with Iron, and some of them are so contrived that they can draw three several sorts of wine out of one Vessel, and by the same tap. The experience is pretty, but the wine is better. Turselinus in his Hist. of Loreto, 1. 3. c. 25, writes that between Easter and Whitsuntide, there have flocked thither sometimes five sometimes six hundred thousand Communicants; and in two days' space in September (about the Feast of the Nativity of our Blessed Saviour) there have appeared two Hundred Thousand Communicants, most of which were Pilgrims.

Having refreshed ourselves in this Cellar, we went to the Apothecaries-shop, belonging to the Holy House also; and furnishing Physic to sick Pilgrims for nothing. There we saw those famous Pots, which make even Physic itself look sweetly, and draw all curious strangers to visit them. For round about a great inner Shop, stand Pots of a great size painted by Raphael Urbin's own hand, and therefore judged by Virtuosi to be of great value. Witness these four only, on which are painted the four Evangelists, for the which were offered by a French Embassador in his King's name four Pots of Gold of the same bigness, and were refused. Brave Raphael, whose only touch of a finger could Midas like, turn Gallipots into Gold. But as Phydias his Statues of Clay were as much adored anciently as his Golden ones: so Raphaels hand is as much admired in the Apothecaries Shop of Loreto as in the Vatican Pallace of Rome. These pots were given to the Holy House by a Duke of Urbin, whose Subject Raphael was, and for whom he had made them with more than ordinary art.'—Voyage of Italy, Part II, pp. 213–4.

6

In 1809, a Guide to the Holy House was printed and published at Loretto, containing an Historical Abridgment of the Prodigious translations of the Holy House of Nazareth', by M. Murri, translated by a member of the order of Cordeliers, and dedicated to his Excellency Lemarois, Governor-General of the three combined departments of Metauro, Musone, and Tronto, Aide de Camp to Napoleon, Emperor and King. It is illustrated with rude wood-cuts, and was no doubt bought in large numbers by pilgrims and others.

In May, 1868, there was some discussion in the Athenaeum, No. 2115, on the whole of the alleged miraculous elements of the story.

NOTE 10.-SUPPOSED NOVEL FOUNDED

NATUR'D MAN'

UPON THE GOOD

Goldsmith is said to have contemplated a narrative version of The Good-Natur'd Man: this novel is stated to have been read by the author to the family of Mr. Bunbury, and there seems to be sufficient evidence that Goldsmith had another novel in preparation a little before his death, but no traces of it remain. The story, as told by Prior, connects itself with Goldsmith's great dramatic success, She Stoops to Conquer. Being pressed by pecuniary difficulties in 1771-2, Goldsmith had at various periods obtained the advance of two or three hundred pounds from Newbery under the engagement of writing a novel, which after the success of The Vicar of Wakefield promised to be one of the most popular speculations. Considerable delay took place in the execution of this undertaking, and when at length submitted to the perusal of the bookseller, it proved to be in great measure the plot of The Good-Natured Man, turned into a tale. Objections being taken to this, the manuscript was returned. Goldsmith declared himself unable or unwilling to write another, but in liquidation of the debt now pressingly demanded, said he should require time to look round for means of raising the money, unless Mr. Newbery chose to take the chance of a play coming forward at Covent Garden. "And yet to tell you the truth, Frank," added the candid poet in making the proposal, "there are great doubts of its success." Newbery accepted the offer, doubtful of being otherwise repaid, and the popularity of She Stoops to Conquer gained, according to the recollection of the narrator, above three hundred pounds more than the sum advanced to the author.' (Prior's Life of Goldsmith, ii. 417.)

SHE STOOPS TO CONQUER

This play was represented at Covent Garden for the first time on March 15, 1773. As in the case of The Good-Natur'd Man, there was the same period of suspense, and the same dilatory proceedings on the part of the manager. Goldsmith in vain implored Colman to take the play and let us make the best of it, and let us have the same measure at least which you have given

6

as bad plays as mine'. The MS. was returned with some not wholly unjustifiable criticisms, accompanied by a promise that the play should nevertheless be acted. Goldsmith then submitted the manuscript to Garrick, who hesitated to approve. Johnson intervened, and consulted both managers with a view to an arrangement, and eventually Colman consented, although reluctantly, that it should be brought out at Covent Garden. Johnson's interest in the play was great from the first. On February 22, 1773, he wrote to Boswell: 'Dr. Goldsmith has a new comedy which is expected in the spring. No name is yet given it. The chief diversion arises from a stratagem by which a lover is made to mistake his future father-in-law's house for an inn. This, you see, borders on farce. The dialogue is quick and gay, and the incidents are so prepared as not to seem improbable' (Boswell's Life, ed. Birkbeck Hill, ii. 205–6). And on March 4, eleven days before the representation, Johnson wrote to the Rev. Mr. White: 'Dr. Goldsmith has a new comedy in rehearsal at Covent Garden, to which the manager predicts ill success. I think it deserves a very kind reception' (Life, ii. 208).

