<-'f 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^]y^ 
 
 -V 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 University of California. 
 
 Class H ^-'1 
 
 
Facsimiles of Pen and Pencil Corrections in Mr. J. P. Collier's Annotated Slinkspere, Fol. 1632. 
 
 I f.,u>~>Tii^- ThJ^i.n::^ .wa 
 
 f ' 
 
 1% 
 
 <9oi^ 
 
 ^^1 
 
 flrannes. 
 
 rajines, ;,G?^^^ | 
 
 Sin^**t- jOHr fvffeet Jbnllairf ^ 
 
 yufs^ 
 
 (^u^ n/'u^/T^ 
 
 vw? 
 
 C-p^ 
 
 
 (c^^rtj 
 
 CX}^ 
 
 Sytter Cbtft^ 
 
 «'>>i^5^">U 
 
 6^ 
 
 I And crooke the pregnant Hindges of the knee, 
 Where thrift may follow lainingj . Doftthou hear^, 
 
 1. Merry Wives of Windsor p. 40, col. 1 . 
 
 2. Ditto ditto i>. 40, col. 2. 
 
 3. Measure for Measure ]>. (>7, col. 1. 
 
 4. Ditto ditto p. 07, col. 2. 
 
 r>. Much ado about Nothing p. 110, col. 1. 
 
 6. Love's labour lost p. 143, col. 1. 
 
 7. Midsummer Night's Dream p. 150, col. 2. 
 
 8. Midsununer Niglit's Dream p. 101, col. 1. 
 
 9. King John p. G, col. 2. 
 
 10. Richard 111 p. 181, col. 2. 
 
 11. Henry VI. (part 1) p. 98, col. 2. 
 
 12. Henry VIII I>. 214, col. 2. 
 
 13. Hamlet p. 277, col. 1. 
 
 14. Ditto p. 187, col. 1. 
 
 K. O. NET11EHCI<U'T, lAC-SIMlLK LITU : 17, .MILL ST., IIANOVKR SIJ. 
 
AN INQUIRY 
 
 INTO THE 
 
 GENUmENESS OF THE MANUSCRIPT CORRECTIONS 
 
 IN 
 
 MR. J. PAYNE COLLIER'S 
 
 ANNOTATED SHAKSPERE, FOLIO, 1632: 
 
 AND OF CERTAIN SHAKSPERIAN DOCIBIENTS 
 LIKEWISE PUBLISHED BY MR. COLLIER. 
 
 N. E. S. A. HAMILTON. 
 
 LCnnTDN: 
 KICHARD BENTLEY, NEW BURLINGTON STREET, 
 
 MDCCCLX. 
 

 IXJNI>OS: PRINTED BY W. CIX)\VE8 AND SONS, STAMFOHU STREET. 
 
FACSIMILES. 
 
 1. Pencillings To face Title 
 
 2. Dabome Wanant p. 83 
 
 3. Alleyn's Letter P- 86 
 
 214467 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 The following i:,a,ges are meant to redeem tlie 
 pledge given to the public in The Times of Jiil;^ 
 2, 1859, in which a more complete examination 
 was promised into the genuineness of numerous 
 modern alterations in Shakspere's text, than 
 was possible in the columns of a newspaper. 
 The matter, I believe, has a great importance, 
 greater than is even suspected as yet. It is 
 really this— whether we shall retain our National 
 Poet's works in a form approaching perfection, 
 or miserably corrupted. 
 
 Tlie last century saw Shakspere's text pretty 
 nearly established. Malone, Steevens, and others, 
 succeeded in presenting it, if not in complete 
 purity, still as accurately as it was read by men 
 who knew Shakspere, lived with, and survived 
 him. The '' old folios " and quartos liad yielded 
 u]) their readings, and tlie doubtful province of 
 
 B 
 
ii PREFACE. 
 
 conjectural emendation alone remained for the 
 most ambitious editor. 
 
 But the year 1849 saw a great change. The 
 entirely new element of manuscrijyt authority was 
 introduced ; and under cover of this, alterations 
 innumerable were made in the text of the Poet. 
 If these corrections rested on a valid basis, a more 
 signal benefit to literature had seldom been con- 
 ferred; but if doubtful or spurious, then the 
 wrong done to the cause of letters was at least as 
 great. 
 
 The greatness and glory, however, of the dis- 
 covery were well kept before the pubKc. The 
 few competent Shaksperian critics who dissented 
 and raised doubts, were put to silence as frivolous 
 or envious, and the " Old Corrector " seemed 
 destined to become one of those 
 
 " dead but sceptred sovereigns, who still rule 
 Oxir spirits fi-om their ui-ns." 
 
 Unfortunately, those who impugned the genu- 
 ineness of these alterations did so on grounds 
 which, however scholar-like, could hardty be 
 conclusive ; whether, for instance, such and such 
 words were in use, or bore a certain si g-nifi cation, 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 in Shakspere's time; while others, again, con- 
 tented themselves with m-ging the improbability 
 of the corrections having been copied from the 
 prompt-books, or in exposing the absurdity 
 involved in the idea of a man's taking a foho to 
 the pit of a theatre, and correcting it on his 
 knee. Such criticism, while it might raise doubts, 
 could never turn them into certainties against 
 the corrections. That question could only be 
 settled by the genuineness or otherwise of the 
 corrections themselves. Were they really of the 
 middle of the seventeenth century, or were they 
 skilful imitations of a much more recent date? 
 And this could only be ascertained by a critical 
 examination of the handwriting of the annotations, 
 conducted by those well used to such inquii'ies. 
 
 It needs not be said that no examination of the 
 kind was undertaken until quite recently. The 
 " annotated folio," it is true, was seen a few times 
 in public, that is to say, thrice at the evening 
 meetings of the Society of Antiquaries, and once at 
 a meeting of the Shakspere Society ;* but, wonder- 
 
 * See Mr. Collier's Affidavit, p. 15. As early as 1853 Mr. Charles 
 Knight pointed out, in a temperate but forcible manner, the pro- 
 priety of having the " Folio - " deposited in the custody of some 
 
iv PREFACE. 
 
 ful as it may seem, notwithstanding the fierceness 
 of controversy to which they gave rise, no one ap- 
 pears to have thought of submitting the marginal 
 corrections to a strict palseographic examination, 
 or of postponing the discussion of their intrinsic 
 merits to the more important and preliminaiy 
 inquiry as to the genuineness of their character. 
 The hook shortly passed into the hands of a 
 late nohle duke, the controversy lost the interest 
 of novelty, and the general impression of the 
 public, both at home and abroad, seemed to be 
 that something very wonderful, after all, had 
 been made out, and that Shakspere, as well as 
 everything else now-a-days, had been " improved." 
 And not only Shakspere. The latter half at least 
 of the present volume is devoted to the discussion of 
 the genuineness of certain " documents," bearing 
 more or less on the history of the Poet and the 
 literature of his day. The importance of these 
 documents is even greater than that of the '' cor- 
 rections." Tliey profess to be originals ; and both 
 from the facts they contain themselves, and the 
 
 public body, who will allow access, under jji-oper regulations, 
 for a full and free inspection of its contents."— OW JAuais or 
 ^'clr, p. lix. rity it i« tliat such a course was not adopted. 
 
PREFACE. V 
 
 light they throw on others, would be invaluable, 
 if authentic. Unfortunately, their importance is 
 much diminished by their undoubtedly spurious 
 nature. While it is grievous to see lessened the 
 scanty number of facts referring to Shakspere's 
 external histoiy, that very circumstance, that we 
 know so little about him, renders it the more in- 
 cumbent upon us to be rigorous and accurate in 
 what we do accept concerning him. The manu- 
 scripts and papers I refer to are fully described 
 further on. The authenticity of several of them 
 has never even been questioned till now. They 
 have gradually filtered into our hterature, and are 
 the cause of an ever-spreading dissemination of 
 error. That this should be arrested, however pain- 
 ful the discovery or process may prove, I think 
 must be desu-ed by every friend to Letters. 
 
 This, therefore, is the ground that I take up. I 
 do not meddle with the intrinsic and purely literary 
 part of the question at all. 1 do not discuss the 
 date or the use of certain words. I merely examine, 
 on external grounds, the authenticity of the hand- 
 writing. While this method is a great deal more 
 conclusive, it is the first time it has been applied 
 
vi PREFACE. 
 
 in tliis discussion. If the following pages be 
 found dry and technical, it is inevitable from the 
 very nature of the inquiry. As a sense of its 
 importance kept me up, I hope and beheve a 
 similar feeling will animate my reader. It cer- 
 tainly is no trifling matter, whether the works of 
 one of the greatest minds that ever adorned 
 humanity be correct or corrupt — entire or muti- 
 lated : it is not unimportant that in our time, and 
 before our eyes, we should see their grandeur 
 defaced and their purity stained. And not easily 
 forgiven should we be, if, seeing this, we strove 
 not to hinder it. 
 
 It merely remains to add, that throughout this 
 self-imposed task, the notion of a personal contro- 
 versy or dispute has never guided my pen. This 
 disclaimer, while it is superfluous for my friends, 
 I wish pointedly directed to the notice of the 
 public. My aim has been to remove from English 
 literature a discreditable imposition. If one or 
 more are aggrieved by the results I have come to, 
 I regret but cannot help it. WhiJe I ask for no 
 favour, I can show no partiality. My inquiries 
 have no recommendation but their honesty and 
 
PEEFACE. 
 
 candour ; and if they receive from competent judges 
 the verdict of Truth, I shall be amply rewarded, 
 and feel that my labour has not been in vain. 
 
 Before concluding this prefatory statement, I 
 have one duty left which fills me with unmixed 
 pleasure—the offer of my grateful thanks to those 
 to whom I am indebted for the opportunity of 
 brino-ing this Inquiry before the public, or who have 
 assisted me with their aid and counsel in a labour 
 of no slight difficulty and of grave responsibility. 
 To his Grace the Duke of Devonshire, for the 
 courtesy with which he placed the volume under 
 discussion at my disposal, and permitted me not 
 only to publish fac-similes of the pen and pencil 
 corrections on its margins, but also to make 
 several important physical experiments in regard 
 to them. 
 
 To the Eight Hon. the Earl of Ellesmere, for 
 the liberality with which he gave me access to 
 his Library, and permitted me to make use of his 
 unique copy of the first folio edition of Shakspere's 
 Plays, as well as to examine and have fac-similes 
 taken of the disputed Shakspere documents at 
 Bridge water House. 
 
viii PEEFACE. 
 
 To the Governors of Dulwich College, for the 
 ready access I obtained to their valuable muni- 
 ments ; and especialty to the Eev. Alfred Carver, 
 the Master of the College, for the friendly aid 
 which converted what might possibly be esteemed 
 an ordinary civility paid to literary men, into a 
 lasting personal obligation to myself. 
 
 To my friends and colleagues in the British 
 Museum, whom I gladly avail myself of the op- 
 portunity of thanking for the unvarying kindness 
 I have ever received from them in my literarv pur- 
 suits. Above all to Sir Frederic Madden, the chief 
 of the Department to which I have the honom* to 
 belong, and to whom an acknowledgment is due, 
 beyond the mere expression of my thanks for the 
 invaluable assistance of his observations and 
 experience. It is, indeed, a simple act of honesty 
 and justice alike to him and to the world, that I 
 should state the origin of the discovery presumed 
 to be established in the following pages. The 
 ' Annotated Shakspere ' was placed in Sir F. 
 Madden's hands by the Duke of Devonshire. 
 His independent examination of it completely 
 convinced him of the fictitious character of the 
 
 / 
 
PREFACE. ix 
 
 writing of the marginal corrections ; and this 
 conclusion he freely communicated to inquirers 
 interested in knowing it. The correspondence 
 between certain pencil-marks in the margins 
 with corrections in ink, first noticed by myself, 
 led him to a closer examination of the volume, 
 and to the detection of numerous marks of punc- 
 tuation and entire words in pencil, and in a 
 modern character, in connection with the pre- 
 tended older writing in ink ; instances of which 
 were subsequently found to occur on nearly every 
 page. It was, moreover, owing in a great mea- 
 sure to Sir Frederic Madden's encouragement 
 that I was originally induced to bestow that at- 
 tention to the subject, which has developed the 
 inquiry to its present results. 
 
 To the numerous other friends who have aided 
 and assisted me in my labour, I have to tender 
 the general expression of a gratitude as lively as 
 it is sincere. 
 
 N. E. S. A. HAMILTON. 
 
 Department of Mannscripis, British Miisci 
 Jaauanj, 18(30. 
 
AN INQUIEY, ETC. 
 
