ch he comprehends the Rabble of Readers, whom he does
not treat as such with regard to their Quality, but to their Numbers and
Coarseness of their Taste. His Words are as follow:

'_Segrais_ has distinguished the Readers of Poetry, according to their
Capacity of judging, into three Classes. [He might have said the same
of Writers too, if he had pleased.] In the lowest Form he places those
whom he calls _Les Petits Esprits_, such thingsas are our
Upper-Gallery Audience in a Play-house; who like nothing but the Husk
and Rind of Wit, prefer a Quibble, a Conceit, an Epigram, before solid
Sense and elegant Expression: These are Mob Readers. If _Virgil_ and
_Martial_ stood for Parliament-Men, we know already who would carry
it. But though they make the greatest Appearance in the Field, and cry
the loudest, the best on't is they are but a sort of _French_
Huguenots, or _Dutch_ Boors, brought over in Herds, but not
Naturalized; who have not Lands of two Pounds _per Annum_ in
_Parnassus_, and therefore are not privileged to poll. Their Authors
are of the same Level, fit to represent them on a Mountebank's Stage,
or to be Masters of the Ceremonies in a Bear-garden: Yet these are
they who have the most Admirers. But it often happens, to their
Mortification, that as their Readers improve their Stock of Sense, (as
they may by reading better Books, and by Conversation with Men of
Judgment) they soon forsake them.'

I [must not dismiss this Subject without [8]] observing that as Mr.
_Lock_ in the Passage above-mentioned has discovered the most fruitful
Source of Wit, so there is another of a quite contrary Nature to it,
which does likewise branch it self out into several kinds. For not only
the _Resemblance_, but the _Opposition_ of Ideas, does very often
produce Wit; as I could shew in several little Points, Turns and
Antitheses, that I may possibly enlarge upon in some future Speculation.

C.

[Footnote 1: 'Essay concerning Human Understanding', Bk II. ch. II (p.
68 of ed. 1690; the first).]

[Footonote 2:

'If Wit has truly been defined as a Propriety of Thoughts and Words,
then that definition will extend to all sorts of Poetry... Propriety
of Thought is that Fancy which arises naturally from the Subject, or
which the Poet adapts to it. Propriety of Words is the cloathing of
these Thoughts with such Expressions as are naturally proper to them.'

Dryden's Preface to 'Alb