IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) V // i. (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: L'exemplaire fWrni fut reproduit grdce d la gdndrositd de: La bibliothdque des Archives publiques du Canada Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettet6 de l'exemplaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprim^e sont filmds en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont filmds en commenpant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de chaque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols — »• signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols V signifie "FIN". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre film6s d des taux de r6ductior> diffdrents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul cliche, il est filmd A partir de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mdthode. 1 2 3 1 32X \ NO i ^ ft /V//; : V /i ^ ']rp/i c /f^C ^^y^ ^ ^^f r *> * /^— ,v ^ # ^ l/?/< /V / l^\L WE OPEN Shakespeare's Gi^ave? '^ J- NO. seP^ POP^ 15Y THOS. D. KING, (Member of the Montreal Shakespeare Club) a?0 TIEIE QXJESTIOnST iPTJT B^Z" MR. J. PARKER NORRIS, IN THE JULY NUMBER OF THE " MANHATTAN." PniNTED FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATION ONLY. Montreal : J. Thbo. RoBiHSON, Printer, 52 St. Francois Xavier Street. Septembeh, 1884. "'«u^ip lillHf»P<"WlP»HHiJ.-l«PU"JUi .• * • ; • . • .;.••••.• • • •• • • .'^ ; ♦.. .; '. Sh/LL we open SH/KESPEARE'S Gl^AVE? NO. ^S^ EEI=L-2- liY THOS. D. KING, (Member of the Montreal Shakespeare Club) TO TZ^E Q-CJESTIOIST I=TJT B"Z" MR. J. PARKER NORRIS, m TEE JULY NUMBER OF THE "MANHATTAN." PRINTED FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATION ONLY. Montreal : J. TiiKO. RoKiNSON, Printer, 52 St. Fraucoia Xavicr Street. Septemueh, 1884. SHULLWEOPEN SHMESPESRE'S GROTE? 3sro. All that was mortal of Shakespeare rests in the Chancel of Holy Trinity Church, Stratford-on-Avon. His body was deposited there on the 2oth of April, 1616. Over his grave is a Hat stone bearing this in- scription : — " Good friend for Jesus' sake forbeare To dif^g the dust enclosed lieare : Bleste be the man that spares thes stones, And curst be he that moves my bones." ^ There is a religious solicitude in the lines. There is a feeling about them to which all classes of Christians are more or less alive ; and although they are not savoured with the genius of the author of The Temi)est, yet, in the hihtorical play of King John, Arthur, after he leaps from the walls of the Castle, exclaims : — " me ! ray uncle's spirit is in these stones, Heaven take my soul, and England keep my bones ! " Though it has been doubted whether Shakes- peare either wrote or dictated these lines — by some called a "doggrel epitaph" — yet the injunction which the lines convoy has been hitherto obeyed. The advocates for the opening of the grave have no doubt in the matter, as is shown by their in<(uisitive- ness and anxiousness to recover Shakespeare's skull ; therefore it is " passing strange " that Mr. Norris should officiously insinuate that the opposition of the^ Mayor and Corporation of Stratford to '• the project of examining the tomb " of the Poet arose from their knowledge that the tomb had been already opened ana the skull stolen. It is useless to discuss the " why and wherefore " of the " lame and halting verses," they are signifi- cant enough to warrant us in believing that they are the express will, not only of Shakespeare, hini- self, but of his wife and f.imily, and being so, the injunction or adjuration ought to be, and must be respected. The adjuration is in accord with Shakespeare's sympathies and affinities— respect and vcjieration for the dead, and for the rites of Christian burial— in accord with his writings, which treat not only religion but all things human with the purest spirit of reverence — writings, in which there is " no severity but for vice, no slavery but for baseness, no unforgiveness but for calculating wickedness.^" Mr. Norris suggests that the adjuration was placed over the grave by some member of the Poet's family to prevent the removal of his body to the old Charnel house— a most ghastly and repulsive chamber contiguous to the Chancel of Holy Trinity Church. But as the Poet was buried within the precincts of the nltar, it is not probable that such a fear was entertained by his family, or that his ciiap- less sknll wonld be knocked about by the spade of a gravedigger, and irreverently jovvled to the gronnd as if it were " Cain's jaw-bone that did the first murder." Is it possible that the adjuration arose from the apprehension that the Puritans, wiio were at the time fast rising into power, and made dramatic representations the special olyect of their indigna- tion, may in their fanaticism ritle the grave of the actor and playwright, who with his fellow-servants to the Rt.-Hon. the Lord Cliamberlain, had to petition the Lords of the Privy Council, in 1596, in order that they might be allowed to repair, enlarge and improve the Blackfriars Theatre " to make the same more convenient for the entertainment of the auditories coining thereto ?"