 In the year 1852, Mr. John Payne Collier 
 published a volume of " Notes and Emendations'' 
 of the Plays of Shakspere, derived from a cor- 
 rected copy of the second edition, in folio, 1632, 
 the history of which he gives in the Introduction 
 to the volume, as follows : — 
 
 " In the spring of 1849 I happened to be in the shop of 
 the late Mr. Eodd, of Great Newport Street, at the time 
 when a package of books arrived from the country ; my 
 impression is that it came from Bedfordshire, but I am 
 not at all certain upon a point which I looked upon as 
 a matter of no importance. He opened the parcel in 
 my presence, as he had often done before in the course 
 of my thirty or forty years' acquaintance with him, and 
 looking at the backs and title-pages of several volumes, 
 I saw that they were chiefly works of little interest to 
 me. Two folios, however, attracted my attention, one 
 of them gilt on the sides, and the other in rough calf: 
 
12 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 the first was an excellent copy of Florio's " New World 
 of Words," 1611, with the name of Henry Osborn 
 (whom I mistook at the moment for his celebrated 
 namesake, Francis) uiDon the first leaf ; and the other a 
 copy of the second folio of Shakespeare's Plays, much 
 cropped, the covers old and greasy, and, as I saw at a 
 glance on opening them, imperfect at the beginning and 
 end. Concluding hastily that the latter would complete 
 another poor copy of the second folio, which I had 
 bought of the same bookseller, and which I had had 
 for some years in my possession, and wanting the former 
 for my use, I bought them both, — the Florio for twelve, 
 and the Shakespeare for thirty shillings,* 
 
 " As it turned out, I at first repented my bargain as 
 regarded the Shakespeare, because when I took it home 
 it appeared that two leaves which I wanted were unfit 
 
 * " I paid the money for them at the time. Mr. Wilkinson, of 
 Wellington Street, one of Mr. Eocld's executors, has several 
 times obligingly afforded me the opportunity of inspecting 
 Mr. Eodd's account-books, in order, if possible, to trace from 
 whence the i)ackage came, but without success. IMr. Eodd does 
 not appear to have kept any stock-book, showing how and when 
 volumes came into his hands, and the entries in his day-book 
 and ledger are not regular nor particular. His latest memoran- 
 dum, on 19th April, only a short time before his sudden death, 
 records the sale of "three books," without specifying their 
 titles, or giving the name of the purchaser. His memory was 
 very faithful, and to that, doubtless, he often trusted. I am 
 confident that the parcel was from the country ; but any in- 
 quiries regarding sales there, could liardly be expected to be 
 satisfactorily answered."— [C] 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 13 
 
 for my purpose, not merely by being too short, but 
 damaged and defaced : thus disappointed, I threw it by, 
 and did not see it again until I made a selection of 
 books I would take with me on quitting London. In 
 the mean time, finding that I could not readily remedy 
 the deficiencies in my other copy of the folio 1632, I 
 liad parted with it ; and when I removed into the 
 country with my family, in the spring of 1850, in order 
 that I might not be without some copy of the second 
 folio, for the purpose of reference, I took with me that 
 which is the foundation of the present work. 
 
 "It was while putting my books together for re- 
 moval that I first observed some marks in the margin of 
 this folio ; but it was subsequently placed upon an upper 
 shelf, and I did not take it down until I had occasion to 
 consult it. It then struck me that Thomas Perkins, 
 Avhose name, with the addition of "his Booke," was 
 upon the cover, might be the old actor who had per- 
 formed in Marlowe's "Jew of Malta," on its revival 
 shortly before 1633. At this time I fancied that the 
 binding was of about that date, and that the volume 
 might have been his; but in the first place I found 
 that his name was Richard Perkins, and in the next I 
 became satisfied that the rough calf was not the original 
 binding. Still, Thomas Perkins might have been a 
 descendant of Richard; and this circumstance, and 
 others, induced me to examine the volume more particu- 
 larly. I then discovered, to my surprise, that there was 
 hardly a page which did not present, in a handwriting 
 of the time, some emendation in the pointing or in the 
 
^ 
 
 r 
 
 14 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 text, while on most of them they were frequent, and on 
 many numerous. 
 
 " Of course I now submitted the folio to a most careful 
 scrutiny ; and as it occupied a considerable time to com- 
 plete the inspection, how much more must it have 
 consumed to make the alterations? The ink was of 
 various shades, differing sometimes on the same page, 
 and I was once disposed to think that two distinct hands 
 had been employed upon them : this notion I have 
 since abandoned ; and I am now decidedly of opinion 
 that the same writing prevails from beginning to end, 
 but that the amendments must have been introduced 
 from time to time, during perhaps the course of several 
 years. The changes in punctuation alone, always made 
 with nicety and patience, must have required a long 
 period, considering their number : the other alterations, 
 sometimes most minute, extending even to turned 
 letters, and typographical trifles of that kind, from 
 their very nature, could not have been introduced with 
 rapidity, while many of the errata must have severely 
 tasked the industry of the old corrector."* 
 
 * " It ought to be mentioned, in reference to the question of 
 the authority of the emendations, that some of them are upon 
 erasures, as if the corrector had either altered his mind as to 
 particular changes, or had obliterated something that had been 
 written before — possibly by some person not so well informed 
 as himself." — [C] I may remark, in reference to this note by 
 IMr. Collier, that the erasures and obliterations are very 
 numerous, and both they and the corrections are hy one and the 
 same hand throughout the volume. Of those partially obliterated I 
 have given some examples in the collations from Hamlet. — [H.] 
 
THE MS CORRECTIONS, ETC. 15 
 
 The veracity of this account Mr. Collier reite- 
 rated in an Affidavit sworn to in the Court of 
 Queen's Bench in 1856. 
 
 - AFFIDAVIT. 
 " In the Queen's Bench. 
 
 " I, John Payne Collier, of Maidenhead, in the County 
 of Berks, Esquire, Barrister-at-Law, and one of the Vice- 
 Presidents of the Society of Antiquaries of London, 
 make oath and say : — 
 
 "1. That ill the years 1841, 1842, 1843, and 1844, I 
 prepared for the press, and published an edition of the 
 works of Shakespeare : that in the spring of the year 
 1849 I purchased of the late Mr. Rodd, of Great New- 
 port Street, bookseller, a copy of the second folio of 
 Shakespeare's Plays, bearing the date of, and which 
 I believe was published in the year 1632; and which 
 copy contained, when I so purchased it, a great number 
 of manuscript notes, purporting to be corrections, altera- 
 tions, and emendations of the original text, made, as I 
 believe, by the same person, and at a period nearly con- 
 temporaneous with the publication of the said folio itself 
 
 " 2. In order that any person interested in the subject 
 might have an opportunity of inspecting the said book, 
 and examining the said manuscript notes, I exhibited 
 the said book to and before the Shakespeare Society, 
 and three times before the Society of Antiquaries, and 
 it was inspected and examined by a great number of 
 persons. The said folio has, since the publication of the 
 
> 
 
 16 INQUIKY I>JTO 
 
 volume next hereinafter mentioned, become, and is now, 
 the property of his Grace the Duke of Devonshire. 
 
 " 3. In the j^ear 1852 I published a volume containing 
 some, but not all, of the said manuscript corrections, 
 alterations, and emendations, and a fac-simile of a part 
 of one page of the said folio, with the manuscript emen- 
 dations thereon ; and an ' Introduction,' setting forth 
 the circumstances under which I became possessed of the 
 said folio edition, and which induced me to publish the 
 said volume. 
 
 " 4. In the year 1853 I published a second edition of 
 the said Notes and Emendations, containing, besides the 
 said ' Introduction,' a statement, in the form of a Pre- 
 face to the last-mentioned edition, of facts and circum- 
 stances which occurred subsequently to the publication of 
 my first edition of the said ' Notes and Emendations ' — 
 a copy of which second edition is now shown to me and 
 marked with the letter A. And I say, that all the state- 
 ments in the said Preface and Introduction, relative to 
 the discovery, contents, and authenticity of the said folio 
 copy, and the manuscript notes, corrections, alterations, 
 and emendations thereof are true ; and that every note, 
 correction, alteration, and emendation in each of the said 
 two editions, and every word, figure, and sign therein, 
 purporting or professing to be a note, correction, altera- 
 tion, or emendation of the text, is, to the best of my 
 knowledge and belief, a true and accurate copy of the 
 original manuscript in the said folio copy of 1632; 
 and that I have not, in either of the said editions, 
 to the best of my knowledge and belief, inserted a single 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 17 
 
 word, stop, sign, note, correction, alteration, or emenda- 
 tion of the said original text of Shakespeare, which is not 
 a ftiithful copy of the said original manuscript,* and which 
 I do not believe to have been written, as aforesaid, not 
 long after the publication of the said folio copy of the 
 year 1632," &c. [The remainder of the affidavit refers 
 to the Coleridge Lectures, published by Mr. Collier in 
 1856.— H.] 
 
 "(Signed) JOHN PAYNE COLLIER." 
 
 " Sworn at the Judge's Chambers, 
 Rolls Garden, Chancery Lane, 
 this 8th day of January, 1856, 
 before me, Wm. Clark, Com- 
 missioner, &c." 
 
 * Apparently Mr. Collier has since altered his opinion as to 
 the respect due to the ' ' said original manuscript," to the extent 
 of occasionally correcting the Corrector. Of this, I quote the fol- 
 lowing singular instance from the play of Coriolanus. In his 
 first edition of the MS. corrections, Mr. Collier announced the 
 important and truly interesting fact, that in Act iii. sc. 2, of 
 that drama a whole line had been left out in all preceding edi- 
 tions, and was now restored through the help and accuracy of 
 the invaluable Corrector. Here is the passage — Volumnia 
 
 says : — 
 
 " Pray be counsailed, 
 
 I have a heart as little apt as yours 
 To brook control without the use of avger, 
 But yet a braine, that leads my use of anger 
 To better vantage." 
 The third line in italics being the new discovery ; and it re- 
 mained as above accurately copied from the corrected folio for 
 six years, viz. in the Notes and Emendations, 1852 and 1853, in 
 
 D 
 
18 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 On the 2nd and IGtli of July, 1859, I laid 
 before the public, through the medium of TJie 
 Times, a summary of facts to prove that the Notes 
 
 the privately distributed fac-similes, in the one-volume Shak- 
 spere, and in the Complete List, 185G. 
 
 Strange as it may seem, in the last edition, of 1858, Mr. Collier 
 has substituted "reproof" instead of "control" as the emenda- 
 tion of the " Old Corrector,'' and this, notwithstanding the scru- 
 pulous accuracy with which he would lead us to suppose he 
 invariably followed his venerable and manuscrift authority. 
 
 I contrast Mr. Collier's first version of the line printed in 
 Notes and Emendations, 1852, wath his account of it in his last 
 edition of Shakspere's Works, 1858. 
 
 Notes and Emendations, Coriolanus, Act iii. sc. 2, J. P. 
 ColUer, 1852. 
 
 " (P. 212) On the same evidence, we here recover a line, 
 which is certainly wanting in the old copies, since they leave 
 the sense incomplete wdthout it. It is in Yolumnia"s entreaty 
 to her son— 
 
 " Pray be counsell'd. 
 I have a heart as little apt as yours, 
 But yet a brain, that leads my use of anger 
 To better vantage." 
 " To what was Yolumuia's heart ' as little apt ' as that of 
 Coriolanus? The insertion of a missing line (the absence of 
 which has not hitherto been suspected) enables us to give the 
 answer : — 
 
 " I have a heart as little apt as yours 
 To brook control ivithont the tise of anger, 
 But yet a brain, that leads my use of anger 
 To better vantage." 
 " The line in italics is written in a blank space, and a mark 
 made to where it ought to come in. The compositor was. 
 
THE MS. COERECTIONS, ETC. 19 
 
 and Emendations contained in Mr. Collier's an- 
 notated copy of Shakspere's Plays, 1632, were 
 in reality modern fabrications of our own day, - 
 
 although written in a feigned hand intended to 
 represent the style of writing common in the 
 seventeenth century ; and that the statement of 
 Mr. Collier that the volume, " from the first page 
 to the last, contained notes and emendations in a 
 handwriting not much later than the time when 
 it came from the press," was incorrect. 
 
 Several months have elapsed since these facts 
 were published, but no satisfactory attempt has 
 been made by Mr. Collier to refute them, or to 
 
 doubtless, misled by the recurrence of the same words at the 
 ends of the two lines, and carelessly omitted the first. From 
 whence, if not from some independent authority, whether heard 
 or read, was this addition to the text derived .?" 
 Shakespeare's Works, ed. Collier, 1858.— Coriolanus, Act iii. sc. 2. 
 " Pray be counsell'd. 
 I have a heart as little apt as yours 
 To brook reproof without the use of anger,' 
 But yet a brain," &c. 
 
