be believed that to be the toast of the Kit-kat was no slight honour; to be a member of it a still greater one; and to be one of its most distinguished, as Congreve was, the greatest. Let us now see what t.i.tle this conceited beau and poet had to that position.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 13: The Kit-kat club was not founded till 1703.]
[Footnote 14: For some notice of Lord Dorset, see p. 61.]
WILLIAM CONGREVE.
When and where was he born?--The Middle Temple.--Congreve finds his Vocation.--Verses to Queen Mary.--The Tennis-court Theatre.--Congreve abandons the Drama.--Jeremy Collier.--The Immorality of the Stage.--Very improper Things.--Congreve"s Writings.--Jeremy"s "Short Views."--Rival Theatres.--Dryden"s Funeral.--A Tub-Preacher.--Horoscopic Predictions.--Dryden"s Solicitude for his Son.--Congreve"s Ambition.--Anecdote of Voltaire and Congreve.--The Profession of Maecenas.--Congreve"s Private Life.--"Malbrook"s" Daughter.--Congreve"s Death and Burial.
When "Queen Sarah" of Marlborough read the silly epitaph which Henrietta, d.u.c.h.ess of Marlborough, had written and had engraved on the monument she set up to Congreve, she said, with one of the true Blenheim sneers, "I know not what _happiness_ she might have in his company, but I am sure it was no _honour_," alluding to her daughter"s eulogistic phrases.
Queen Sarah was right, as she often was when condemnation was called for: and however amusing a companion the dramatist may have been, he was not a man to respect, for he had not only the common vices of his age, but added to them a foppish vanity, toadyism, and fine gentlemanism (to coin a most necessary word), which we scarcely expect to meet with in a man who sets up for a satirist.
It is the fate of greatness to have falsehoods told of it, and of nothing in connection with it more so than of its origin. If the converse be true, Congreve ought to have been a great man, for the place and time of his birth are both subjects of dispute. Oh! happy Gifford!
or happy Croker! why did you not--perhaps you did--go to work to set the world right on this matter--you, to whom a date discovered is the highest palm (no pun intended, I a.s.sure you) of glory, and who would rather Shakespere had never written "Hamlet," or Homer the "Iliad," than that some miserable little forgotten sc.r.a.p which decided a year or a place should have been consigned to flames before it fell into your hands? Why did you not bring the thunder of your abuse and the pop-gunnery of your satire to bear upon the question, "How, when, and where was William Congreve born?"
It was Lady Morgan, I think, who first "saw the light" (that is, if she was born in the day-time) in the Irish Channel. If it had been only some one more celebrated, we should have had by this time a series of philosophical, geographical, and ethnological pamphlets to prove that she was English or Irish, according to the fancies or prejudices of the writers. It was certainly a very Irish thing to do, which is one argument for the Milesians, and again it was done in the Irish Channel, which is another and a stronger one; and altogether we are not inclined to go into forty-five pages of recondite facts and fine-drawn arguments, mingled with the most vehement abuse of anybody who ever before wrote on the subject, to prove that this country had the honour of producing her ladyship--the Wild Irish Girl. We freely give her up to the sister island. But not so William Congreve, though we are equally indifferent to the honour in his case.
The one party, then, a.s.sert that he was born in this country, the other that he breathed his first air in the Emerald Isle. Whichever be the true state of the case, we, as Englishmen, prefer to agree in the commonly received opinion that he came into this wicked world at the village of Bardsea, or Bardsey, not far from Leeds in the county of York. Let the Bardseyans immediately erect a statue to his honour, if they have been remiss enough to neglect him heretofore.
But our difficulties are not ended, for there is a similar doubt about the year of his birth. His earliest biographer a.s.sures us he was born in 1672, and others that he was baptized three years before, in 1669. Such a proceeding might well be taken as a proof of his Hibernian extraction, and accordingly we find Malone supporting the earlier date, producing, of course, a certificate of baptism to support himself; and as we have a very great respect for his authority, we beg also to support Mr.
Malone.
This being settled, we have to examine who were his parents: and this is satisfactorily answered by his earliest biographer, who informs us that he was of a very ancient family, being "the only surviving son of William Congreve, Esq. (who was second son to Richard Congreve, Esq., of Congreve and Stretton in that county)," to wit, Yorkshire. Congreve _pere_ held a military command, which took him to Ireland soon after the dramatist"s birth, and thus young William had the incomparable advantage of being educated at Kilkenny, and afterwards at Trinity, Dublin, the "silent sister," as it is commonly called at our universities.