^ The icono>^.lastic spirit, then latent, broke out in 1G42, when Richard Culmer (Blue Dick) " rattled down proud Becket's glassie bones," by destroying a part of the great window of the north transept of Canterbury Cathedral, the gift of Edward IV. and his Queen, in the centre of which was Becket him- self at full length, robed and mitred. The iconoclast narrowly escaped martyrdom at the hands of a " malignant fellow-townsman, who threw a stone with so good a will that if Saint Richard Culmer had not ducked, he might have laid his own bones among the rubbish." The remembrance of Culmer's narrow escape 6 from martyrdom will, I l.ope, act as a deterrent to any intending desecnitor of the Poet's grave, even If he 18 utterly indillerent to the inscribed maledic- tion. No matter who wrote or suggested the adjura- tion, " For Jesus' sake forbeare," it has been for nearly three bundled years religiously respected and regarded, and I most fervently hope; in common with thousands of leaders and students of the works of Shakespeare, that his bones may not be disturbed before Time dissolves the Stratford monument. Could the anathema, " Curst be he that moves my bones," be as sudden in effect as the " mandrake's groan,"* he must be a very bold man that would either counsel or attempt the exhumation of the Poet's bones. Last year Dr. Ingleby addressed a pamphlet to the Mayor and individual members of the Corpora- tion of Stratford-on-Avon, advocating the opening of Shakespeare's grave, which is said to be well written, ably considered and favourably concluded ; yet, despite these three qualifications, it raised such storms of indignation, torrents of hard speeches vehement letters, and whirlwinds of passionate invective throughout England, that I should have thought no one would have been hardy enough to again renew the question "Shall we open Shakespeare's Grave? The proposal was styled " a desecration both useless and indecent; and revolting to a truly reve- rent mind ;"— " nn atrocious design ;" — " an out- rageous act of sacrilege suggested by a depraved mind ;" — '* an impious and odious proposal and wanton act of vandalism;"— "an act insane in itself, and to indulge even at the best an idle and prurient curiosity ;" — an impudent and wanton act of van- dalism ;" — *' a desecration of that sacred spot deai- to the heart of every human being in any way con- nected or acquainted with the revered Poet." No man " was never so bethump'd with words" as Dr. Ingleby. Letters from all parts of Great Britain, from Denmark, Canada, and other distant places were sent to the Mayor of Stratford-on-Avon reprehending the proposition. In consequence of these earnest expressions of opinion, a meeting of the Town Council of Stratford was held in the month of October, 1883, when the subject, despite some strong expressions against Dr. Ingleby, was tem- perately discussed, and the following resolution was unanimously adopted : — " That a record be made upon the minutes of this meeting of the most entire and emphatic disapproval of this Corporation to any proposition or project for interfering in any way with, or disturbance of, the grave, tombstone, and monument of Shakej^peare in the Chancel of Holy Trinity Church, Stratford-on-Avon." I copy an extract from a somewhat tangled speech by Mr. Alderman Gibbs upon the occasion as it not only gives a partial answer to the cui, hono of the question, but it insinuates that there was something in Dr. Ingleby' s desire to get temporary 8 possessior. of Shakespeare's skull more potent, yet covert, than a laudable curiosity for " testing the Droeshout print and every one of the half-dozen portraits-in-oil which pass as presentments of Shakes- peare's face at different periods of his life." * * * * " It was strange that many having the advantage of intellect and knowledge could, for che sake of gain, and to gratify their morbid curiosity reconcile their consciences to their attempts to set afloat projects of false theory which in their heart of hearts they really despised. As in this case which I consider one in point,— to exhume the remains of Shakespeare, which could not possibly add to our knowledge, or serve any good purpose, or solve any problem as to the sort of man our Shakespeare was For it is quite clear to all physi- ologists or phrenologists that the brain of a Shakes- peare must be enclosed in the skull of a fully developed-man, the structure of whose whole head must be similar to that shown by the bust in the chancel, erected so soon after his death, and with which most of the so-called portraits were in keep- ing, showing the high forehead; it being quite cc-tam that the development of a man's head to write as our Shakespeare did must have a full forehead. A low-browed man never portrayed all the workings, passions, and foibles of our natures, nor possessed such a brilliant imagination as our immortal bard. Then to exhume Shakespeare's remains was simply to see the formation of his skull divested of the flesh, the absurdity of which pro- 9 ceeding must be quite clear to all rational and honest people, whose opinion, if pronounced, must be either that the project covered some sinister design, or it savoured of the wasteful folly of idiots. PhotograpJis of Shalcespeare s ahull loould, doubilesa, have a large sale all over the loorld."