[43] [Some important evidence has come to light since Scott wrote, which shows that the response to Dryden’s petitions and the reward of his services was not so insignificant as appears from the text, though it was meagre enough.  The facts were not known fully even to Macaulay, and his ignorance enabled him, in perfect honesty, to make the case against Dryden, for supposed venal apostasy, stronger than it might otherwise appear.  The documents referred to were discovered by Mr. Peter Cunningham and by Mr. Charles Beville Dryden, the latter of whom communicated his discovery to Mr. Robert Bell.  As the facts are undoubted, and Macaulay’s ignorance of them equally so, it seems a little remarkable that a reviewer of the little book on Dryden to which I am too often obliged to refer my readers, should have announced his adherence to “Macaulay and fact” rather than “Mr. Bell and sophistry.”  It is not obvious how fact can be on the side of a writer who was, owing to no fault of his own, ignorant of the fact, and whose ignorance furnished him with his premises.  The state of the case is this.  Dryden’s application to Hyde produced the following Treasury warrant:—­

—­of the sume of Fifty pounds for one quarter of the said Annuity or Pencon due at Mid-summer 1680.  And by Vertue of his Ma’ts Lres of Privy Scale directing an additionall Annuity of One hundred pounds to him the said John Dryden to draw one or more orders for payment of the sume of Twenty five Pounds for one Quarter of the said Annuity due at Lady day 1680.  And let both the said sumes making the sume of Seaventy Five Pounds be satisfyed out of any his Ma’ts Treasure now or hereafter being and remaining in the Receipt of Excheq’r not appropriated to particular uses For w’ch this shal be your Warrant.

  Whitehall Treasury Chambers May the 6th 1684

To our very Loving friend S’r Robert Rochester howard Kn’t Auditor of the Receipt J Ernle’r of his Ma’ts Excheq’r.  Ed Dering Int’r. in officio Auditor Ste:  ffox Recpt see-ij Dni Regis Int’r in Oficio Clei Pell &c.  Mr. Dryden 75_l_.

It will be seen from this that independently of the appointment of the laureateship, Dryden had in or before the year 1679 received an additional pension of L100 a year.  Confirmatory of this is a Treasury order for the quarter of the same pension, due January 5th, 1679, and a secret service payment of the same year, apparently referring to the same pension.  Moreover, on December 17th, 1683, Dryden was appointed collector of customs in the port of London.  The value of this is unknown, but the sum of L5 for collecting the duties on cloth, which is the only part of the emoluments as to which there is documentary evidence, must have been a very small part of it.  Now these two appointments, the laureateship and the collectorship,