son's explanation (see the Var. Shakespeare), I have to add, not only,

'A lady of my hair cannot want pitying.'

Fletcher's Nice Valour, act i. sc. 1.

but also another passage which proves indisputably that the Doctor was right. In the play of Sir Thomas More (Ms. Harl. 7368), a fellow named Faulkner is brought in custody before Sir Thomas; and when the said Faulkner, who in consequence of a vow wears his hair very long,-tells Sir Thomas that he is servant to a secretary, we find (fol. 12);

'Moore. A fellow of your haire is very fitt

To be a secretaries follower!'.

Sir Thomas using the word with a quibble,—'grain, texture, complexion, character."" (The play of Sir Thomas More was edited by me for the Shakespeare Society in 1844; in which edition the passage now cited occurs p. 43.)

P. 405,- act v. sc. 1.

"What is honour? A word. What is in that word, honour? What is that honour? Air."

Here, as in his first edition, Mr. Collier spoils Falstaff's famous catechism, by adopting the ridiculous repetition of the 4to, 1608, instead of printing, with the later eds., "What is honour? A word. What is that word, honour? Air."

P. 409,-act v. sc. 2.

"For, heaven to earth, some of us never shall

A second time do such a courtesy.'

We do not alter the old text here, for we think the Rev. Mr. Dyce's objection to ''Fore heaven and earth' of the corr. fo. 1632, ought to have weight: it is an unusual, though by no means unprecedented, form of attestation on a serious occasion; and although Hotspur tells us, just before, that he has 'not well the gift of tongue,' he would rather, on that account, have adopted a common mode of speaking. Mr. Dyce does not say what he prefers; but here on earth,' adopted by Mr. Singer, would not be amiss, if we could suppose the old printer to have misread 'heaven' here, and 'to' on. We leave the words 'For heaven to earth' to Warburton's explanation, that the odds were so great that heaven might be wagered against earth that many present would never again embrace."

Mr. Collier, I suspect, would not easily find in any writer the expression ""Fore heaven and earth" used as a "form of attestation on a serious occasion."-In my Few Notes, &c., to which Mr. Collier now alludes, I certainly did not expressly say "what I preferred;" but I never supposed that any one would doubt my approval of the old reading and of Warburton's explanation:-as to Mr. Singer's conjecture, it is about as bad as that of the Ms. Corrector.

P. 411,-act v. sc. 3.

"""masking in his coats.'

It is marching in his coats' in all the old copies, but beyond dispute, even with the Rev. Mr. Dyce, it ought to be 'masking.' Mr.

Dyce (Few Notes,' p. 96) quotes an emendation of his own in Marlowe's 'Tamburlaine,' Pt. I., A. v. sc. 2, which is in conformity with that in the corr. fo. 1632, viz.

'And mask in cottages of strowed reeds :'

in the early 4tos, 'mask' is misprinted march. We may take this opportunity of stating that in the three lines introducing the one he has cited, there are more than as many other blunders of the press.”

I, in my turn, "may take this opportunity of stating" that "the blunders" in the three lines introducing the one I formerly "cited," have been corrected by me (and to my own satisfaction), even without the aid of Mr. Collier, in my one-volume edition of Marlowe's Works, 1858, p. 33.

P. 417,-act v. sc. 4.

"There is Percy [Throwing down the body]. If your father will do me any honour, so,' &c.

Throwing down the body.] This stage-direction is found no where but in my corr. fo. 1632, and Mr. Singer (perhaps not thinking the point worth notice, although it alters the whole business of the scene) has copied it without observation. It shows what was the practice of our old stage, and what certainly ought to have been the practice on our modern stage, viz. that Falstaff, instead of keeping the corpse of Percy on his back till the end of the scene, should relieve himself from the burden by throwing it down."

Was there ever an editor who made so many random assertions as Mr. Collier? Before accusing Mr. Singer of

copying, without acknowledgment, "this stage - direction found no where but in my corr. fo. 1632," why did he not look how the passage is given in the later editions of Shakespeare,-in the Variorum one, for instance, of 1821? In that edition it stands thus;

"There is Percy: [Throwing the body down.] if your father will do me any honour, so," &c.

Besides, Mr. Collier is quite in the dark about "the practice on our modern stage," when he fancies that "Falstaff keeps the corpse of Percy on his back till the end of the scene.' -I never saw a Falstaff that did so, and I have seen several: but as, in all probability, Mr. Collier will not take my word for it, I call in the unimpeachable testimony of Oxberry's acting edition of the play, 1822;

then am I a Jack.—(Throws the body down.)—There is Percy. If your father will do me any honour, so," &c.

