he piece
thoroughly, and says, "From internal evidence, it must be inferred that
the writing of the play was finished after the publication of 'Common
Sense' in January, 1776, and before the news had reached Philadelphia of
the evacuation of Boston, March 17, 1776." Though Sabin takes for
granted that Leacock wrote "The Fall of British Tyranny," Hildeburn, in
the "Issues of the Press" (ii, 249), states that it is "said to have
been written by Mr. Laycock of Philadelphia." If the John Leacock, whose
name appears in the Philadelphia Directory of 1802, is the one who wrote
"The Fall of British Tyranny," following that clue we find his name
disappearing from the Directory in 1804. Hence, he must either have
died, or have moved away from Philadelphia.

The elusive name of Leacock is to be considered also in connection with
an opera entitled, "The Disappointment; or, The Force of Credulity,"
signed by Andrew Barton,[3] supposed to be a pseudonym, and attributed
variously to "Colonel" Thomas Forrest and to John Leacock. I already
have had occasion to mention "The Disappointment" in connection with
Godfrey's "The Prince of Parthia." The reader will remember that in 1767
"The Disappointment" was put into rehearsal, but was suddenly withdrawn
in preference to Godfrey's piece. This play has been fully and
interestingly analyzed by O. G. Sonneck, who gives the reasons for the
withdrawal of the play from rehearsal by the American Company of
Philadelphia, 1767. These reasons are definitely stated in the
_Pennsylvania Gazette_ for April 16, 1767, which contains this warning
in the American Company's advertisement of "The Mourning Bride": "N.B.
'The Disappointment' (that was advertised for Monday), as it contains
personal Reflections, is unfit for the Stage."

The reason why this piece is attributed to "Colonel" Thomas Forrest is
that there is a memorandum in substantiation on the title-page of a copy
owned by the Library Company of Philadelphia.

Mr. Sonneck gives further and more extensive treatment of the subject in
his excellent book on "Early Opera in America," (Schirmer, 1915) as well
as in "Sammelbaende der Internationale Musik Gesellschaft," for
1914-1915.

We mention the matter here, because, although Sonneck enters into a long
discussion of the life of Forrest, he fails to give any satisfactory
account of John Leacock. In fact, he says in closing, "If Andrew Barton,
Esq., is to be a pseudonym, it seems to me that John Lea