 1 (" To BROOK REPliOOF WITHOUT THE USE OF ANGEE.") 
 
 " This line is from the corr. fo. 1G32, and is clearly wanted, 
 since the sense is incomplete without it. The eye of the old 
 compositor was doubtless misled by the words ' use of anger ' at 
 the end of two followmg lines. Those who are unwilling to 
 insert the line are obliged to suppose Volumnia to speak cUip- 
 tically ; but until the discovery of the corr. fo. 1G32, nobody sus- 
 pected even an ellipsis. We rejoice in the discovery," 
 
20 INQriEY INTO 
 
 remove the stigma of forgery from liis " folio." 
 1 must therefore suppose that he is aware of 
 the impossibility of doing this, and that he is 
 now at length convinced of the spurious character 
 of the corrections ; the more so as he has proffered 
 no explanation of the circumstances by wliich he 
 may have been himself originally deceived, or of 
 the reasons which induced him to accept and pub- 
 lish as genuine emendations of the seventeenth 
 century, what in fact it rec|uires no rigorous 
 examination to discover are worthless counterfeits 
 of the nineteenth. 
 
 As in denouncing the character of the cor- 
 rectionsj the only objects I had in view were the 
 vindication of truth, and the desii-e to warn the 
 world of the spurious nature of the " emendations " 
 by which they had been too readily deceived, 
 I would gladly have left the more minute features 
 of the case to be developed by the recognised 
 guardians of Shaksperian literature. Above all, 
 I naturally supposed that Mr. Collier (who alone 
 has introduced into his editions of Shakspere the 
 corrections derived from this Folio, and to whom 
 the discovery of the Folio itself is due,) would have 
 hastened to lend his aid to sift to the bottom the 
 particular evidences against the credibility of the 
 volume, which I had brought so distinctly and 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 21 
 
 prominently to his notice. In this, however, 
 I was mistaken. So far from assisting in an 
 inquiry, in the results of which he, more than 
 any living man, must have been deeply interested, 
 he has only broken silence to give utterance to a 
 desire, rather petulantly expressed, and under the 
 circumstances impossible to regard, that he and 
 his Folio might be let alone, and considered 
 privileged from further scrutiny. 
 
 I may have regretted this expression of feeling 
 on Mr. Collier's part as an error of judgment ; 
 but I feel less concern in regard to the line of con- 
 duct adopted by some other and later champions 
 of the Foho, who, in their need of argument 
 forgetting the duty of courtesy, seem to have 
 imagined that the civilities of ordinary life do 
 not extend to literary disputants. However, on 
 all sides, "fuller and fm'ther particulars" were 
 called for ; and as, in the course of my inquiries, 
 I had made the extraordinary discovery that not 
 only in reference to the corrected folio of 1632, 
 but in other instances in which Mr. Collier had 
 pubhshed " facts " and " documents," relative to 
 Shakspere, these facts and documents turned out 
 on investigation to be likewise spurious, I have 
 resolved to lay before the world all the results of 
 my investigations, leaving any inferences dedu- 
 
22 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 cible from them to the judgment of the indi- 
 vidual reader. 
 
 On the 18th of May, 1859, Sir Frederic 
 Madden, Keeper of the MSS. in the British 
 Museum, attaching at that time, as I understand,* 
 no great importance to the various doubts 
 respecting the authenticity of the corrections in 
 the annotated folio 1632, which from time to 
 time had reached him, but having a great desire 
 to inspect the vohime for his own information, 
 wrote to the Duke of Devonshire begging the loan 
 of it for a short time, for the satisfaction of him- 
 self, Dr. Bodenstedt of Munich, and a few friends. 
 
 On the 26th, the book was placed in Sir 
 Frederic's hands, and, at his request, a discre- 
 tionary power was shortly after granted him by 
 the noble owner, to exhibit the book to a more 
 
 • In a memorandum commimicated to me by Sir Frederic Mad- 
 den, he states—" I bad a gi-eat wisb to see the vobime, after this 
 second avowal of doubts expressed by IMr. Staunton and Dr. 
 Ingleby, but my mind was so free from any bias, that I did not 
 entertain the least suspicion of forgery, and in September, 
 1858, I eagerly availed myself of the opportunity afforded me 
 by Mr. Collier (who had sent me a copy of the Hamlet of 16o3, 
 lithographed at the expense of the late Duke of Devonshire), 
 to express to him my wish to see the annotated folio, hni not 
 having the honour to be acquainted Avith the now Duke of Devon- 
 shire, I asked Mr. Collier if he could manwje to gain vie access to 
 tlw volume. To this request Mr. Collier never made any reply." 
 
THE MS. COREEOTIONS, ETC. 23 
 
 extended literary circle, in consequence of the 
 numerous applications to see it, which had been 
 sent in, as soon as it was known to be at the 
 Museum. In accordance with this permission, 
 a considerable number of persons interested in 
 the matter did so examine the volume during the 
 period it remained in the Museum, and no 
 application to see it was declined, except during 
 the brief period in which Mr. Frederick Netherclift 
 was occupied in making from it the fac-similes pre- 
 fixed to this volume. 
 
 Such were the circumstances under which 
 the " Folio" came into the Museum ; and it was 
 not at first imagined that anything would result 
 from its examination tending to invalidate the 
 manuscript corrections on its margins. 
 
 A short inspection, however, of the ink cor- 
 rections in the text and on the margins was 
 sufficient to give rise to the gravest doubts as to 
 their genuineness. In the first place, although 
 evidently written by one hand throughout, yet 
 the forms of the letters, especially of the capital 
 letters, presented strange anomalies. On one 
 page would be found a word or letter, characteristic 
 rather of the writing of the 16th than of the 17 th 
 century ; while in close juxtaposition, and some- 
 times on the same page, the identical letter or 
 
 ^ 
 
24 TNQITIRY INTO 
 
 word would occur, bearing every appearance of 
 having been written witlnn the present century. 
 
 Then, again, many of the letters, although exe- 
 cuted with evident care, were seen to be rather 
 7 exaggerations of the style of the 17th century 
 
 than examples of the style itself; while instances 
 occur in almost every page, in which the operator, 
 apparently not satisfied with his first attempt at an 
 ' antique appearance, has subsequently retouched 
 
 his work, in a manner greatly calculated to arouse 
 suspicion, as the ink employed for the purpose is not 
 uncommonly of a different shade, and the stroke of 
 a different thickness from that in which the word 
 or letter was originally written. Thus, on mere 
 pala^ographic grounds, the authenticity of the 
 corrections appeared questionable. But it was 
 further discovered, and this, too, before the whole 
 weight of these literal objections had been fully 
 considered, that a series of partially-obliterated 
 pencil corrections was visible throughout the 
 /^ margins of the Folio, corresj?ondmg with the cor- 
 
 rections made in ink, and sometimes actually 
 underlying them. The appearances presented by 
 these pencil corrections merit exact description. 
 
 In the first place, they have none of the feigned 
 antiquity about them of the ink corrections, either 
 in form or spelling. They are in a bold, clear 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 25 
 
 handwriting of the present day, are evidently exe- 
 cuted by one hand throughout, and have been placed 
 on the margins to direct the alterations afterwards 
 made in ink, and with which they invariably corre- 
 spond. They are of various kinds. Amongst the 
 most common are crosses and ticks, apparently 
 used to call attention to words or letters requiring 
 correction. Some of them may, of course, be the 
 "crosses, ticks, or lines" which Mr. Collier acknow- 
 ledges he introduced himself; but as cases occur 
 where such pencil-ticks actually underlie correc- 
 tions in ink, some of them at least must have been 
 placed on the margins before the " Old Corrector " 
 commenced his labours. The ordinary signs in 
 use to indicate coriigenda for the press are of 
 common occurrence in the margins, while the 
 corrections indicated thereby are made in the text 
 in the ^wasf-antique ink. Again, whole syllables 
 or words occur in pencil, partially rubbed out, 
 but still legible, and in which the character of the 
 modern' handwriting is plainly visible ; while in 
 near neighbourhood to them, the same syllable or 
 word is repeated in ink in the antique hand. In 
 some cases the ink word and the pencil word 
 occupy the same space in the margin, and are 
 written one upon the other ; and in these instances 
 the naked eye readily detects the fact that the 
 
26 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 pencil lias been written prior to the ink. As, 
 however, the most positive evidence on this head 
 was desirable, its decision forming one of the 
 turning-points of the inquir}', Mr. Maskel3'ne, by 
 permission of the Duke of Devonshii-e, undertook 
 to institute a series of microscopic and chemical 
 experiments on the subject. The importance of 
 the point lay in this : that since the pencil altera- 
 tions were undeniably recent (as a glance at the 
 ^ fac-similes prefixed to this volume will show), 
 
 it followed that the ink corrections, if written 
 subsequently to these, must be modern like- 
 wise, however carefully an antique appearance 
 might have been simulated for them. Mr. Mas- 
 kelyne's experiments set this point completely at 
 rest, and at the same time ehcited several par- 
 > ticulars as to the chemical composition and spurious 
 
 character of the ink itself It was, in fact, proved 
 by scientific demonstration, that the antique-look- 
 1 ing alterations in ink were not so venerable as 
 the modern pencilling ; that they were in reahty 
 modern fabrications, although executed with such 
 dexterity as to deceive on a cursory glance even 
 an experienced eye. So important are these experi- 
 ments, that I re-state them here in Mr. Maskelyne's 
 own words. He says : — 
 
 " This simple test (the microscope) of the cliaracter of 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 27 
 
 these emendations, I brought to bear on them, and with 
 the following results : — 
 
 " Firstly, as to any question that might be raised con- 
 cerning the presence of the pencil-marks asserted to be 
 so plentifully distributed down the margin, the answer 
 is, they are there. The microscope reveals the particles 
 of plumbago in the hollows of the paper, and in no case 
 that I have yet examined does it fail to bring this fact 
 forward into incontrovertible reality. Secondly, the ink 
 presents a rather singular aspect under the microscope. 
 Its appearance in many cases on, rather than in, the 
 paper, suggested the idea of its being a water-colour 
 paint rather than an ink; it has a remarkable lustre, 
 and the distribution of particles of colouring matter in 
 it seems unlike that in inks, ancient or modern, that I 
 have yet examined. 
 
 " This view is somewhat confirmed by a taste, unlike 
 the styptic taste of ordinary inks, which it imparts to 
 the tongue, and by its substance evidently yielding to 
 the action of damp. But on this point, as on another, 
 to which attention will presently be drawn, it was not 
 possible to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion in the 
 absence of the Duke of Devonshire's permission to make 
 a few experiments on the volume. 
 
 " His Grace visited the Museum yesterday, and was 
 good enough to give me his consent to this. The result 
 has been that tbe suspicions previously entertained re- 
 garding the ink were confirmed. 
 
 " It proves to be a paint removable, with the exception 
 of a slight slain, by mere water, while, on the other 
 
-7- 
 
 28 TNQUIEY INTO 
 
 hand, its colouring matter resists the action of chymical 
 agents which rapidly change inks, ancient or modern, 
 whose colour is due to iron. In some places, indeed, 
 this paint seems to have become mixed, accidentally or 
 otherwise, with ordinary ink, but its prevailing charac- 
 ter is that of a paint formed perhaps of sepia, or of 
 sepia mixed with a little Indian ink. This, however, is 
 of secondary importance in comparison with the other 
 point which has been alluded to. This point involves, 
 indeed, the most important question that has arisen, 
 and concerns the relative dates of the modem-looking 
 pencil-marks and the old emendations of the text which 
 are in ink. The pencil-marks are of different kinds. 
 Some are c^'s, indicative of the deletion of stops or 
 letters in the text, and to which alterations in ink, I 
 believe, invariably respond. Others, again, belong to 
 the various modes at present in use to indicate corri- 
 genda for the press. Some may, perhaps, be the 
 " crosses, ticks, or lines," which Mr. Collier introduced 
 himself. But there are others again in which whole 
 syllables or words in pencil are not so effectually rubbed 
 out as not to be still traceable and legible, and even the 
 character of the handwriting discernible, while in near 
 neighbourhood to them the same syllable or word is 
 repeated in the paint-like ink before described. The 
 pencil is in a modern-looking hand, the ink in a quaint 
 antique -looking writing. In several cases, however, the 
 ink word and the pencil word occupy the same ground 
 in the margin, and are one over the other. The ques- 
 tion that arises in these cases, of whether tliese tvo 
 
THE MS. COKEECTIONS, ETC. 29 
 
 writings are both ancient or both modern, or one an- 
 cient and the other modern, is a question for the anti- 
 quary or palseographist. The question of whether the 
 pencil is antecedent or subsequent to the ink is resolv- ^ 
 
 able into a physical inquiry as to whether the ink over- 
 lies the pencil, or the pencil is superposed upon the ink. 
 The answer to this question is as follows :— 
 
 " I have nowhere been able to detect the pencil-marks 
 clearly overlying the ink, though in several places the 
 pencil stops abruptly at the ink, and in some seems to ^ 
 
 be just traceable through its translucent substance, 
 while lacking there the generally metallic lustre of the 
 plumbago. But the question is set at rest by the re- 
 moval by water of the ink in instances where the ink 
 and the pencil intersected each other. The first case I 
 chose for this was a u in Richard JJ., p. 36. A pencil 
 tick crossed the u, intersecting each limb of that letter. 
 The pencil was barely visible through the first stroke, 
 and not at all visible under the second stroke of the u. 
 On damping off the ink in the first stroke, however, the 
 pencil-mark became much plainer than before, and even 
 when as much of the inkstain as possible was removed, ^ 
 
 the pencil still runs through the ink line in unbroken 
 even continuity. Had the pencil been superposed on 
 the ink, it must have lain superficially upon its lustrous 
 surface, and have been removed in the washing. We 
 must, I think, be led by this to the inference that the 
 pencil underlies the ink— that is to say, was antecedent 
 to it in its date ; while, also, it is evident that the " old ^ 
 
 commentator " had done his best to rub out the pencil 
 
30 IXQUIEY INTO 
 
 writing before he introduced its ink substitute." — Times, 
 July 16, 18.59. 
 
