The court, however, considered the representation of the
piece as at least of dubious propriety. The parallel was capable of
being so extended as to exhibit no very flattering picture of the
king's politics; and, on the other hand, it is possible, that the fate
of the Duke of Guise, as identified with Monmouth, might shock the
feelings of Charles, and the justice of the audience.
Accordingly, we learn from the "Vindication," that the representation
of the piece was prohibited; that it lay in the hands of the lord
chamberlain (Henry Lord Arlington) from before mid-summer, 1682, till
two months after that term; and that orders were not finally given for
its being acted until the month of December in the same year. The
king's tenderness for the Duke of Monmouth had by this time so far
given way, that he had ordered his arrest at Stafford; and, from the
dark preparations on both sides, it was obvious, that no measures were
any longer to be kept betwixt them. All the motives of delicacy and
prudence, which had prevented the representation of this obnoxious
party performance, were now therefore annihilated or overlooked.
Our author's part of the "Duke of Guise" is important, though not of
great extent, as his scenes contain some of the most striking
political sketches. The debate of the Council of Sixteen, with which
the play opens, was his composition; the whole of the fourth act,
which makes him responsible for the alleged parallel betwixt Guise and
Monmouth, and the ridicule cast upon the sheriffs and citizens of the
popular party, with the first part of the fifth, which implicates him
in vindicating the assassination of Guise.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25