At the age of nineteen, this youth sought the cla.s.sic shades of the Middle Temple, of which he was entered a student, but by the honourable society of which he was never called to the bar; but whether this was from a disinclination to study "c.o.ke upon Lyttleton," or from an incapacity to digest the requisite number of dinners, the devouring of which qualify a young gentleman to address an enlightened British jury, we have no authority for deciding. He was certainly not the first, nor the last, young Templar who has quitted special pleading on a crusade to the heights of Parna.s.sus, and he began early to try the nib of his pen and the colour of his ink in a novel. Eheu! how many a novel has issued from the dull, dirty chambers of that same Temple! The waters of the Thames just there seem to have been augmented by a mingled flow of sewage and Helicon, though the former is undoubtedly in the greater proportion. This novel, called "Incognita; or, Love and Duty Reconciled," seems to have been--for I confess that I have not read more than a chapter of it, and hope I never may be forced to do so--great rubbish, with good store of villains and ruffians, love-sick maidens who tune their lutes--always conveniently at hand--and love-sick gallants who run their foes through the body with the greatest imaginable ease.
It was, in fact, such a novel as James might have written, had he lived a century and a half ago. It brought its author but little fame, and accordingly he turned his attention to another branch of literature, and in 1693 produced "The Old Bachelor," a play of which Dryden, his friend, had so high an opinion that he called it the "best first-play he had ever read." However, before being put on the stage it was submitted to Dryden, and by him and others prepared for representation, so that it was well fathered. It was successful enough, and Congreve thus found his vocation. In his dedication--a regular piece of flummery of those days, for which authors were often well paid, either in cash or interest--he acknowledges a debt of grat.i.tude to Lord Halifax, who appears to have taken the young man by the hand.
The young Templar could do nothing better now than write another play.
Play-making was as fashionable an amus.e.m.e.nt in those days of Old Drury, the only patented theatre then, as novel-writing is in 1860; and when the young ensign, Vanbrugh, could write comedies and take the direction of a theatre, it was no derogation to the dignity of the Staffordshire squire"s grandson to do as much. Accordingly, in the following year he brought out a better comedy, "The Double Dealer," with a prologue which was spoken by the famous Anne Bracegirdle. She must have been eighty years old when Horace Walpole wrote of her to that other Horace--Mann: "Tell Mr. Chute that his friend Bracegirdle breakfasted with me this morning. As she went out and wanted her clogs, she turned to me and said: "I remember at the playhouse they used to call, Mrs. Oldfield"s chair! Mrs. Barry"s clogs! and Mrs. Bracegirdle"s pattens!"" These three ladies were all buried in Westminster Abbey, and, except Mrs. Cibber, the most beautiful and most sinful of them all--though they were none of them spotless--are the only actresses whose ashes and memories are hallowed by the place, for we can scarcely say that they do _it_ much honour.
The success of "The Double Dealer," was at first moderate, although that highly respectable woman, Queen Mary, honoured it with her august presence, which forthwith called up verses of the old adulatory style, though with less point and neatness than those addressed to the Virgin Queen:
"Wit is again the care of majesty,"
said the poet, and
"Thus flourished wit in our forefathers" age, And thus the Roman and Athenian stage.
Whose wit is best, we"ll not presume to tell, But this we know, our audience will excell; For never was in Rome, nor Athens seen So fair a circle, and so bright a queen."
But this was not enough, for when Her Majesty departed for another realm in the same year, Congreve put her into a highly eulogistic pastoral, under the name of Pastora, and made some compliments on her, which were considered the finest strokes of poetry and flattery combined, that an age of addresses and eulogies could produce.
"As lofty pines o"ertop the lowly steed, So did her graceful height all nymphs exceed, To which excelling height she bore a mind Humble as osiers, bending to the wind.
I mourn Pastora dead; let Albion mourn, And sable clouds her chalkie cliffs adorn."
This play was dedicated to Lord Halifax, of whom we have spoken, and who continued to be Congreve"s patron.