 It seemed incomprehensible how these various 
 and irrefragable proofs of forgery could have 
 escaped Mr. Collier, considering the " most care- 
 ful scrutiny " to which he states he committed 
 the folio. But I now began to compare the 
 marginal corrections with Mr. Collier's Complete 
 List of them, published in 1856, and with very 
 singular results. The List professes to give, in a 
 tabular form, the " entii'e body " of the emenda- 
 tions. Nothing can be more clear than this. It 
 is not only indicated by the title,* but asserted 
 in the strongest manner in the preface, as the 
 following extracts show. Mr. Collier says : — 
 
 " These Notes and Emendations are before the world in 
 two separate editions ; but as the whole of the altera- 
 tions and corrections were not included, and as those 
 interested in such matters are anxious to see the entire 
 body in the shortest form, I have appended them to the 
 present volume in one column, while in the opposite 
 column I have placed the old, or the received text. 
 Thus a comparison may be made in an instant, as to the 
 
 • "A List of every MS. Note and Emendation in Mr. Collier's 
 copy of Shakespeare's AVorks, folio, 1632." (Appended to Cole- 
 ridge's " T>ectnics on Shakespeare and Milton," ed. J. P. Collier. 
 London, ISr.H. f>ctavo.) 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 31 
 
 particular letters, syllables, words, or lines in which 
 changes have been introduced."— Pre/ace to Coleridge s 
 Seven Lectures, p. 60. 
 
 Again, Mr. Collier says ; — 
 
 " I have gone over every emendation in the folio 1632, 
 recently, for the purpose of the last portion of my 
 present volume ; and I am more and more convinced, 
 that the great majority of the corrections were made, 
 not from better manuscripts, still less from unknown 
 printed copies of the plays, but from the recitation of old 
 actors while the performance was proceeding."— Pre/ace 
 to Seven Lectures, p. 73. 
 
 And still further he adds : — 
 
 '' Fault has been found with me, in other quarters, for 
 not having at once seen everything in the way of MS. 
 note in my folio 1632. I have often gone over the 
 thousands of marks of all kinds in its margins ; but I 
 will take this opportunity of pointing out two emenda- 
 tions of considerable importance, which, happeniug not 
 to be in the margins, and being written with very pale 
 ink, escaped my eye until some time after the appear- 
 ance of my second edition, as well as of the one-volume 
 Shakespeare. For the purpose of the later portion of 
 my present work I have recently re-examined every line 
 and letter of the folio 1632, and I can safely assert that 
 no other sin of omission on my part can be diseoveredr — 
 Preface to Seven Lectures, p. 79. 
 
 And yet in spite of these reiterated assertions, 
 
?^ 
 
 32 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 the literal fact is, that the Complete List does 
 not contain one half of the corrections, many of 
 the most significant being among those omitted. 
 That it may be seen this is no exaggerated state- 
 ment, I subjoin a collation of the entire play 
 of Hamlet ; the collations faithfully representing 
 the "emendations on the margins of the folio." 
 Such of them as Mr. CoUier has inserted in his 
 Complete List being indicated by a capital C. I 
 have likewise, through the kind assistance of my 
 friend Mr. Howard Staunton, indicated the ori- 
 /> ginal soui-ces, from which the principal corrections 
 
 have been derived. Many of my readers will 
 probably be surprised to see the number of them 
 which can be thus identified, and the small claims 
 to originality which the " Old Corrector " actually 
 possesses. Some of the readings not given in the 
 List are certainly to be met with in the one- 
 volume edition of Shakspere, published by Mr. 
 Collier in 1853; but the text of that volume, 
 although purportiug to be "regulated by the 
 recently discovered folio of 1632," sometimes 
 follows the printed folios of the first and second 
 edition, sometimes the MS. corrections in the 
 folio 1632, and sometimes the quartos, and is 
 ^ therefore, as a book of reference, utterly worth- 
 
 less, it being impossible for the reader to dis- 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 33 
 
 criminate from what source any given reading is 
 derived. "The truth is," says a sound Shak- 
 sperian critic (Grant White), " that the text of 
 the pernicious one-volume edition, professing to 
 be ' regulated by the recently discovered folio of 
 1632, containing early MS. emendations,' is 
 composed from the readings of the first folio, the 
 uncorrected second folio, Mr. Collier's corrected 
 second folio, and all other previous and subse- 1 ^ 
 quent editions ; the changes from the first folio, 
 or from any other edition, being in no way 
 indicated. To the well-read, critical student of 
 the text, the book is useless ; to him who has 
 but commenced his studies, indescribably con- 
 fusing; to the genera] reader, a delusion and a 
 snare. With all respect due from me to a gen- 
 tleman who was a man when my father was a boy, 
 I must say that the publication of that volume 
 was a crime against the republic of letters." 
 
34 
 
 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 EMENDATIONS " IN THE PLAY OF " HAMLET," FROM THE 
 "CORRECTED FOLIO" 1C.32, 
 
 [The let't-hand column contains the prmted text of the folio 1G32. The words, letters, &c.' 
 to the right placed between crotchets, refer to words, letters, &c. in italic, and placed between 
 crotchets in the text, and exhibit the manuscript " corrections " found on the margins of Mr- 
 J. P. Collier's " Corrected Folio," 1632 , such of these as have been published by Mr. Collier in 
 the Complete List being distinguished by the letter C. The foot-notes show the sources from 
 wliich the manuscript corrections to which they refer were originally derived.j 
 
 Printed Text of Folio 1632. 
 
 MS. Corrections. 
 
 p. 272, 
 col. 1. 
 
 [Act I.] 
 
 Unter Bernaedo ajid Francisco. 
 
 Bar. Tis n[o]\v struck twelve[,] get thee to bed,, [e]' C.[:] [,] 
 
 Francisco. 
 [Mar.] What, ha's this thing appear'J againe 
 Wh[o]n yond same Starre , thats Westward 
 col. 2. The Bell then [beating] one 
 
 MUer the Ghost ^. 
 
 Bar. Looke, it not like the King ? 
 
 Hor. Most like [:] 
 When , th' Ambitious Norway combatted 
 He smot , the sledded PoUax 
 
 Mar. Thus twice before, and just at this [sam(f\ houre 
 
 Hon. In what particular [thoughte to] worke 
 
 [HOR.]^ 
 
 [e]-^ [,] 
 
 [tolling] this in a modern hand 
 in ink, but afterwards par- 
 tially obliterated. 
 
 [armed] 
 
 [s]^ 
 
 [.] with pencil cross in margin. 
 
 [he]^ C. 
 
 [e] w'ith pencil mark, 
 [dead]" afterwards part, oblit. 
 [it] partially obliterated. 
 
 ' Stecvens. - 4to 1604. ■'' 4tos and fol. 1623. ^ 4tos. " 4tos. « Fol. 1623, and 1st and 2nd 4tos. 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, 
 
 Printed Text of Folio 1(132. 
 
 Mar. Good now, sit downe, and tell me, he that 
 knowes, 
 Do's not divide tne Sunday from the weeke[,] 
 p. 273, Which he stood seiz'd [o]n, 
 ^^^- ^- Was gagecl by our King : which had re[turHd'] 
 And carriage of the Article [(7e]sign'd 
 8hark'd up a IJstof L[aHt7]lesse Resolutes 
 
 ^ Unter Grhost againe. 
 
 Which happily foreknow[w?^] may avoyd 
 Speake of it. Stay, and speake. Stop it, Marcellus. 
 The Cocke that is the Trumpet to the [day^ 
 Some saye[6-], that ever 'gainst that season 
 And, (they say) no spirit can walke abroad 
 No Faiery ta[Z]kes 
 .;Y3 [But looke, the Morne in Russet Mantle clad, 
 col. 2. Walkes o're the Dew of yon high Easterne hill.] 
 
 Ophelia, Lords Attendants. ,, 
 
 To \beare\ our hearts in griefe 
 rWith one Auspicious, and one Dropping eye. 
 With mirth in Funeral), & with Dirge in Marriage, 
 In equall Scale weighing Delight and Dole] 
 Colleagued with the dreame of Jiis Advantage [;] 
 Of these dilated Articles allow [:]^ 
 
 p. 274, [t>6o Laertes 
 
 col. 1. to 
 
 What wouldst thou have Laertes ?] 
 
 ETC. 35 
 
 MS. Corrections. 
 [, , ,] with pencil mark. 
 
 [?J with pencil mark. 
 
 w 
 
 [maind] partially obliterated, 
 [then ?] afterwards oblit. 
 [aw]^ C. 
 
 Entire line of Stage direction 
 obliterated. 
 
 [ledge] partially obliterated. 
 
 [^Cock erowesY 
 
 [morne]" C. 
 
 crossed out. 
 
 [then]^ 
 
 crossed out. C 
 
 Jeunens. - -Itos. =* 4to IWd 
 
 4to 160r 
 
 These two lines crossed through. 
 A pencil x in margin. 
 
 [King takes his seate] 
 [bathe] C. 
 
 These lines crossed out. 
 
 [t] partially obliterated. [,] 
 [.] [Give them] 
 
 Crossed o\it, 
 ■ 4tos & folio 1G23. 
 
36 
 
 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 Printed Text of Folio 1632. 
 
 MS. Corrections. 
 
 p. 274, 
 cul. 2. 
 
 Ham. a. little more then kin, and lesse then kind. 
 
 QUEE. Good Hamlet cast thy nightl [«/] colour off 
 Doe not for ever, with thy v[e]yled lids 
 [It shewes a will most incorrect to Heaven 
 
 to 
 As any the most vulgar thing to sence.] 
 
 [ Fye, tis a fault to heaven 
 
 to 
 This must be so.] 
 And the King's Eou[(?]e[,] the heavens, &c. 
 
 Manet Hamlet^ 
 
 Seeme[s] to me all the uses of this world 
 
 Fye on't ? Oh fie, \_fie,~\ tis an un weeded Garden 
 
 That he might not \heteene\ the windes of heaven 
 
 Visit her face too roughly. Heaven and Earth[,] 
 Must I remember [:] why, she would hang on him 
 
 [ {Aside) ]i 
 [ike] C. 
 [a]^ 
 
 Crossed out. 
 
 Crossed out. 
 [8]=* [dele] 
 
 \^Tr limpets] 
 
 [dele]^ 
 
 [dele]^ 
 
 [let e'en]'^ but afterwards 
 partially obliterated. 
 
 p. '.^I^o. 
 col.l. 
 
 Enter Horatio, [Barnard,] and Makcellus [Barnardo]" 
 
 Ham. I am glad to see you \ivell\ [dele] C. 
 
 Ham. I would not {have] your enemy say so [heare]'*' C. 
 
 To \taTce\ it truster of your owne report [make]" 
 
 HoR. Indeed my Lord, it \_followet]i\\\diV(\\x\)on [followed]''^ 
 
 I [should'] not looke upon his like agaiue [shall]" 
 
 Ham. Saw ? Who ? [Saw whom.]'" 
 AA'ithin his Truncheon's lengtli ; whilst they \hestill\T] [bechiird] C. 
 
 Waiburtdii. 
 « 4t(> 1(;04. 
 
 4to 1C04. •■' 4tos. ' 4to:v 
 4tos. " 4tos & lol. Wlo. 
 
 ■'' -Itds. ''Theubakl. ^Variorum. 
 4tos .V- fol. 1G23. '^ 4to & lol. 1G23. 
 