P. 419,-act v. sc. 5.

"Which not to be avoided falls on me.'

There can hardly be a doubt that this is the line Shakespeare wrote, and not, as it lamely stands in the old copies (lamely as regards both metre and meaning),

'Since not to be avoided it falls on me.'

The emendation is from the corr. fo. 1632," &c.

One of the hundreds of variations introduced by the Ms. Corrector in sheer wantonness. As to the metre, that of the old line is right enough (if we do not try to spoil it by laying an emphasis on "me"); and as to the meaning,-that of the old line has decidedly the advantage in clearness.

SECOND PART OF KING HENRY IV.

P. 441,-act i. sc. 2.

"both the diseases prevent my curses.'

It is in the old copies both the degrees' . . . Mr. Singer observes that it has been proposed to change degrees to diseases.' Where has it been proposed? In the corr. fo. 1632, but he has again forgotten to name the source of his information," &c.

See pp. 1, 2 of the present volume.

I

P. 447,-act ii. sc. 1.

"A hundred mark is a long score for a poor lone woman to bear,' &c. a long scORE] In the old editions it is 'a long one,' which Theobald altered to loan, but the true word is doubtless' score,' which is found in the margin of the corr. fo. 1632: the old printer blundered between ' score,' one, and 'lone,' and composed the wrong word."

Nay, "the true word is doubtless" the word of the old copies,-"one;" which Douce thus explains most satisfactorily; "The hostess means to say that a hundred mark is a long mark, that is, score, reckoning, for her to bear. The use of mark in the singular number in familiar language, admits very well of this equivoque." (In a note ad l. in my ed. of Shakespeare I have cited another attempt at a pun by Mrs. Quickly, "You shall have An fool's head of your own." The Merry Wives of Windsor, act i. sc. 4.)

P. 460,-act ii. sc. 4.

"grant that, my pure virtue, grant that.'

6

PURE virtue] It is poor virtue' in all the old impressions, and amended to 'pure virtue,' used ironically, in the corr. fo. 1632. Here Mr. Singer's amended copy of the same edition comes to his aid, for he finds the change (never before proposed) irresistible."

Mr. Collier and Mr. Singer might have learned from Johnson's Dictionary that "poor" is sometimes nearly equivalent to dear :—and see the passages cited in p. 79 of the present volume.

P. 469,-act ii. sc. 4.

"For the boy, there is a good angel about him, but the devil outbids him too.

P. Hen. For the women?

Fal. For one of them, she is in hell already, and burns poor souls. For the other, I owe her money, and whether she be damned for that, I know not.'

she is IN hell already,] We ought probably to read a for 'in;' Falstaff's meaning being that Doll is herself a hell already, and ‘burns poor souls' by inflicting her diseases upon them. The Rev. Mr. Dyce has not understood the passage, and pins his faith upon Sir T. Hanmer, who varies from the old text, and prints 'poor soul,' as if those words applied to Doll."

In his former edition Mr. Collier pointed the last of the above speeches thus, "For one of them, she is in hell already, and burns, poor souls," which, surely, it was no wonder that "the Rev. Mr. Dyce did not understand:"-in his present edition Mr. Collier points the words so as to make them convey a sense which is little better than nonsense. In short, Mr. Collier, clinging pertinaciously to error, is the only editor since Hanmer's days who has not adopted the correction "poor soul," — a correction in which it seems strange that Hanmer should not have been anticipated by Rowe or Pope or Theobald.—Falstaff calls Doll "poor soul" because she was "in hell already, burning" (with the lues venerea).

P. 471,-act ii. sc. 4.

“Host. O! run, Doll, run; run, good Doll. Come. She comes blubbered. Yea-will you come, Doll ?"

In my Remarks, &c. p. 113, I observed that here the words "She comes blubbered," instead of being addressed, as Mr. Collier supposed, "to Bardolph within," are evidently a stage-direction which has crept into the text by some mistake, and which means merely that the boy who acted Doll was “to come in a fit of weeping." Of that observation Mr. Collier takes no notice in his new edition: but he says that the "She comes blubbered" is "addressed to Bardolph outside, as a reason why Doll does not instantly comply." Do the words read like " a reason"?

P. 472,- act iii. sc. 1.

"Then, happy low, lie down!'

There is no pretext here for Warburton's proposed emendation, ‘Then, happy lowly clown,' which the Rev. Mr. Dyce weakly and, we must say, somewhat timidly advocates," &c.

What I said in my Remarks, &c. p. 113, was that “the conjecture of Warburton ought to be mentioned by every editor of Shakespeare ;" and that, though certain passages may be cited in confirmation of Warburton's conjecture, I must not be understood as if recommending its adoption into

66