The two companies of players, after a long and expensive warfare, had now united their forces; on which occasion Dryden furnished them with a prologue, full of violent Tory principles.  By this united company “The Duke of Guise” was performed on the 30th December 1682.  It was printed with a dedication to Hyde, Earl of Rochester, subscribed by both authors, but evidently the work of Dryden.  It is written in a tone of defiance to the Whig authors, who had assailed the dedicators, it alleges, “like footpads in the dark,” though their blows had done little harm, and the objects of their malice yet lived to vindicate their loyalty in open day.  The play itself has as determined a political character as the dedication.  Besides the general parallel between the leaguers and the fanatical sectaries, and the more delicate, though not less striking, connection between the story of Guise and of Monmouth, there are other collateral allusions in the piece to the history of that unfortunate nobleman, and to the state of parties.  The whole character of Marmoutiere, high-spirited, loyal, and exerting all her influence to deter Guise from the prosecution of his dangerous schemes, corresponds to that of Anne, Duchess of Monmouth.[35] The love too which the king professes to Marmoutiere, and which excites the jealousy of Guise, may bear a remote and delicate allusion to that partiality which the Duke of York is said to have entertained for the wife of his nephew.[36] The amiable colours in which Marmoutiere is painted, were due to the Duchess of Monmouth, Dryden’s especial patroness.  Another more obvious and more offensive parallel existed between the popular party in the city, with the Whig sheriffs at their head, and that of the Echevins, or sheriffs of Paris, violent demagogues and adherents to the League, and who, in the play, are treated with great contumely by Grillon and the royal guards.  The tumults which had taken place at the election of these magistrates were warm in the recollection of the city; and the commitment of the ex-sheriffs, Shute and Pilkington, to the Tower, under pretext of a riot, was considered as the butt of the poet’s satire.  Under these impressions the Whigs made a violent opposition to the representation of the piece, even when the king gave it his personal countenance.  And although, in despite of them, “The Duke of Guise” so far succeeded, as “to be frequently acted, and never without a considerable attendance,” we may conclude from these qualified expressions of the author himself, that the play was never eminently popular.  He, who writes for a party, can only please at most one half of his audience.