dedications are uniformly signed John Ford, though he is frequently called Forde by his contemporaries, and the same spelling he seems to have adopted in order to produce the anagram Fide Honor, by which he distinguishes the title of most of his dramas; a conceit which the pedantry of the age must excuse. The meagreness of the following biographical account will be readily excused by the reader who has examined the lives of his dramatical contemporaries, in which we are continually led to lament that our knowledge respecting them amounts to little better than nothing.

The date of his birth has been ascertained by Mr Malone, from the information of the Reverend Mr Palk, vicar of Ilsington in Devonshire, where our poet was baptized, April 17, 1586. He was the second son of Thomas Ford, Esq.; and his family seems to have been respectable at least, as his father was enabled to bestow upon him a liberal education. His studies were directed to the law, and before he arrived at the age of seventeen he became a member of the Middle Temple, where he was entered November 16, 1602 *. Here he seems to have prosecuted his professional studies; but his ambition to be ranked amongst the poets of his country appears to have been very ardent, for in 1606, when he was not yet oneand-twenty, he published an occasional poem

* Shakspeare, Ford, and Jonson, by Mr Malone, printed in the Variorum edition of Shakspeare, 1803, Vol. II. p. 386.

entitled "Fames Memorial, or the Earle of Devonshire deceased; with his honourable Life, peaceful End, and solemne Funeral," and dedicated to the Lady Penelope, Countess of Devonshire. That this was his first appearance in public is evident from the following conclusion of the dedication: "Thus, Madame, presuming on your acceptance, I will in the meane while thinke my willing paines (hitherto confined to the innes of court, studyes much dif ferente), highly guerdoned, and mine unfeathered muse (as soone dead as borne) ritchly graced under the plumes of so worthy a pro

tectresse*."

Though our author did not again seek the favour of the public in print till twenty-three years after this first attempt, he had certainly produced, in the mean time, some plays upon the theatres. When he ventured forth with his Lover's Melancholy in 1629, he expressly stated, in his dedication to the Society of Gray's Inn, "My presumption of coming in print in this kind hath hitherto been unreprovable, this piece being the first that ever courted reader." At what time he commenced his theatrical career it is not in our power to ascertain; but we are fortunately enabled to decide which of his plays was the first which ap

* Reed's edition of Dodsley's Old Plays, 1789, Vol. VIII. p. 3. The original presentation copy in MS. is in the collection of Mr Malone. It is not improbable that he had been induced by the patronage of the Earl of Devonshire to pay this tribute of respect to his memory.

peared upon the stage. In his dedication to the Earl of Peterborough prefixed to 'Tis Pity She's a Whore, he expressly terms that tragedy "the first fruits of his leisure in the action;" and this is evidence sufficient to determine the rank it should hold in a chronological arrangement of his works. From the printer's apology at the conclusion it appears that the drama obtained great commendation for the actors who performed in it; but, notwithstanding this applause, the poet thought fit to withhold it from the press till the year 1633.

Few dramatic authors have commenced their career with a production which more strongly breathes the very soul of poetry; but few have chosen a more unfortunate subject for the display of their talents. The vivid glow of passion with which the incestuous intercourse of Giovanni and Annabella is delineated has justly been termed by Langbaine "too beautiful" for the subject, and the utter wreck and degradation of two characters which are held up to our admiration in the commencement; the one gifted with every qualification of a generous and philosophical soul, the other interesting for every thing which can render a female mind amiable, assails our feelings too powerfully, and renders the perusal of one of the finest plays, in point of pathetic effect, even painful. The conduct of the principal plot is skilfully interwoven with the subordinate one, the interest is not suffered to cool, a defect too frequent in the plays of that age, and the ca

tastrophe is brought about with much dramatic art. With regard to the characters, none of them are amiable without alloy of baseness except the Friar, (a well-drawn copy of Friar Lawrence in Romeo and Juliet,) and the insipid husband of Hippolita. From the whole, however, it may be asserted, that Ford never excelled this his first attempt, though he undoubtedly equalled it in The Broken Heart.

It was probably in the year 1622, or not long after, that our poet joined with Rowley and Dekkar, poets of considerable reputation in their day, in dramatising the story of Mother Sawyer, the witch of Edmonton, a poor creature who was condemned and executed about that period. From the title page of the joint tragedy, it appears to have met with a reception highly favourable, having been acted often at the Cockpit theatre, and once at court, "with singular applause;" notwithstanding which it remained in manuscript till the year 1658, when it was published by two players, Bird and Pennycuicke, to whose necessities during the Rebellion we are indebted for the publication of many plays which might otherwise have shared the fate of Mr Warburton's unfortunate collection. The play, which is chiefly interesting for the singularity of the subject, was probably produced immediately after that instance of judicial folly and superstition had taken place, and perhaps the immediate profit to be expected from the exhibition upon the stage, of what the spectators

had fresh in their minds, from having witnessed the execution at Tyburn, induced the players to employ such an extensive partnership of dramatic authors, in order to bring out the tragedy with the utmost speed. For, besides the three poets mentioned above, several others, whose reputation would not have increased the popularity of the play, joined in the composition, as we learn from the et cætera after the names of Rowley, Dekkar, and Ford. What parts were composed by the several authors it is now impossible to ascertain with any degree of precision. It may, however, be ob served, that the scenes between Frank, Susan, and Winnifred are much in the pathetic style of our author; and as they are written in the regular versification of his known productions, while that of his two principal coadjutors is remarkably rugged, it will not be considered as too great a stretch of hypothesis if we ascribe those scenes to him. They contain great poetical beauties, and few passages in the old plays affect the feelings more forcibly than the tender ebullitions of Susan's attachment, and the terrific agitation of Frank's mind in the scene where the nature of his crime is discovered. The intercourse of Mother Sawyer and her diabolical familiar are an apt illustration of the superstitions of the time, and, as they are much in the style of Dekkar, I should be inclined to ascribe them to that neglected poet, whose reputation cannot be affected by having produced the admirable soliloquy of the old