Thorough analysis, then, of the contemporary evidence will be of decided value both to the general reader and to the specialist who cares to institute minute comparison between the full facts and the usual statements of the case. The familiar, though by no means the best,1 statement of the matter, may be put in the words of Henry Morley: "The Rivals missed success on the first night through bad acting in the part of Sir Lucius O'Trigger. The part was transferred to another actor, and success was complete. In gratitude to Clinch, the actor who thus saved his play, Sheridan wrote his farce of St. Patrick's Day." Beyond question, the implication is that the failure was due wholly to Lee's wretched acting, and that the transfer of his part to Clinch was all that was necessary for complete success.

First of all, even a casual reading of Sheridan's own Preface to the play reveals several additional reasons for its non-success. One was its undue length; another the possibility of malicious opposition in the first-night audience, still another the certainty of opposition from some who thought Sir Lucius O'Trigger a reflection on the Irish gentleman. The extracts given in the Appendix,3 which may be multiplied readily,* from

1 Among the usual omissions in even the best statements of the case are, for example, the wretched acting and utter ignorance of their parts of Shuter and others besides Lee at the first performance, their great subsequent improvement both in acting and in knowledge of the text, and Sheridan's revision of the part of Sir Lucius to remove all suggestion that Sir Lucius was intended as a national reflection upon the Irish gentleman. 2 The Plays of Richard Brinsley Sheridan, Introduction.

3 Pp. 313-316.

♦ Mention may be made, for example, of the communication to The Morning Post of January 20, 1775, a remonstrance against attempts " "to create a prejudice against the performance, by every mode that malevolence could suggest," and the statement in The London Chronicle, for January 21-24, 1775: "Several people in the galleries, who were evidently planted to disturb the performance, were turned out before the third act."

contemporary newspapers, prove that Sheridan spoke not merely truly, but well within the truth.

But the matter does not stop here. Contemporary evidence gives other weighty reasons for the failure of the play. Shuter, who played Sir Anthony Absolute, is criticised almost as harshly as Lee himself, while the other actors, with but few exceptions, are roundly scored by critics of the first performance. Attention has been called by some of Sheridan's biographers to the fact that in so far as The Rivals was a revolt against "sentimental comedy" it ran counter to the dramatic fashion of the day a fact to which Sheridan's second prologue to the play bears witness. But since Faulkland and Julia pleased the sentimentalists, and since the revised production of the play was instantly successful, despite the retention of much that attacked sentimentalism, this in itself cannot fairly be held accountable for the failure of the first performance.

Before turning from the consideration of the initial failure of The Rivals, it will be well to disprove the common assertion that the play was performed a second time before it was withdrawn for alteration. Probably the best explanation of

1

1 Brander Matthews, Sheridan's Comedies, p. 23; and again, p. 65, 1885 ed. (these mistakes are repeated in the 1904 ed., xxii, lx); Lloyd C. Sanders: Life of Richard Brinsley Sheridan, p. 26; G. A. Aitken, Temple edition of The Rivals, Intro. v. Less readily explainable is the statement of G. G. S. [igmond] in his Life of Sheridan, prefixed to the Bohn Library edition of The Dramatic Works of Richard Brinsley Sheridan, 1848 ed., p. 39, who, after comment on Lee's wretched acting at the first performance adds: "Fortunately, on the following night [the italics are mine] Mr. Clinch was his substitute." Since the discovery of this mistake I have found that Mr. Rae, with his usual accuracy, has in a passing clause (Sheridan's Plays: Prefatory Notes, xiii) mentioned "the second [performance] on the 28th." Since, however, this clause can in itself hardly attract the attention it deserves, in view of far more prominent incorrect statements, the massing of the proofs in the case for the first time still seems justifiable.

1

the mistake is furnished by the following extract, which has seemingly never attracted attention, from The Town and Country Magazine, January, 1775. In the course of a critique upon The Rivals occurs this sentence: "After a pretty warm contest towards the end of the last act, it was suffered to be given out for the ensuing night." To this, however, is appended the following significant foot-note: "Mr. Sheridan withdrew it after the first night's representation to make some alterations, as we suppose, similar to those here pointed out." Full corroboration of the latter statement is to be found in contemporary newspapers. The Gazetteer, January 24, gives notice that The Rivals will be performed "for the second time," on Saturday next (the 28th), and on January 30 the same paper says, "The new Comedy of The Rivals, which was performed for the second time on Saturday night, was received with very great applause." The fact is, therefore, that The Rivals was withdrawn after the first performance. The second performance was the successful revision produced January 28.