 Variorum 
 Johnson. 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, 1:TC. 
 
 37 
 
 Printed TeH of Folio 1632. 
 
 col. 2. 
 
 p. 276, 
 col. 1, 
 
 col. 2 
 
 It lifted up it, head 
 
 HoR. As I doe live my [Iionourable^ Lord 'tis true 
 
 Ham, His Beard was [grisl?/'] 
 Let it be [frehble] in your silence still 
 \_Froivard,'] not permanent ; sweet not lasting 
 The suppliance of a minute ;, No more 
 In thewes and Bulke : but as \_his] Temple waxes 
 The vertue of his [feare :] but you must feare 
 The [sanctity'] and health of the whole state 
 As he in his peculiar \_sect] and [force'] 
 If with [two] credent eare 
 And keepe [within] the reare of your affection 
 The Canker galls the [infant] of the Spring 
 Be wary th[a]n 
 As watchm[e]n to my heart 
 And re[«]kes not 
 
 Bear't that th' [opposed] may beware of thee 
 Are of a most select and generous [cheff] in that 
 [A] borrowing duls, &c. 
 [Hoaming] it thus, you'l tender me a foole 
 
 Ophe. And hath given countenance to ^^ his speech 
 My Lord, with all the, vowes of heaven 
 You must not take for fire. [For] this time, Daughter 
 Not of the [ei/e,] &c. 
 
 Breathing like sanctified and pious [bonds] 
 [Doe not beleeve his vowes ; for they are Breakers 
 
 fo 
 The better to beguile. This is for all] 
 
 ' 3rd 4to. " 4tos & fol. 1623. ^ 4tos. ■> 4tos. ^ 4tos. 
 9 4tos. '° 4tos and fol. 1623. " 4tos. '- 4to, 1604, & fol. 
 •Mtos & fol. 1623. '« 4to 1604. i- 4{os. '^ 4toy. i" 'J'lieo 
 
 MS. Corrections. 
 [s]> ~~ 
 
 [honoured p 
 fgrisled]^^ C. 
 [tenable]^ C. 
 [Forward]'' 
 [but] 
 [the]" 
 [will]' C. 
 [safety]'* C. 
 [act]» C. [place]-' C. 
 [too]'" 
 
 [you in]" C. 
 [infants]'^ 
 
 [e] 
 [a] 
 
 [c] 
 
 [opposer]^^ 
 
 [choise]'-" C. 
 
 [Audj'^ 
 
 [Running] C. 
 
 [it in] afterwards part, oblit. 
 
 [holy]'« 
 
 [From]'" 
 
 [dye]'^ C. 
 
 [bawds]'" C. 
 
 Crossed out 
 
 •"•Ilannicr. " 4tos. " 4to 1604. 
 1623. '^ ord Ito. " Stccvcns. 
 bald. 
 
INQUIRY INTO 
 
 Printed Text of Folio 1G32. 
 
 Have you so [slander] any Ymonmit] leisure 
 Look too't, I charge you ;., come your way 
 
 Enter Hamlet, Hoeatio, Marcellus. 
 
 p. 277, What does this meane my Lord ?^ 
 col. 1. 
 
 And as he dr[^]ines his draughts 
 
 Enter Ghost,^ 
 
 Be thy e[v]ents wicked or charitable 
 
 King, Father, Royall Dane : Oh [oA] answer me 
 
 With thoughts beyond \thee ; reaches] 
 
 Or to the dreadfull ^[onyiet] of the Cliffe 
 
 Which might deprive your Soveraignty of Reason 
 
 This line had been corrected into 
 [Which might deprive you of your Soveraign Reason] 
 but the corr. afterwards partially obliterated. 
 HOR. Be rul'd, you shall not goe.,, 
 col. 2. HoR. Heaven., will direct it. 
 
 And for the day confin'd to {fast in] fi[er]s 
 
 To eares of Flesh and Blood ; list Hamle.,, \oh] list 
 
 With witchraft of his wit[6-], \^ta^^^X\ traitorous gifts 
 p. 278, But soft, methinks I scent the Morning[.s] Ayre 
 col. 1. Q£ £^^£g^ Qf Crowne, and Queene at once \dis2mtchtA^ 
 
 Cut off even in the blossom[es] 
 
 And shall I couple hell ? Oh fio : hold [my] heart 
 
 MS. Corrections. 
 
 [squander] C. [moments]' C. 
 [so now] C. 
 [Sc. 4]^ 
 
 [Chambers] Chambers also in 
 pencil on outer margin. 
 
 [a]^ 
 
 [armed as before] [armed] oc- 
 curs also in pencil on the 
 
 [outer margin. 
 
 [nt]^ C. 
 [dele]^' 
 
 [the reaches]^ 
 [ummit]" C. 
 
 [They struygle] 
 
 W 
 
 [lasting]* C. [re] but aftcr- 
 
 w-ards obliterated. 
 Oppoisiti_' to tlu' correction lasliny 
 
 is the foll(n\ing pencil note : 
 
 " See LLL i;!3. This is in 
 
 Smith's .... 1705." 
 
 [t] [dele] 
 [dele] [wi]' C. 
 [dele]'« 
 [despoiled] 0. 
 [dele] 
 [deie] C. 
 
 ;rdito. ^Kowe. ^ 4to 1604. Mtos. ■' 4tos. Mtos. ' Howe. '^ Heath. Mtos&var. '" 4tos. 
 
THE MS. CORKECTTONS, ETC 
 Printed Text of Folio 1632. 
 
 39 
 
 MS. Corrections. 
 
 TJnmixt with baser matter ; [^cs,] yes, by heaven 
 Oh most pernicious^ woman 
 
 At least I'm sure it may be so in Denmarke^ 
 
 Enter Horatio and Marcellus. 
 
 [dele]' 
 
 [and perfidious] C. perfidious in 
 pencil can be seen underneath 
 the ink. 
 
 [wri . . ]- afterwards oblit. 
 \loiver down'] 
 
 Mar. How ist't my Noble Lord ? [^Enter] 
 
 col. 2. HOR. These are but wilde & hur[/ling words, my [t] 
 Lord. 
 HoR. What is't my Lord ?, we will 
 Gho. Sweare. 
 Gho. Sweare. 
 Than \are\ dream't of in \our\ Philosophy 
 
 Witli Arraes encombred thus, or th[?«]s, head shake 
 Or such ambiguous giving, out to note 
 
 p 279, Ghost. Sw-eare. 
 
 col. 1. With all my love, commend me to you 
 
 Actus Secundus 
 
 POLON. You shall doe marvel _,s wisely. 
 A[w(^] thus, I know his father and his friends, 
 [Reynold. As gaming my Lord 
 
 to 
 Reynol. I my Lord, I w^ould know that] 
 \_Polon.'] Marry Sir, here's my drift 
 
 [||Mar.] 
 
 \vnder\ 
 
 \vnder\ 
 
 The two italic words have been 
 crossed through, the cross- 
 ing afterwards obliterated. 
 
 [i]^ 
 
 [s]^ 
 
 [vnder\ 
 
 [I doe]'^ pencil underneath. 
 
 [^Sccena |?riwa] 
 [ou]'' also in pencil. 
 [s]' C. S also in pencil. 
 
 These lines crossed through in 
 ink, also marked in pencil. 
 
 col. 2 
 
 [dele] 
 \_Reynol.'] At closes in the consequence, I marry, [Pol.]* 
 
 4to ir,04. - Eowe. •' 4tos, 1003, 1604-5. ^ Warburton. * 4tos &' fol. 1023. « 4to 160;" 
 « 4tos. 9 4to 1604 & fol. 1623. 
 
40 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 Printerl Text of Folio 1082. ^^^- CorrcHion 
 
 The[i>] falling out at Tennis [re]^ 
 
 I saw him enter such a house of sa[i]le ; [dele]- 
 
 Your bait of falshood, takes this Calj,>]e of truth ; [rp]^ C. 
 
 He rais'cl a sigh, so [hidjeous and profound [pit]" 
 
 p. 280, I am sorry that with better [•s:p]eed and judgement [h]^ C. 
 
 ''''^' ^' I had not quoted him. I fear[t'] he did but trifle [d]" 
 
 col. 2. My Newes shall be the [JSTezves'] to that great Feast [fruitej' C. 
 King. Thyselfe doe grace to them, and bring them in.^ [Mxit FolJ 
 King. Well, we shall sift him. Welcome^ good [my]^ 
 Friends 
 
 With an intreaty herein further shewne., [{letter)] 
 
 Meane time we thanke you for your weW-llook't^ [took]'" 
 
 Pol. This businesse is [wry] well ended [dele]'^ C. 
 
 My Liege and Mad[r]m [a]'^ 
 
 p. 281, That we find out [the] the cause of this effect [dele]'^ 
 
 ^**^- ^- Hath given me this : now gather, and surmise^ [readesj* 
 
 Thats an ill Phrase, a vil[(^]e Phrase, beautified [dele]'^ 
 is a vil[c^]e [dele]^" 
 
 And more above hath his soliciting.,, [s]^^ 
 
 Or my deere Majesty you.^ Queene [r]^^ 
 
 Into the Madnesse where[o]n [i]^^ 
 
 And [^^M waile for L^- ^'l ^• 
 
 He walkes fo[u]r[e] houres together [dele]^^"^ C. 
 
 p. 281, QUEE. So he [Aa*-] ii^cleed [dothf 
 
 ^''^- 2- [And] keepo a Farme and Carters [But]~- C. 
 
 One man pick'd out of [ftvo] thousand [ten]=^^ C. 
 
 .4to 1004 & fol. 1G23. ^ 4to 1004. -Uos. Mto. & fol. 102 '. ' 4 tos. o. 
 
 :4tos. «Eowc. «4tos. '" 4to. & fol. 102P.. •' 4to. -Itos & fo 102... -o... 
 
 HYanovum. -4to. '-Ito. - 4tos -Itos .^ lol. 102... -Uos. - Hann.ov. ■ lio... 
 •^ 4tos. -" -Itop. 
 
THE MS. COKKECTIONS, ETC. 
 
 41 
 
 Privfed Text of Folio 1632. 
 
 MS. Corrections. 
 
 p. 282, 
 col. 1. 
 
 col. 2. 
 
 Ham. [For if the Sun breed Magots in a dead 
 
 dogge, being a good kissing Carrion] 
 [Pol. I have my Lord.] 
 [Ham. Let her not walke i'th Sunne : 
 Conception is a blessing, but not 
 as your daughter may conceive. 
 Friend, looke too 't.] 
 Pol. How say you by that &c.. 
 
 What doe you read my Lord ?^ 
 Pol. I meane the matter you [_nieane] 
 
 purging thicke Amber, [or] Plum-Tree 
 l[o]cke of Wit, 
 How pregnant (sometimes) his Replies are. 
 My honorable Lord, I will most humbly 
 Ham., These tedious old fo^es 
 Polon. You goe to seeke my Lord Hamlet, there 
 he is. 
 
 Ham. Nor the soales of her Shooe , ? 
 [Guild. Faith, her privates, we] 
 Hajvi. [In the secret parts of Fortune ? Oh, most 
 true : she is a Strumpet.] 
 
 [Guild. Which dreames indeed are ambition 
 to 
 Heroes the Beggers Shadowes :] 
 
 prevent your discovery [of] your secrecy 
 it goes so heav[<?w]ly with my disposition 
 this brave ore-hangings this Majesticall 
 golden fire, ; why, it appear[£'<f] 
 though by your smiling, 
 
 [dele] 
 [dele] 
 
 [dele] 
 
 [to himself ey 
 
 [to Mm] 
 
 [reade]^ 
 
 [and]3 
 
 [a]^ 
 
 [to himself e^ 
 
 [him] 
 
 [Enter] 
 
 [JExitJ 
 
 W 
 [dele] 
 
 [dele] 
 
 [dele] 
 
 [and]*^ 
 [i] C.^ 
 
 [firmam*]* C. 
 [s][s]» 
 [Smile, R.] 
 
 ' These asides are as old as Eowe. 
 
 2 4tos. 
 4tos. 
 
 3 4to.s. 
 » Yar. 
 
 ^ 4tOR. 
 
 Eowe. 
 
 4tos. 7 4fos. 
 
42 
 
 INQUTEY INTO 
 
 p. 283, 
 col. 1. 
 
 col. 2. 
 
 p. 284, 
 col. 1. 
 
 col. 2, 
 
 rrinted Text of Folio 1632. 
 