^ The Saturday Review, London, September 8th, 1883, said, in reference to Dr. Ingleby's proposal : " We object to it because, by the nature of the human mind, feelings of reverence and affection gather round the last resting places of those whose words or deeds have made them leaders and bene- factors of mankind. It is of much more importance that these feelings should be respected than that the claims of a trivial and purposeless curiosity should be gratified. To attain some end of serious importance, no one would object to the exhumation of any body so long as it was done decently and in order. But that, to gain the idle object of Dr. Ingleby's search, the last prayer of one to whom jvery cultivated Englishman owes a personal debt of gratitude should be wantonly rejected is a wholly different matter. It would needlessly disgust and offend thousands of people ; it would bring deserved opprobium on the country in the eyes of other nations ; and it would go far to stimulate the vice of morbid and impertinent curiosity, which needs no encouragement, but rather every check that can be applied to it." The London Daily News, Sept, 1st, 1883, said :— " There is absolutely no excuse for the proposal. 10 For the bust in question was erected within ten years of his death, and must be an immeasureablj better guide to his personal appearance than the skull of the Poet who has been dead more than two centuries and a half. But Shakespeare's insight into the follies of mankind is shown, if he did indeed write the inscription for his tomb, to have been no more confined than were his other gifts to the circumstances of his own age." It was with pleasure I read the opinions of the Saturday Revieio and the Daili/ News, as I had written two letters upon the subject to the Montreal Herald prior to seeing those papers ; in my first, I said: — It is to be fervently hoped that such a sacrilege is not seriously entertained— anv man who can be guilty of such an act ought to receive the most exemplary and condign punishment— I raise my voice against the contemplated act, and against the rifling the graves of any of the great men who have adorned their country's name, whether as poets, statesmen, philosophers and warriors, for if those we reverently bury should hereafter have their bodies exhumed by ill-con- ditioned clergymen or unfeeling churchwardens, let our monuments in future be '' The Maws of Kites.' " In my second, I said:— I cannot think that such men as the authors ot the Brid(jwater Treatises on the power and wisdom of God in the creation ; or such men as Davy, Faraday, and Dalton, Tyn- dall, Spencer, and Huxley would attach any importance to the examination of Shakespeare's 11 skull for the sake of anatomically comparing its configuration with the skulls of other men who have been the flower and glory of our race. The idea was not original as far as Dr. Ingleby is concerned. In the Shakespeare Tercentenary Number of Chamber's Journal published April 23rd 1864, page 20, there occurs this passage :— * * * * " persons have not been wanting to assert that in the interests of science, physical and mwal, the relics of the great Shakespeare ought to be subjected to a thorough examination." Eight years ago Mr. J. Parker Norris of Philadelphia, U.S., whose contribu- tions to and knowledge of Shakesperian Literature are wide and thorough, and whose veneration and admiration for the Poet's writings are generally admitted, suggested the advisibility of opening Shakespeare's grave and reverently examining his remains. The suggestion was the means whereby its author had opprobious epithets heaped upon his head, and got well abused and jeered at by the critics who wen' opposed to what they thought would be an act of desecration. In this thought his critics are not peculiar. As I have neither seen nor read Mr. Norris" first suggestion, nor the criticisms of his opponents, who are charged with losing sight of the real merits of the suggestion or proposal, I must pass both by, and confine myself to a few remarks upon the second suggestion " Shall we open Shakespeare's Grave " ? which appeared in the July number of The Manhattan. 12 Mr. Norris opens his argument with some doubt as to the ultimate end and result of his and Dr. Ingleby's pleadings for the exhumation of the Poet's bones ; and expresses the hope that *' the advancement of scientific accuracy may yet conquer mere sentiment." There is an ambiquity in the sentence which 1 have italicized. Are we to understand by the term "scie7iiifi.c accuracy" that the knowledge of phren- ology, physiognomy, physiology, pathology and natural philosophy will be enhanced if we found in Shakespeari.'s grave a skull with an unequalled altitude of forehead, a globe-like cranium, " the front of Jove himself" ; or, a skull with a combination of forms and general proportions rarely seen in living man ; or a skull in contour and measurement agreeing either with the Kesselstadt Death-Mask, or the Stratford Bust ; or if we found the body entire, dressed at all points, cap-a-pie, "in his habit as he lived" ? Such a discovery may conquer and ought to conquer mere sentiment, if mere sentiment is to be confounded with that false, lachrymose, snivelling sentiment which is so much the fashion with those who delight in the " virtuous oratory " of a Joseph Surface. But, I emphatically ask, would those wlio have conscientious scruples about the adjuration, and consider that the rilling of Shakespeare's grave would be a sacrilegious act, and regard the " For Jesus' sake forbeare" as the dying testament,— the last wish of the Poet— be satisfied to relinquish 13 their sentiment — a sentiment, resulting from their cap