A more formal attack was made in a pamphlet, entitled, “Some Reflections on the pretended parallel in the Play called the Duke of Guise.”  This Dryden, in the following Vindication, supposes to have been sketched by Shadwell, and finished by a gentleman of the Temple[4].  In these Reflections, the obvious ground of attack, occupied by Hunt, is again resumed.  The general indecency of a theatrical exhibition, which alluded to state-transactions of a grave and most important nature; the indecorum of comparing the king to such a monarch as Henry III., infamous for treachery, cruelty, and vices of the most profligate nature; above all, the parallel betwixt the Dukes of Monmouth and Guise, by which the former is exhibited as a traitor to his father, and recommended as no improper object for assassination—­are topics insisted on at some length, and with great vehemence.

Our author was not insensible to these attacks, by which his loyalty to the king, and the decency of his conduct towards Monmouth, the king’s offending, but still beloved, son, and once Dryden’s own patron, stood painfully compromised.  Accordingly, shortly after these pamphlets had appeared, the following advertisement was annexed to “The Duke of Guise:” 

“There was a preface intended to this play in vindication of it, against two scurrilous libels lately printed; but it was judged, that a defence of this nature would require more room than a preface reasonably could allow.  For this cause, and for the importunities of the stationers, who hastened their impression, it is deferred for some little time, and will be printed by itself.  Most men are already of opinion, that neither of the pamphlets deserve an answer, because they are stuffed with open falsities, and sometimes contradict each other; but, for once, they shall have a day or two thrown away upon them, though I break an old custom for their sakes, which was,—­to scorn them.”

The resolution, thus announced, did not give universal satisfaction to our author’s friends; one of whom published the following remonstrance, which contains some good sense, in very indifferent poetry: 

  An Epode to his worthy Friend JOHN DRYDEN, to advise him not to
    answer two malicious Pamphlets against his Tragedy called “The
    Duke of Guise.” (Marked by Luttrel, 10 March, 1683/4.)

  Can angry frowns rest on thy noble brow
    For trivial things;
  Or, can a stream of muddy water flow
    From the Muses’ springs;
  Or great Apollo bend his vengeful bow
    ’Gainst popular stings? 
  Desist thy passion then; do not engage
  Thyself against the wittols of the age.

  Should we by stiff Tom Thimble’s faction fall,
    Lord, with what noise
  The Coffee throats would bellow, and the Ball
    O’ the Change rejoice,
  And with the company of Pinner’s Hall
    Lift up their voice! 
  Once the head’s gone, the good cause is secure;
  The members cannot long resist our power.