 [Ham. Ho'.v chances it they travaile 
 to 
 
 if Philosophy could find it out.] 
 HA:\r. Then ca[w] each Actor on his Asse. 
 [Polo. The best Actors in the world, either for Tragedy 
 to 
 
 the [Pr«?s] Chanson will shew you more] 
 
 twas Cau[^]ary 
 
 there was no [^SaUets] in the lines 
 
 but it was (as I [rg]ceived it 
 One [chief e] speech in it 
 Blacke as h[e] purpose 
 When h[is] lay 
 And ]ik'[d] a Newtrall 
 
 Breake all the Spokes and F[a]llies s: 
 
 About her lanke and all ore-te[a]med Loynes 
 And ]oassion_, [«n] the Gods 
 
 according totheir des[rt]rt 
 You are welcome to Elsonower ^ 
 Make mad the guilty, and apal[<?] the free 
 Like John a-d ,eames 
 To make [ (52;p]ression bitter 
 Wh[o] ? AVhat an Asse am I ? [/ sure ] 
 Be [r]ent him to the quicke 
 Wherein He catch the Conscience of the King 
 
 MS. Corrections. 
 
 [dele] 
 
 [me]' C. 
 
 [dele] 
 
 Fans has however been made 
 into [pious]^ C. 
 
 [i]3 
 
 [Salt]^ C. 
 
 [con] but partially obliterated. 
 
 [dele]^ C. 
 
 [is]« 
 
 [ej^ 
 
 [e]« 
 
 [e]- 
 
 [ate]" C. [dele] C. 
 
 [e]- 
 
 [Uzeunt Players] 
 
 [1]- 
 
 [r]- 
 
 [transg] C. 
 
 [y]'^ C. [dele] 
 
 [t]- 
 
 P.2S5, 
 col. 1. 
 
 [Act 3. Scene 1.] 
 Rosin. Niggard of question, but [of] our demands [to]'" C. 
 
 ' 4tos. 2 4to 1604-5. ^ 4tos & fol. 1G23. " 
 and fol. 1623. » 4tos & fol. 1623. ^ Variorum. 
 stoned. 4tos & fol. 1623. '^ 4to 1604. " ^owe 
 17 Made up from FTanmer and Warburton. 
 
 Pope. 5 4tos. « 4tos & fol. 1623. ' 4tos 
 ^" Varioi-um. '^Hanmer & Capell read pas- 
 . " 4tos and fol. 1623. '^ 4tos. '« 4tos. 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC 
 
 43 
 
 Printed Text of Folio 1632. 
 
 [We are oft too blame in this 
 to 
 Oh heavy burthen !] 
 And pious Action, we doe [surge] ore 
 King. Oh 'tis true.,, 
 [Pol.] I heare him comming 
 
 MS. Corredions. 
 
 [dele] The passage has never- 
 theless been corrected, in two 
 instances. 
 
 [suger]^ 
 [AsideJ 
 [dele] 
 
 E7^ter Hamlet.^ 
 
 The Oppressors wrong, the [^poo7'e\ mans Contumely 
 col. 2. The pangs of [disprized'j Love 
 
 Who would [these'] Fardles beare 
 
 from whose Bourne 
 
 Oph. Good my Lord, ^, 
 
 Ophe. Could beauty my lord, have 
 
 better Comerce then [^our] honesty ? 
 
 [For vertue cannot so inocculate our 
 
 old stocke, but we shall rellish of it.] 
 
 With more offences at my b[e]cke 
 
 play the Foole no [ivai/] 
 
 p. 286, [Goe, farewell, Or if thou wilt needs marry 
 col. 1. ^ ' ' ^ 
 
 to 
 
 the rest shall keepe as they are] 
 
 notwithstanding corrected as follows : — 
 
 Ham. I have heard of your [pratl]mg 
 
 God has given you one [/j]ace 
 
 [Ojjhelia behinde reading] 
 
 [proud]^ C. 
 
 first made into [misprized,] 
 the m afterwards obliterated, 
 and the word made [dis- 
 pized]^ C. 
 
 [dele]^ 
 
 [u]« 
 
 [forward] 
 
 [with]' C. 
 [dele] 
 
 [a]C. 
 [where]® C. 
 
 [dele] 
 
 [paint]" 
 [f]C.'° 
 
 4tos. " Pope. 
 
 4tos. 
 
 4tos 1604-5. « 4tc 
 paint in f/s. 
 
 « Pope. 7 4tos. « 4tos. ^ Theobald ; 4to8. 
 4tos. 
 
u 
 
 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 Printed Text of Folio 1632. 
 
 p. 28fi 
 col. 2 
 
 p. 287 
 col. 1 
 
 [gidge] 
 
 all but one shall^. 
 That unmatch'd for[^im]e 
 Whereon his brain[es] 
 
 Enter Hamlet & tivo or three of the Playens. 
 
 too much., your hand thus 
 Su[r]e the Action to the word 
 That you ore-st[o]p not 
 
 [or] [Nor man] 
 
 Uxejit Players 
 
 Ham. Bid the Players make hast,^. 
 
 Ham. What hoa, Horatio^. 
 As ere my Conv[.s-]er., ation 
 
 [Why should the poore be flatterd 
 to 
 As I doe thee. Something too much of this.] 
 And crooke the pregnant Hindges of the Knee 
 Even with the,,Comment of [m?/] soule 
 As Vulcans Styth.,. Give him [w]eedful note 
 And after we will both our judgement , joyne 
 ^Eiiter King, Queene, Polonius, &c. 
 
 \liis] Guard carrying Torches 
 Get you a place 
 
 Polo. Oh ho, doe you marke that ?^ 
 
 MS. Corrections. 
 
 [gigge]' C. 
 [live]2 C. 
 [m]3 
 
 [brain] C. 
 [Scene 2] 
 \unreadie\ 
 
 [with]^ C. 
 [t]^ 
 
 [e]«a 
 
 [dele] [nor man]^ C. 
 
 [e] 
 
 {Enter Ho.]^ 
 [dele] [s]^" 
 
 [ dele ] The line, however, 
 "corrected" 
 
 [begging] m pencil 
 [very]^' C. [thy]^' C. 
 [y]- [h]- C. 
 
 [S]>3 
 
 [Sennet'] 
 
 [a]- 
 
 [Eiter] 
 
 [Croes to 0(peUa] 
 
 ' 4tos. ' 4tos & fol. 1G23. ^ 4tos & foi. 1632. •• 4tos. ' 4tos & fol. 1623. « 4tos. 
 This direction is first found in 4to 1603. » 4to 1604. i« 4toB & fol. 1623. " 4t 
 1623. 12 4to8. 13 4tos & fol. 1623. '* Jennens. 
 
 7 4tos. 
 s & fol. 
 
THE MS. COmiECTIONS, ETC. 
 Printed Text of Folio 1632. 
 
 45 
 
 MS. Corrections. 
 
 [Ham. Lady, shall I lye in your Lap 
 
 to 
 Ham. Nothing] 
 Ophe. I my Lord , 
 col. 2. Ham. Let the Divell weare blacke 
 for He have [a] suite of Sables 
 [Ophe. Will they tell us what this shew meant 
 to 
 He ma^ke the Play.] 
 
 Unter ,^ King, a7id his Queene. 
 
 Phoebus Car[«] 
 
 World have time^ twelve 
 
 p. 288, And as my love is [siz,'] my feare is so. 
 col. 1. 
 
 The violence of [o]ther Griefe or joy 
 Directly [seaso7is] him his Enemy 
 Ham. If she should breake [_it notv] 
 col. 2. [Ham. I could interpret betweene you and your love 
 to 
 Ham. So you [w/s]take husbands] 
 Ham. Why let the str[M]cken Deere goe weepe 
 [Would not this Sir, and a Forrest of Feathers 
 to 
 HoRA. You might have Rim'd] 
 Provinciall Roses on my ra[c]'d shoes 
 [iTam.] Oh good Horatio 
 
 [dele] 
 
 [Lie doivne neare Jier^ 
 
 [no] 
 
 [dele] 
 
 [r]> 
 
 \_PlayerY 
 
 [r] C.3 
 
 [s]^ 
 
 Apparently first corrected into 
 [j^Jj'd!]. afterwards obliterated 
 and made [siz'd]^ C. 
 
 [ei]« 
 
 [p . . .s] but obliterated 
 
 [her vow] C. 
 
 [dele] 
 
 [must]^ 
 
 [i]« 
 
 [dele] 
 
 [ais]9 C. 
 [dele] 
 
 4tos & fol. 1623. " Pope. ^ Rowe. " 4tos & fol. 1623. •' fol. 1623. 3rd and 4th folios 
 have/icU So Eowe and Pope. « 4tos. 'Theobald. » 4to 1603. » Steevens. 
 
INQUIRY INTO 
 
 PrInteJ Ted of Folio 1632. 
 
 .1/<S'. Currtctiims. 
 
 p. 289, So wildly from [_my] affaire 
 col, 1. You doe [freely] barre the doore of your owne 
 col. 2. In this little Organe, yet cannot you make it, 
 PoLON. By th' Mp]sse. 
 Tis now the very witching time of night, , 
 How in my words so[?n]ever she be shent 
 
 Enter King, Rosixckoss, & Guilderstar. 
 
 To keepe those , many bodies safe 
 
 [the cease of Majesty 
 to 
 Did the King sighe, but with a general grone] 
 Fixt on the Som[?2e]t of the highest Mount 
 Are mortiz'd and adjo.n'd 
 29Q In the corrupted curr[a]nts of this world 
 col. 1. And oft tis seene, the wicked p[?v'2c^] it selfe 
 All may be well, , 
 
 [the] C. 
 [surely]' C. 
 [speake]^ C. 
 [a]3 
 
 [Exeunt] 
 [dele]^ 
 [Scene 3] 
 
 [verie] C. 
 
 [dele] 
 
 [mi]^ 
 [i]« 
 
 [e]' 
 
 [urse] C. 
 [Kneeles] 
 
 col. 2. 
 
 Enter Hamlet.^ 
 my thoughts remaine below. 
 
 ^ \{hehind) his sword drawen] 
 
 [rising] 
 
 S[o]ree'nd [c]« 
 
 He [sile]nce me [en'e] heere [sco]^ C. [even]^ C. 
 
 Withdraw, I heare him comming., [Exit Pol. behind the arras] 
 
 Ham. Goe, goe, you question with an [idle] tongue [wicked]'" C. 
 QuEE. Nay, then He se[z;] those to you [nd] C. 
 
 You goe not till I set, up a glasse [you]" 
 
 4tos ; surely but, variorum. 
 7 4tos. ** 4tos & fol, l<iL'3. 
 
 4tos. ■' 4tos. " 4tb 4to. 
 ' Ilanmeraud \N'arbiuton. 
 
 Kowc, &c. « 4tos A: fol. 1G23. 
 '» 4tos. » 4tos & fol. 1623. 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, E'J'C. 
 
 47 
 
 Printed Text of Folio 1632. 
 
 Pol. What hoa, lielpe, helpe, helpe..^ 
 
 Pol. Oh I am slaine. Killes Polonius. 
 
 QUEE. As kin[c^] a King? 
 
 Ham, I Lady, twas my word 
 Leave wringing of your hands, peace, sit you downe 
 p. 291, See what a grace^ seated on his Brow 
 " N[o]w lighted on a 
 Heere is your husband, like a Mildew'd [c^Jeare 
 Blasting his wholesome \)x[eat]C\ 
 Would st[e]p from this 
 When the compulsive Ard[?t]r[g] 
 A[s] Reason panders Will 
 
 EnUr Ghost, 
 That laps't in [Ti]me and Passion. 
 
 col. 2. And with [the] corporall ay re 
 Start, up and stand, an end 
 
 Looke where he goes even now out at the Portall. Exit 
 And doe not spred the Compost o[r] the Weedes 
 Thus bad begins, and worse remaines behind^ 
 
 p. 292, And breath of life : I have no life to breath. 
 
 col. 1. 
 
 Exit Hamlet tugging in Polonius. 
 There's matter[s] 
 
 Ore whom his very madnesse, like some 0[«]re 
 But we will ship him hence, and this vil[(^Je deed 
 
 MS. Correct iong. 
 
 [within^ 
 
 [at the backe and then comes 
 
 fo7'ward\ 
 [dele]i 
 
 [Seeing Polonius] 
 [{to her)] 
 [was]^ 
 [e]3 
 [dele]^ 
 [other] ^C. 
 [oo] C. 
 [o]« 
 [ndj^ C. 
 
 [unarmed] 
 
 [fu] C. 
 [th'in]«C. 
 
 [s] [sT 
 , [ahostj' 
 
 M\ 
 
 [to himself] but almost oblit. 
 
 [e]- 
 
 [Exit Queene] 
 
 [IIII Act ^. So. l.f 
 
 [dele] 
 
 [dele]''' nearly obliterated. 
 