The fame of the young man was now made; but in the following year it was destined to shine out more brilliantly still. Old Betterton--one of the best Hamlets that ever trod the stage, and of whom Booth declared that when he was playing the Ghost to his Hamlet, his look of surprise and horror was so natural, that Booth could not for some minutes recover himself--was now a veteran in his sixtieth year. For forty years he had walked the boards, and made a fortune for the patentees of Drury. It was very shabby of them, therefore, to give some of his best parts to younger actors. Betterton was disgusted, and determined to set up for himself, to which end he managed to procure another patent, turned the Queen"s Court in Portugal Row, Lincoln"s Inn, into a theatre, and opened it on the 30th of April, 1695. The building had been before used as a theatre in the days of the Merry Monarch, and Tom Killegrew had acted here some twenty years before; but it had again become a "tennis-quatre of the lesser sort," says Cibber, and the new theatre was not very grand in fabric. But Betterton drew to it all the best actors and actresses of his former company; and Mrs. Barry and Mrs. Bracegirdle remained true to the old man. Congreve, to his honour, espoused the same cause, and the theatre opened with his play of "Love for Love," which was more successful than either of the former. The veteran himself spoke the prologue, and fair Bracegirdle the epilogue, in which the poet thus alluded to their change of stage:
"And thus our audience, which did once resort To shining theatres to see our sport, Now find us tost into a tennis-court.
Thus from the past, we hope for future grace: I beg it---- And some here know I have a _begging face_."
The king himself completed the success of the opening by attending it, and the theatre in Lincoln"s Inn Fields might have ruined the older house, if it had not been for the rapidity with which Vanbrugh and Cibber, who wrote for Old Drury, managed to concoct their pieces; while Congreve was a slower, though perhaps better, writer. "Love for Love"
was hereafter a favourite of Betterton"s, and when in 1709, a year before his death, the company gave the old man--then in ill health, poor circ.u.mstances, and bad spirits--a benefit, he chose this play, and himself, though more than seventy, acted the part of Valentine, supported by Mrs. Bracegirdle as Angelina, and Mrs. Barry as Frail.
The young dramatist with all his success, was not satisfied with his fame, and resolved to show the world that he had as much poetry as wit in him. This he failed to do; and, like better writers, injured his own fame, by not being contented with what he had. Congreve--the wit, the dandy, the man about town--took it into his head to write a tragedy. In 1697 "The Mourning Bride" was acted at the Tennis Court Theatre. The author was wise enough to return to his former muse, and some time after produced his best piece, so some think, "The Way of the World," which was also performed by Betterton"s company; but, alas! for overwriting--that cacoethes of imprudent men--it was almost hissed off the stage. Whether this was owing to a weariness of Congreve"s style, or whether at the time of its first appearance Collier"s attacks, of which anon, had already disgusted the public with the obscenity and immorality of this writer, I do not know: but, whatever the cause, the consequence was that Mr. William Congreve, in a fit of pique, made up his mind never to write another piece for the stage--a wise resolution, perhaps--and to turn fine gentleman instead. With the exception of composing a masque called the "Judgment of Paris," and an opera "Gemele," which was never performed, he kept this resolution very honestly; and so Mr. William Congreve"s career as a playwright ends at the early age of thirty.
But though he abandoned the drama, he was not allowed to retire in peace. There was a certain worthy, but peppery little man, who, though a Jacobite and a clergyman, was stanch and true, and as superior in character--even, indeed, in vigour of writing--to Congreve, as Somers was to every man of his age. This very Jeremy Collier, to whom we owe it that there is any English drama fit to be acted before our sisters and wives in the present day. Jeremy, the peppery, purged the stage in a succession of Jeremiads.
Born in 1650, educated at Cambridge as a poor scholar, ordained at the age of twenty-six, presented three years later with the living of Ampton, near Bury St. Edmunds, Jeremy had two qualities to recommend him to Englishmen--respectability and pluck. In an age when the clergy were as bad as the blackest sheep in their flocks, Jeremy was distinguished by purity of life; in an age when the only safety lay in adopting the principles of the Vicar of Bray, Jeremy was a Nonjuror, and of this nothing could cure him. The Revolution of 1688 was scarcely effected, when the fiery little partizan published a pamphlet, which was rewarded by a residence of some months in Newgate, _not_ in capacity of chaplain.
But he was scarcely let out, when again went his furious pen, and for four years he continued to a.s.sail the new government, till his hands were shackled and his mouth closed in the prison of "The Gate-house."
Now, see the character of the man. He was liberated upon giving bail, but had no sooner reflected on this liberation than he came to the conclusion that it was wrong, by offering security, to recognize the authority of magistrates appointed by a usurper, as he held William to be, and voluntarily surrendered himself to his judges. Of course he was again committed, but this time to the King"s Bench, and would doubtless in a few years have made the tour of the London prisons, if his enemies had not been tired of trying him. Once more at liberty, he pa.s.sed the next three years in retirement.