Quite as obvious as the reasons for the initial failure of The Rivals are the reasons for the success of the revised production. The transfer of Lee's part to Clinch was but one of many factors in the final triumph. Shuter and other actors inadequate at first redeemed themselves, while Sheridan himself subjected the play to thorough condensation and revision. His changes included pruning of dialogue, alteration in the action. of the plot, and especial revision of the part of Sir Lucius. The oft-put query 3 “How could Sir Lucius possibly have been

1 The mistake of later commentators seems due to following Genest (V, 459), who is here incorrect.

2 For additional proofs see the three newspaper extracts On the Revised Performance, pp. 316–318, and the extract from The Critical Review, p. 318.

3 E.g. "Why any one should object to Sir Lucius it is now difficult to discover." Brander Matthews: Sheridan's Comedies, 1885 ed., p. 320

misconstrued into an intended reflection upon the Irish gentleman?" is conclusively answered by the statement that Sheridan, in the revision of the no longer extant text of the original performance, "very judiciously removed everything that could give offence in the character of Sir Lucius O'Trigger." The extracts from contemporary newspapers, which are given in the Appendix,' amply prove the contentions already made the comments on the First Performance giving the reasons for the initial failure of The Rivals, the comments on the Revised Performance giving the reasons for its final success. 4. THE BOOKS OF LYDIA LANGUISH'S CIRCULATING LIBRARY2

The Morning Post of February 3, 1775, contains the following communication: "Mr. Editor, I desire you will inform the Author of the Rivals that his attack upon Circulating Libraries in his first act is unjust, and very impertinent: Besides his sentiments are so inconsistent He pretends to make such fine speeches in his play about love, and to pay such a compliment in the Epilogue to the Ladies, yet would decry novels, which form the very food and sustenance of love. I should be glad to know what are most of the modern comedies but dialogue novels? Are the two Play-houses better than circulating libraries? Only that at Mr. Noble's we may chuse our entertainment, and there the managers chuse it for us; So, as our club consequently honour your paper with a place at our breakfast-table, I desire you will give this notice a place in it instantly, that the Author may expunge the malicious scene, or we will let him know that Ladies can hiss as well as smile. Yours &c. Sukey Saunter."

(1904 ed., p. 253). "Why the audience took offence at the former [i.e. Sir Lucius] must pass the wit of man to decide." Lloyd C. Sanders: Life of Richard Brinsley Sheridan, p. 40. 1 Pp. 313-318.

2 In The Journal of English and Germanic Philology, October, 1905, I have already published a considerable part of the results of the investigation of this subject.

The scene to which Sukey Saunter refers is the second scene of the first act. Somewhat covertly in the dialogue between Lydia and Lucy, more openly in Sir Anthony's denunciation of the circulating library as "an evergreen tree of diabolical knowledge," Sheridan strikes effectively at the sentimental novel of the day. This attitude toward the sentimental novel reinforces powerfully his attitude toward the sentimental drama.1 Popular, however, as were these sentimental novels and dramas, Sheridan did not wage the attack single-handed. Beside his picture of the books of Lydia Languish's circulating library may be put this earlier comment of The London Magazine, April, 1770: "Fatal Friendship' is not a bad title for the novel of a circulating library. It strikes young, and particularly female minds, with a kind of melancholy curiosity." Equally ironical or plainly contemptuous comments appear in some of the magazine reviews of the novels alluded to in Sheridan's scene. Appreciation, not merely of the text of this scene, but of Sheridan's general attitude to the spirit of sentimentality run riot, is helped by an account of The Books of Lydia Languish's Circulating Library.

The following analysis is based solely upon contemporary evidence. The sometimes differing views of the magazine reviewers throw instructive side-lights on the conflict between sentimentality and sentiment. Worthy of comment, too, is the fact that the mild rain of Sheridan's satire falls on the just and the unjustif men are to be judged by the company they keep for Smollett and Sterne appear side by side with Mrs. Fogerty, Mr. and Mrs. Griffith, and others who have passed into the limbo of novelists of a day.

Twenty books are mentioned by Sheridan: The Reward of Constancy; The Fatal Connexion; The Mistakes of the Heart; The Delicate Distress; The Memoirs of Lady Woodford; The Gordian Knot; Peregrine Pickle; The Tears of Sensibility;

1 See Introduction, pp. xliii-xlv.