 [dele]''' 
 
 ' 4tos. - 4tos &fol. 1623. ^ 4tos i 
 4toR. ^Srd (fe4th 4tos. i" 4to 1604. 
 
 fol. 1023. * 4tos & fol. 1623. * 4to8. ^ Rowe, &c. ' 4t08. 
 "4tos. '2Rowe,&c. '» Rowe. '■' 4tos & fol. 1623. 'Mtos. 
 
48 
 
 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 Printed Ted of Folio 1632. 
 
 p. 293, 
 col. 1. 
 
 P^292, Enter Kmg. 
 
 Who like not in their judgement,, but their eyes : 
 But ne[ar]er 
 
 Ham. a certaine convocation 
 
 of, wormes are ene at him 
 [King. ^Mlat dost thou meane by this ?] 
 
 [Ham. Nothing but to shew you gut of a 
 
 Begger] 
 Hath. He will stay till ye come ,, 
 Ham. [I see a Cherube that sees him 
 but,] [(?]ome 
 Payes homage to us ; thou maist not coldly se[^] 
 How ere my h[a]p,s, 
 
 \_Enter Fortinbras tvith an Army. 
 
 . to 
 For. Goe safely on.] 
 
 Y^nter Queene and Horatio. 
 col. 2. At his head a [grass\-greene] Turfe 
 
 Let in the Maid, [let in'] a Maid, never departed more 
 p. 294, [Keejjjes on his wonder, keepes himselfe in cloudes 
 
 MS. Corrections. 
 
 [iScene 2.] 
 
 w 
 
 [v]' C. 
 
 [palated] C. 
 
 [dele] 
 
 [dele] 
 
 [ExeuntJ 
 
 [dele] 
 
 [C] 
 
 [e] 
 
 [o] [ef C. 
 
 [Scene 3.] 
 
 [dele] 
 [Scene \ 3.] 
 
 [2. L] C. 
 
 [that out]^ 
 
 This has been crossed through, 
 but the margin on which the 
 correction is made has been 
 carefully torn away.* 
 
 4tos. 
 
 - Variorum. ^ Johnson suggested hopes, and that the passage should rhyme ; and 
 the folio, 1623, has — were ne'er hegun. * 4tos & fol. 1623. 
 
 ♦ In the Complete List we are told by Mr. Collier that the "corrected" Folio has "Feeds for Keepes;" Feeds 
 being the reading of the 4tos. Consequently the margin must have been intentionally mutilated since 1856, when 
 the List was published, in order to get rid of the reading of the 4tos ! Similar instances of recent mutilation occur 
 throughout the "Folio." 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 
 
 49 
 
 Printed Text of Folio 1632. 
 
 Miter a Messenger^ 
 Let them guard the door. What is the matter ? 
 col. 2! Ore-beares your officers[,] the rabble call him [Lord] 
 The Ratifiers & props of every wor[cZ] 
 
 King. The doores are broke. 
 Even here betweene the chaste imsmi[^]ched brow 
 [King. Good Laertes 
 to 
 Repast them with my blood] 
 
 Of your deare fathers death, [if] writ in y' revenge 
 That S.,oop- stake 
 King. Why now ? [what noi/se is that ?] 
 
 Miter Ophelia^. 
 
 [Nature is fine in Love 
 
 to 
 After the thing it loves.] 
 And on his grave raine[s] many a teare 
 No, no, he is dead, go^e to [thi/] Death-bed 
 His Beard ^as white as Snow 
 295 ^rid o[f] all Christian Soules, I pray God 
 col. 1.' God buy ye. Mxit Ophelia,. 
 
 Be you content to lend your pa jence 
 
 col. 2. 
 
 Mnter Horatio, with an Attendant. 
 
 Say. God bless you[r] Sir 
 [Stood] Challenger on mount of all the Age 
 King. Laertes you shall., them 
 
 4to8 & fol. 1623. 2 4to8. 
 
 4tos. " Johnson. * 4to8 
 7 4tos & fol. 1623. 
 
 MS. Corrections. 
 
 [Enter] 
 [in haste] 
 [••] [King] C. 
 Altered but obliterated. 
 
 [Sword out] 
 
 w 
 
 [dele] but the following correc- 
 tions nevertheless made, 
 [is't]^ C. 
 [w] 
 [you speake] 
 
 [still distraught] 
 
 [dele] 
 
 [dele] 
 
 [n] C. [his] C. 
 
 [w] C.^ 
 
 [n]^ 
 
 [dauncing distracted] 
 
 [ij 
 
 [Scene \ 4.] 
 
 [dele]« 
 [Sole] C. 
 [heare]' 
 
 ; fol. 1623. " -Itos .^' fol. 1623. 
 
50 
 
 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 Printed Text of Folio 1632. 
 
 Or is it some abuse ? [Or] no such thing 
 And for his death no wind of blame 
 shall breathj_. 
 
 p. 296, Had witchcraft in't ; he grew [i]nto his Seat 
 
 '^°^' ^' And lemme of all [our] Nation 
 
 If one could match you [Sir.'] This report of his 
 Did Hamlet so envenom with hi[s] Em7 
 Your sodaine commiug [over] to play with him 
 
 Laer. ■Wh[y] out of this, my Lord 
 A Sword unba[e]ted 
 Requite him for your Father 
 And for that purpose 111 annoi[o]t my Sword 
 So mortall, [I] but dip[^] a knife in it 
 Wee'l make a solemne wager on your co[mm]mgs 
 col. 2. As make your bowts more violent to th[e] end 
 Or like a creature Native, and [f7]educed 
 Pull'd the poore wretch from her melodious [b]y 
 
 Enter two Cloivnes ^, 
 
 and an Act hath three branches : 
 It is [coi] Act 
 
 Other. Nay but he.je you, Goodman Delver 
 p. 297, [Other. Was he a Gentleman 
 col. 1. to 
 
 Other. Goe to.] 
 
 MS. Corrections. 
 
 [and]' C. 
 
 [e]^ 
 [nf 
 [that]* 
 [deie]^ 
 
 W 
 
 [o'er]" 
 
 [at]" C. 
 
 [dele]« 
 
 [e]« 
 
 [n]- 
 
 [that]'' C. [dele]" C. 
 
 [n n]'^ C. 
 
 [at]'3 
 
 [r] r also in pencil at side. C 
 
 [la]'* C 
 
 [V. Act 5, Scene 1.]'^ 
 
 [ivith Spades # tooles:] 
 
 [to]'« C. 
 [a]'^ 
 
 [dele] 
 
 1 4tos "- Eowe, and all after. ^ 4tos. In the Complete List the is given as the reading : 
 the is also the rcadmg of the quartos. * 4tos & fol. 1623. « 4tos & fol. 1623. ^ 4tos. 
 «4tos. Mt08& fol. 1623. '" 4tos & fol. 1623. " 4tos. "^ 4tos. '^ 4tos. '^ 4tos. - Rowe. 
 '• 4tos. '" 4tos & fol. 1623. 
 
THE MS. COKRECTIONS, 
 
 ETC. 
 
 Printed Text of Folio 1632. 
 
 MS. Corrections. 
 
 Get thee to [_Yaiigmi,'] fetch me a 
 
 [You']^ 
 
 sto[a] pe Liquor 
 
 [0]^ 
 
 Sings [and digges.] ^ 
 
 [Exit other Clo.J 
 
 Clowne sings ^ 
 
 [ {smi) ] 
 
 But age, &c. 
 
 
 col. 2. Cloivne sings ^ 
 
 [ {Skull) ] 
 
 A Picke-axe, &c. 
 
 
 Ham. or equivocation will 
 
 
 [follo'iv] us 
 
 [undoe]^ 
 
 [How long hast thou been a Grave-maker ? 
 
 
 to 
 
 [dele] 
 
 Its no great matter there.] 
 
 
 p. 298, [Ham. Why 
 
 
 col. 1. , 
 to 
 
 [dele] 
 
 Man and Boy thirty yeeres.] 
 
 
 A Tanner will last you nine yeere[«] 
 
 [dele]^ 
 
 Alexander returne[^7i] into dust 
 
 [d] 
 
 Should patch a Wall, ^.expell the Winter s flaw 
 
 [tj 
 
 ivith^ Lords attendant 
 
 [Priest and~\^ 
 
 col. 2. Foredoe it^ owne life ; [^]was some Estate 
 
 [s]« [it]« 
 
 Couch we a while, and marke, 
 
 \^At one side'] 
 
 To sing sa[^e] Requiem 
 
 [d] C. 
 
 QuEEX. Sweets, to the sweet farewell ^ 
 
 [Flowers'] 
 
 Laer. Oh, t[er]r[^■]ble wooe[r] 
 
 [dele] [e] C. [dele]« C. 
 
 51 
 
 ' Yon Complete List. " fol. 1623, and subsequent editions read stoup or doop. ' Eowe. 
 ' 4tos& fol. 1623. ^ 4tos & fol. 1623. « 4tos & fol. 1623. ' Priest in all modern editions. 
 " 4th 4to. » 4tos. 
 
52 
 
 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 Printed Text of Folio 1632. 
 
 MS. Corrections. 
 
 H AM. Wliat is he, whose griefes ^ 
 
 Laer. The Divell take thy soule , 
 Sir though I am not spleen [a^«'e] and rash 
 Which let thy wisenesse feare. Away thy hand , 
 Woo't weepe ? woo't fight ? woo't ^ teare thy selfe ? 
 p. 299, He doo\. Dost thou come here to whine 
 
 ^ Anon as patient as the female Dove 
 The Cat will mew, [and] Dog will have his day 
 Strengthen you^ patience in our last nights speech 
 Wee'l put the matter to the present push., 
 
 A 
 
 Uiiter Hamlet and Horatio. 
 [me thought I lay 
 to 
 HoR. That is most certaine.] 
 (And praise [be] rashnesse for it) let us [knoiv] 
 When our de[rtre] plots do [jxade] 
 
 [Hajvi.] Up from my Cabin. 
 (My [^]eares forgetting manners) 
 No not to stay the grin[(/]ding of the Axe 
 But wilt thon heare, how I did proceed ?^ 
 The eftect[s] of what I wrote 
 And many such like Assp]s of great charge 
 col. 2, Subscrib'd it, gau',, th' Impression 
 
 Was our Sea-fight, and what to this was se[ment] 
 They are not neere my conscience ; their de[5]ate 
 Tis dangerous when ^ baser nature comes 
 
 [Fonvard] 
 [Seize hiniy 
 [eticke] 
 [Strive] 
 [storm e or] C. 
 [He doo't] C. 
 [Queene]^ 
 [the]3 C. 
 [r]^ [Uxit] 
 [To Laertes] 
 Scene 2.^ 
 
 [dele] corrected however as 
 follows. 
 
 [to] oblit. [owne] C. 
 
 [epe]''C. [faile]^C. 
 
 [dele] 
 
 [f]« 
 
 [dele]« 
 
 [Giving it] 
 
 [dele]'" 
 
 [e]" 
 
 [e]'^ 
 
 [quell] C.'^ 
 
 [fe]'" C. 
 
 [a] 
 
 • Eowe. 2 4tos. 3 Theobald. ^ 4tos. » Rowo. ' 4tos. ? Pope. « 4tos & fol. 1623. 
 9 4tos&fol. 1623. '" 4tos. " The suggested quibble of asses is Johnson's, i- 3rd and 4th folios. 
 '•■' 4toB read sr(jiinit. '< -Itos. 
 
THE MS. COERECTIONS, ETC. 
 
 53 
 
 Printed Text o Folio 1632. 
 
 p. 300. 
 col. 1 
 
 col. 2. 
 
 p. 301, 
 col. 1. 
 
 Ham. Does it not, tliink'st th[t'e] 
 Throwne out | his Angle for my proper life 
 [dost know this waterfly 
 to 
 spacious in the possession of dirt.] 
 OSK. Swe_,t Lord, if your [friencTjshi-p 
 were at leasure 
 He hath on[e] twelve for mine 
 
 [lie] gaine nothing but my shame 
 [he does well to 
 commend it himselfe 
 
 to 
 the Bubbles are out.] 
 
 there are no tongues else for^s [tmigue] 
 but thou wouldest not thinke 
 how^^all heere 
 HoR. If your mind dislike any thing, obey^ 
 Ha]VI. Give me your pardon, Sir, I've 
 done you wrong, 
 [Was't Hamlet wrong'd Laertes ? Never, Hamlet. 
 
 to 
 His Madnesse is poore Hamlets enemy] 
 And hurt my [i!/] other 
 Laer. Come one for me^ 
 
 King. Set me the Sto^pes of Wine upon that Table 
 And in the Cup an union shall [A]e throw^ 
 The Cannons to the Heavens, the Heaven^ to Earth 
 
 MS. Corrections. 
 