After 1693, Jeremy Collier"s name was not brought before the public till 1696, when he publicly absolved Sir John Friend and Sir William Perkins, at their execution, for being concerned in a plot to a.s.sa.s.sinate King William. His "Essays on Moral Subjects" were published in 1697; 2nd vol., 1705; 3rd vol., 1709. But the only way to put out a firebrand like this is to let it alone, and Jeremy, being, no longer persecuted, began, at last, to think the game was grown stupid, and gave it up. He was a well-meaning man, however, and as long as he had the luxury of a grievance, would injure no one.
He found one now in the immorality of his age, and if he had left politics to themselves from the first, he might have done much more good than he did. Against the vices of a court and courtly circles it was useless to start a crusade single-handed; but his quaint clever pen might yet dress out a powerful Jeremiad against those who encouraged the licentiousness of the people. Jeremy was no Puritan, for he was a Nonjuror and a Jacobite, and we may, therefore, believe that the cause was a good one, when we find him adopting precisely the same line as the Puritans had done before him. In 1698 he published, to the disgust of all Drury and Lincoln"s Inn, his "Short View of the Immorality and Profaneness of the English Stage, together with the Sense of Antiquity upon this Argument."
While the King of Naples is supplying his ancient Venuses with gowns, and putting his Mars and Hercules into pantaloons, there are--such are the varieties of opinion--respectable men in this country who call Paul de k.o.c.k the greatest moral writer of his age, and who would yet like to see "The Relapse," "Love for Love," and the choice specimens of Wycherley, Farquhar, and even of Beaumont and Fletcher, acted at the Princess"s and the Haymarket in the year of grace 1860. I am not writing "A Short View" of this or any other moral subject; but this I must say--the effect of a sight or sound on a human being"s silly little pa.s.sions must of necessity be relative. Staid people read "Don Juan,"
Lewis"s "Monk," the plays of Congreve, and any or all of the publications of Holywell Street, without more than disgust at their obscenity and admiration for their beauties. But could we be pardoned for putting these works into the hands of "sweet seventeen," or making Christmas presents of them to our boys? Ignorance of evil is, to a certain extent, virtue: let boys be boys in purity of mind as long as they can: let the unrefined "great unwashed" be treated also much in the same way as young people. I maintain that to a coa.r.s.e mind all improper ideas, however beautifully clothed, suggest only sensual thoughts--nay, the very modesty of the garments makes them the more insidious--the more dangerous. I would rather give my boy Jonson, Ma.s.singer, or Beaumont and Fletcher, whose very improper things "are called by their proper names,"
than let him dive in the prurient innuendo of these later writers.
But there is no need to argue the question--the public has decided it long since, and, except in indelicate ballets, and occasional rather _French_ pa.s.sages in farce, our modern stage is free from immorality.
Even in Garrick"s days, when men were not much more refined than in those of Queen Anne, it was found impossible to put the old drama on the stage without considerable weeding. Indeed I doubt if even the liberal upholder of Paul de k.o.c.k would call Congreve a moral writer; but I confess I am not a competent judge, for _risum teneatis_, my critics, I have not read his works since I was a boy, and what is more, I have no intention of reading them. I well remember getting into my hands a large thick volume, adorned with miserable woodcuts, and bearing on its back the t.i.tle "Wycherley, Congreve, Vanbrugh, and Farquhar." I devoured it at first with the same avidity with which one might welcome a bottle-imp, who at the hour of one"s dulness turned up out of the carpet and offered you delights new and old for nothing but a tether on your soul: and with a like horror, boy though I was, I recoiled from it when any better moment came. It seemed to me, when I read this book, as if life were too rotten for any belief, a nest of sharpers, adulterers, cut-throats, and prost.i.tutes. There was none--as far as I remember--of that amiable weakness, of that better sentiment, which in Ben Jonson or Ma.s.singer reconcile us to human nature. If truth be a test of genius, it must be a proof of true poetry, that man is not made uglier than he is.
Nay, his very ugliness loses its intensity and palls upon our diseased tastes, for want of some goodness, some purity and honesty to relieve it. I will not say that there is none of this in Congreve. I only know, that my recollection of his plays is like that of a vile nightmare, which I would not for anything have return to me. I have read, since, books as bad, perhaps worse in some respects, but I have found the redemption here and there. I would no more place Shandy in any boy"s hands than Congreve and Farquhar; and yet I can read Tristram again and again with delight; for amid all that is bad there stand out Trim and Toby, pure specimens of the best side of human nature, coming home to us and telling us that the world is not all bad. There may be such touches in "Love for Love," or "The Way of the World"--I know not and care not.
To my remembrance Congreve is but a horrible nightmare, and may the fates forbid I should be forced to go through his plays again.