rhetoric taught out of the rules of Plato, Aristotle, Phalereus, Cicero, Hermogenes, Longinus.  To which poetry would be made subsequent, or, indeed, rather precedent, as being less subtile and fine, but more simple, sensuous, and passionate.  I mean not here the prosody of a verse, which they could not but have hit on before among the rudiments of grammar; but that sublime art which in Aristotle’s Poetics, in Horace, and the Italian commentaries of Castelvetro, Tasso, Mazzoni, and others, teaches what the laws are of a true epic poem, what of a dramatic, what of a lyric, what decorum is, which is the grand masterpiece to observe.  This would make them soon perceive what despicable creatures our common rhymers and play-writers be; and show them what religious, what glorious and magnificent use might be made of poetry, both in divine and human things.]

[Footnote 15:  [in]]

[Footnote 16:  [Saturdays Paper]]

* * * * *

No. 298.  Monday, February 11, 1712.  Steele.

  Nusquam Tuta fides.

  Virg.

  London, Feb. 9, 1711-12.

  Mr. SPECTATOR,

I am a Virgin, and in no Case despicable; but yet such as I am I must remain, or else become, tis to be feared, less happy:  for I find not the least good Effect from the just Correction you some time since gave, that too free, that looser Part of our Sex which spoils the Men; the same Connivance at the Vices, the same easie Admittance of Addresses, the same vitiated Relish of the Conversation of the greatest of Rakes (or in a more fashionable Way of expressing ones self, of such as have seen the World most) still abounds, increases, multiplies.

The humble Petition therefore of many of the most strictly virtuous, and of my self, is, That you’ll once more exert your Authority, and that according to your late Promise, your full, your impartial Authority, on this sillier Branch of our Kind:  For why should they be the uncontroulable Mistresses of our Fate?  Why should they with Impunity indulge the Males in Licentiousness whilst single, and we have the dismal Hazard and Plague of reforming them when married?  Strike home, Sir, then, and spare not, or all our maiden Hopes, our gilded Hopes of nuptial Felicity are frustrated, are vanished, and you your self, as well as Mr. Courtly, will, by smoothing over immodest Practices with the Gloss of soft and harmless Names, for ever forfeit our Esteem.  Nor think that I’m herein more severe than need be:  If I have not reason more than enough, do you and the World judge from this ensuing Account, which, I think, will prove the Evil to be universal.

You must know then, that since your Reprehension of this Female Degeneracy came out, I’ve had a Tender of Respects from no less than five Persons, of tolerable Figure too as Times go:  But the Misfortune