Fortune was to prove kinder in this than in his first play. The way was being prepared for the successful revival of a comedy of manners based on real life, as contrasted with that of the sentimental' or French school which had been so long in fashion. The production by Foote at the Haymarket, by means of puppets, of a piece called The Handsome Housemaid, or Piety in Pattens, which was intended to show how a maiden of low degree, by the mere effects of morality and virtue, raised herself to riches and honour, struck a blow at sentimental comedy from which it was slow to recover. Garrick was swift to note the change in taste, and sent Goldsmith a Prologue with which to lead off his play.

Colman, however, remained sceptical to the last; he had set his mind against the play, refused to supply new dresses and fresh scenery, and sent out his dismal forebodings in the most approved manner of Croaker. Then troubles arose with the actors. Smith threw up Young Marlow; Woodward refused the part of Tony Lumpkin. If there was any conspiracy against poor Goldsmith, he was to have a signal revenge on his enemies.

Nor was this all, for the mere finding a title for the play proved almost insuperable; but Goldsmith's own suggestion was at last adopted, and the final difficulty was thus surmounted. 'We are all in labour,' wrote Johnson, 'for a name to Goldy's play.' What now stands as the sub-title, The Mistakes of a Night,' was the original title fixed on. The Old House a New Inn was put forward as an alternative, and Sir Joshua Reynolds suggested The Belle's Stratagem. The question was solved by Goldsmith himself, possibly from remembering Dryden's line-' But kneels to Conquer, and but stoops to Rise'-and the play was thus happily named.

When at last the play was produced its reception exceeded the expectation of the author or his friends. The members of the Club were present in force to applaud the play; but the spontaneous acclamations and enjoyment of the audience were so great as to render extraneous assistance of this kind unnecessary. Even a hostile critic such as Horace Walpole was obliged to admit its success. Writing to Lady Ossory on March 16 he says, There was a new play by Dr. Goldsmith last night, which succeeded prodigiously' (Letters, viii. 256). As for his enthusiastic friends, Johnson's opinion may be given: 'I know of no comedy for many years that has so much exhilarated an audience; that has answered so much the great end of comedy, making an audience merry.'

The single hiss which is said to have so painfully startled Goldsmith at the beginning of the fifth Act, and to have caused Colman to remark, ‘Pshaw, Doctor, don't be afraid of a squib, when we have been sitting these two hours on a barrel of gunpowder,' related to the trick played off by Tony Lumpkin on Mrs. Hardcastle-an incident which was no doubt based on Madame de Genlis's similar adventure at the hands of Sheridan. It is said that Goldsmith never forgave Colman for his ill-timed jest, if jest it were. But the moderation with which Goldsmith in the Dedication treated Colman's criticisms betrays no such unforgiving resentment. Indeed, as things turned out, there was more need for pity, as may be judged from the account by Prior: The fire of squibs, witticisms, and paragraphs against Colman became incessant; his opinion of the play was attributed to extreme jealousy.... So perseveringly was this warfare carried on, in every

variety of form, that the manager became at last seriously annoyed; he wrote what was considered a penitential letter to Goldsmith, requesting he would "take him off the rack of the newspapers", and in order to escape the annoyance in London, took flight, in the beginning of the second week, to Bath.'

The first representation, as has been said, took place on March 15, and the new comedy was continued each night the theatre was open until May 31. The author took three nights for his benefit (March 18, April 12, and April 19), by which it is estimated he received four or five hundred pounds. On the 5th of May, the tenth day of performance, it was commanded by the King and Queen. During the summer Foote produced the play at the Haymarket; and at Covent Garden it was frequently repeated before the following Christmas. From that time forward it took its place as one of the standard and most acceptable pieces of the British Drama.

Goldsmith had now come to the parting of the ways, and, save in point of reputation and undying fame, the future had little more to offer him. The copyright of his play had passed into the hands of Mr. Francis Newbery, under circumstances already narrated (see Note 10); by that publisher it was entered at Stationers' Hall on March 26, 1773, and duly issued, reaching a fifth edition in the same year.

NOTE 11.-THE THREE PIGEONS. Page 98.

On November 6, 1882, at a meeting of the Cambridge Antiquarian Society, a communication from Dr. J. B. Pearson was read, in which he suggested that The Three Pigeons, at the point where the road from Thame to Abingdon crosses that from London to Oxford, was possibly the site where Goldsmith laid the scene of She Stoops to Conquer. This, however, does not seem probable. The name was often used as the sign of inns and shops in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, notably The Three Pigeons at Brentford, an inn which has acquired celebrity owing to its being one of the few haunts of Shakespeare now remaining. Cp. Ben Jonson's Alchemist.

NOTE 12.-GREEN AND YELLOW DINNERS. Page 113.

Horace Walpole, in a letter written April 7, 1765, describes a dinner at Northumberland House at which he was present, and