sum of 13007. in prosecutions, for the purpose of removing those inhabitants whom, for instruction in the science of human life, the playhouse had drawn thither."

"Shuter, whose facetious powers convulsed whole audiences with laughter, and whose companionable qualities often set the table in a roar,' was a miserable being. The following anecdote of him, told from the best authority, will confirm this assertion; and, I am afraid, were we acquainted with many of his profession, we should find that his case is by no means a singular one. Shuter had heard Mr. Whitefield, and trembled with apprehension, of a judgment to come; he had also frequently heard Mr. Kinsman, and sometimes visited him in London. One day, accidentally meeting him in Plymouth, after some years of separation, he embraced him with rapture, and inquired if that was the place of his residence. Mr. Kinsman replied, Yes, but I am just returned from London, where I have preached so often, and to such large auditories, and have been so indisposed, that Dr. Fothergill advised my immediate return to the country for change of air.'' And I,' said Shuter, have been acting Sir John Falstaff so often, that I thought I should have died; and the physicians advised me to come into the country for the benefit of the air. Had you died, it would have been in serving the best of Masters; but had I, it would have been

in the service of the Devil. Oh, Sir, do you think I shall ever be called again? I certainly was once, and if Mr. Whitefield had let me come to the Lord's table with him, I never should have gone back again. My Lord E-sent for me to-day, and I was glad I could not go. Poor things they are unhappy, and they want Shuter to make them laugh. But oh, Sir, such a life as yours! As soon as I leave you, I shall be King Richard. This is what they call a good play, as good as some sermons. I acknowledge there are some striking and moral things in it; but after it, I shall come in again with my farce of 'A Dish of all Sorts,' and knock all that on the head. Fine reformers we!'-Poor Shuter! once more thou wilt be an object of sport to the frivolous and the gay, who will now laugh at thee, not for thy drollery, but thy seriousness; and this story will be urged against thee as the weakness of a noble mind. Weakness let it be called; but, in spite of himself, man must be serious at last. And when a player awakes to sober reflection, what agony must seize upon his soul!”

I am, Sir, &c.

LETTER II.

SIR,

On your remarks concerning the literary characters which this town has produced in past ages, I shall decline making any observations. For what is authentic, you deserve the thanks of your readers, as they may not easily find any account of the subjects of this part of your Letters, except in larger and more important compilations. On your estimation of the present state of literature in Reading, I shall offer some strictures, after previously noticing two or three other matters, in the order they stand.

After speaking of the literati of the borough, you take occasion to introduce Reading School as an object of your severe censure. Let us examine the justice and veracity of your assertions on this interesting and important theme. "It is rather surprising," say you, " that this town should have produced so few learned men, considering the advantages the inhabitants possessed, of having their children educated at the FreeGrammar-school, formerly free of all costs, as its name implies." I should be sorry, Sir, to be at all incorrect in what

I have to offer on this subject, which perhaps it may not be easy to enter on, without giving offence to one or another party concerned in the institution. My pen, however, will be guided by truth, as far as it has been in my power to obtain it; but if I should undesignedly fall into any mistake, on its being pointed out, an apology shall readily be made to the learned and worthy head of the school on the one hand, or to its respectable trustees on the other. It appears to me, Sir, that you are as much a stranger to the character and foundation of Reading School, as you are to many other things on which you have presumed to exercise your criticising powers. The school was never free in the sense in which you have asserted it to have been so; nor was it instituted, as you maintain, expressly and exclusively for the benefit of the natives of the town. In the charter of Queen Elizabeth, it is said that "the school was founded and built by her predecessors, for educating the sons of the inhabitants, and others, in literature." This privilege is so far from being confined to natives, that not only all inhabitants, but all other persons, wheresoever they may live, have a right to send their sons to the school.

According to your principles, where could country gentlemen send their children for instruction? For, undoubtedly, the greater part of our public schools, at which they have generally edu cated them, are foundation-schools. And this has

1

been the case more particularly in times past, when there was less probability of these schools having deviated from their original intention, than it is at the present period, when private schools are much more frequent than they were formerly. Indeed, most other foundation-schools are still more restricted by the words of their respective founders than the Reading seminary; but not a single instance can be pointed out, in which those schools exclude all but natives of the place. And the governors or trustees of those schools knew too well their interest, and that of their neighbours, not to encourage strangers to participate in the advantages of the school, either by coming to reside, or by sending their children to board, in the town.

In this sense, the Reading, like many other foundation-schools, is free. The salary was intended to give respectability and permanency to the institution; but it was too small to enable the masters to teach without pay. I am informed, Sir, on authority which I believe cannot be disputed, that neither charter nor statute ever existed, to order that "the sons of the inhabitants, and others," shall be "educated in literature" gratis. Is it to be supposed that a person would be found to educate all the natives of this town, even in the time of Queen Elizabeth, for 107. a-year? If all the natives had been educated gratis, would not the fact have been well known? If the privilege had been