 [on]' "" 
 
 [2]C. 
 
 [dele] 
 
 [e]^ [lord]2 C. 
 
 [dele]^ 
 [I] 
 
 [dele] 
 
 the line however corrected. 
 
 [turne]* C. 
 
 [iU is]^ C. 
 [it]^ 
 
 [To Laertes'] 
 
 [dele] 
 
 [Br]^ C. 
 [Bring foiles] 
 
 [0]« 
 
 [b] [ne] but obliterated. 
 
 [s]^ 
 
 ' Eowe. * 4tos. ' 4tos. ^ 4tos. * 4tos. ^ 4tos. ^ 4toe. ® 4tos. 
 9 3rd 4to. 
 
54 
 
 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 Pi-inted Text of Folio 1632. 
 
 Ham. lie play this bout first ; set., by a while 
 Here'[s] a Napkin, rub thy browes^ 
 Qu. I will my Lord.,^ 
 KiN'G. Part them ; they are incens'd.. 
 Hoe. They bleed on both sides. How is'[«] my Lord. 
 To my , Sprindge, Osricke 
 I am poyson'd.., 
 p. 301, (rts this fell Sergeant death 
 
 ^" ■ ^' Is stricTct in this Arrest) oh I could tell you., 
 HOK. Never beleeve it. 
 Let go, by heaven I'le have't. 
 
 Good night \_8weet Frience'] 
 
 [Why do's the Drumme come hither 
 
 to 
 To tell him his commandment is fulfiU'd] 
 [His'] quarry cries on Havocke 
 
 p. 302, 
 
 cols. 1 
 
 &2. 
 
 col. 1. I have some Ri^ t[e]s of memory in this Kingdome 
 
 col. 2. Which [are'] to claime, my vantage doth 
 
 HoR. Of that I shall [ahva^es] cause to speake 
 But let this s[ame] be presently perform'd 
 
 MS. Corrections. 
 
 [it]' c. 
 
 [is] C= [my sonne] C. 
 
 [She drinkesf 
 
 [Both wounded] 
 
 [it]3 
 
 [owne]* C. 
 
 [dies'f 
 
 [dele] obliterated. 
 
 [all] obliterated. 
 
 [takes the Cup.] 
 
 [Struggling, Hamlet gets it.] 
 The word struggling afterwards 
 in part obliterated. 
 
 [be blest] [Finis.] 
 
 [dele] 
 
 a liue however corrected. 
 
 [This]« C. 
 
 These two columns crossed 
 through [dele], but neverthe- 
 less the following alterations 
 [gh] [dele]' [made. 
 
 [now]« C. 
 
 [have also]'-" 
 
 [cene] C. 
 
 [While I remaine behind to tell 
 
 a tale 
 That shall hereafter turne the 
 
 hearers pale.] 
 
 4tos. * Caix;ll. 
 
 Variorum. •* 4to6. ' AH modern editions from Eowe. " 4tos. 
 7 4tos. ^ 4tos. » 4tos. 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 
 
 55 
 
 Collatim of a page taken from Henri/ VI. Part II. 
 
 Corrected folio, p. 142. Collier, 1856, p. 223, col. 2. 
 
 What say ye, Countrimen ? will ye [relent^ 
 Or let a [I'abble^ 
 col. 1. Shake he his weapon at us, and passe by. 
 
 given \out'] these arms 
 Henry hath mony[,] you are strong and \may\ly\ 
 God on our side, \we\ doubt not \of\ Victorie 
 Follow me souldiers wee'l devise a \meane ] 
 Was ever king that [i<9?/'<i] an earthly Throne 
 
 [m]fortunate 
 And with a puissant and [a mighty] power 
 Like to a Ship, that having scap'd a Tempest 
 Is straightway [elaim'd] and boorded with a Pyrate. 
 Of gallow-glasses and stout ^ Kernes 
 I pray thee, Buckingham, go ^ and meet him* 
 Come wife, let's in and learne to [governe better] 
 
 col. 
 
 MS. Corrections. 
 
 [repent] C. 
 
 [rebell] 
 
 [As he doth passe us let his 
 
 weapon shake.] partially 
 
 obliterated, 
 [up] obliterated. 
 [ ; ] [crye] 
 [dele] obliterated, 
 [thing] obliterated, 
 [filled] obliterated, 
 [unfortunate] obliterated, 
 [united] C. 
 
 [calm'd] 
 
 [Irish] C. 
 
 [thou] C. 
 
 [rule againe] obliterated. 
 
 * In Complete List, Mr. Collier incorrectly printed— 
 I pray thee, Buckingham, then go and meet him. 
 
J- 
 
 56 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 Mr. Collier will perhaps be able to explain how 
 so small a proportion of the marginal corrections 
 of the " Folio " is recorded in his List, in which 
 he informs ns he can " safely assert that no 
 sin of omission can be discovered." 
 
 I now proceed to examine the only other ground 
 put forward by Mr. Collier in proof of the au- 
 thority of his "Folio," viz., tliat it, ivith all its cor- 
 rections, had been in the possession of Mr. Parry 
 some half-century ago. This assertion he first made 
 in the Preface to the second edition of Notes and 
 Emendatioiw, 1853, and confirmed by the affidavit 
 of 1856. 
 
 Had such been actually the case, it would of 
 course have relieved the present generation from 
 the suspicion of having perpetrated this " most 
 discreditable fraud." But, as we shall presently 
 see, Mr. Parry altogether denies having ever pos- 
 sessed this volume, and states that Ae had not even 
 seen it until the thirteenth of July in the last 
 year (1859.) 
 
 Mr. CoUier, however, asserts that the book was 
 identified by Mr. Parry, and he gives two distinct 
 narratives, not only of the fact but of the man- 
 ner of the identification. These two narratives 
 diff'er materially, if they are not actually contradic- 
 tory. I subjoin both for the purpose of compa- 
 
THE MS. COERECTIONS, ETC. 57 
 
 rison. The first occurs in the Preface to the 
 second edition of Notes and Emendations, 1853, 
 where "the important discovery regarding the 
 ownership and history of my corrected folio 
 1632" is thus related :— 
 
 " John Carrick Moore, Esq., of Hyde Park Gate, Ken- 
 singtoD * * * was kind enough to address a note to me, 
 in which he stated that a friend of his, a gentleman of 
 the name of Parry, had been at one time in posses- 
 sion of the very foho upon which I founded my recent 
 volume of " Notes and Emendations," that Mr. Parry 
 had been well acquainted with the fact that its margins 
 were filled throughout by manuscript notes, and that he 
 accurately remembered the handwriting in which they 
 were made On being shewn the facsimile, which ac- 
 companied my first edition, and which is repeated in the 
 present, he declared his instant conviction that it had 
 been copied from what had once been his folio 1G32. 
 How, or precisely when, it escaped from his custody he 
 knew not, but the description of it in my " Introduction," 
 exactly corresponded wdth his recollection. 
 
 " I lost no time in thanking Mr. Moore for these tidings, 
 and in writing to Mr. Parry for all the particulars within 
 his knowledge. Unfortunately the latter gentleman, 
 just before he received my note, had met with a serious 
 injury, which confined him to his bed, so that he was 
 unable to send me any reply, 
 
 " For about ten days I remained in suspense, but at 
 last I determined to wait upon Mr. Moore, to in(|uire 
 
 I 
 
INQUIRY INTO 
 
 whether he was aware of any reason why I had not re- 
 ceived an answer from Mr. Parry. He accounted for 
 the silence of that gentleman on the gi'ound of his 
 recent accident ; and as Mr. Moore was confident that 
 Mr. Parry was correct in the conclusion that my folio 
 1632 had formerly belonged to him, he advised me to 
 call upon him, being sure that he would be glad to sa- 
 tisfy me upon every point. I accordingly hastened to 
 St. John's Wood, and had the pleasure of an interview 
 with Mr. Parry, who, without the slightest reserve, gave 
 7^ me such an account of the book as made it certain that 
 
 it was the same which, some fifty years ago, had been 
 presented to him by a connexion of his family, Mr. 
 George Gray. Mr. Parry described both the exterior 
 and interior of the volume, with its innumerable cor- 
 rections and its missing leaves, with so much minute- 
 ness, that no room was left for doubt." 
 
 " On the question from whence Mr. Gray, who resided 
 at Newbury, had procured the book, Mr. Parry was not 
 so clear and positive ; he was not in a condition to state 
 any distinct evidence to show out of what library it had 
 come ; but he had always understood and believed that 
 it had been obtained, with some other old works (to the 
 collection of which Mr. Gray v/as partial), from Upton 
 Court, Berkshire, — formerly and for many years before 
 the dispersion of the library, the residence of a Roman 
 Catholic family of the name of Perkins, one member of 
 which, Francis Perkins, who died in 1736, was the hus- 
 band of Arabella Farmer, the heroine of the ' Rape of 
 the Lock.' 
 
 .^ 
 
THE MS. COEEECTIONS, ETC. 59 
 
 " This information has been communicated to me so 
 recently, that I have not yet been able to ascertain at 
 what date, and in what way, the books at Upton Court 
 were disposed of. Mr. Parry is strongly of opinion that 
 Mr. Gray became the owner of this copy of the folio 
 1632, considerably before the end of the last century; 
 and Mr, Parry was himself at Upton Court about fifty 
 years since, when a Roman Catholic clergyman, eighty 
 years of age, who had remembered the books there all 
 his life, showed him the then empty shelves upon which 
 they had been placed in the library. 
 
 " A Mr. Francis Perkins died at Upton Court three 
 years after the publication of the folio 1632 ; and if 
 Mr. Parry's belief be correct, that the copy which 
 Mr. Gray gave to him had once been deposited there, it 
 is not impossible that Francis Perkins was the first 
 purchaser of it. If so, we might be led to the inference, 
 that either he, or one of his immediate descendants, was 
 the writer of the emendations ; but as has been mentioned 
 elsewhere, the present rough calf binding was not the 
 original coat of the volume ; and as far as my imperfect 
 researches have yet gone, I do not find any Thomas 
 Perkins recorded as of Upton Court. 
 
 " The Christian name of the great actor of the reign of 
 Charles I. was Pvichard ; and a Richard Perkins, called 
 Esquire in Ashmole's Collections, at a date not stated, 
 married Lady Mervin, a benefactress of that parish. 
 Why should we deem it impossible that Richard Perkins 
 having attained eminence on the stage, subsequently 
 married a lady of title and property ? 
 
^ 
 
 60 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 " However, this and other points, dependent chiefly 
 upon dates, remain to be investigated, and upon any of 
 them I shall be most thankful for information. 
 
 " The only facts that I am yet able to establish are, 
 that my folio 1682, with its elaborate corrections, about 
 half a century since, came into the possession of Mr. 
 Parry, from Mr. George Gray, who, it is probable, ob- 
 tained it from Upton Court (about eight miles from his 
 residence), where it is unquestionable that at an early 
 date there was a library, likely to have contained such 
 a book, which library was afterwards dispersed. The 
 name of 'Tho. Perkins' on the cover, is a strong con- 
 firmation of the opinion that it once formed part of that 
 library ; and as to the identity of the volume, and hand- 
 writing of the marginal notes, Mr. Parry feels absolutely 
 certain. 
 
 " Having thus made, very unexpectedly, the first step 
 (decidedly a long one), towards the history of this copy, 
 &c., &c., it remains for me to advert to objections, &c." — 
 {Preface to Second Edition of " Notes and Emendatimis" 
 1853.) 
 
 ISTow I think the expressions " Mr. Parry gave 
 me such an account of the book, as made it certain 
 that it was the same which, some fift}'- years ago, 
 had been presented to him by a connexion of his 
 family ;" and " Mr. Parry described both the ex- 
 terior and interior of the volume, with its innumer- 
 able corrections and its missing leaves, with so 
 much minuteness that no room was left for doubt," 
 
THE MS. CORIIECTIONS, ETC. 61 
 
 lecad inevitably to the conclusion that the hook 
 itself was not shown to Mr. Parry. Indeed had it 
 been, Mr. CoUier would certainly have stated tliat 
 fact in his narrative, as being much more con- 
 clusive as to its identification than the most 
 minute description could possibly be. 
 
 In regard to Mr. Parry's account of "the 
 exterior and interior of the volume," that 
 gentleman and Mr. CoUier are at issue. Mr. 
 Parry asserts that he certainly recollects his 
 volume sufficiently well to describe its appear- 
 ance accurately ; but that then the description 
 could not possibly have led Mr. CoUier to suppose 
 it was the same as his corrected copy of 1632 ; on 
 the contrary, it must at once have proved to him 
 that it was wholly different, since Mr. Parry states 
 that his volume was of the first edition, 1623, and 
 was bound in smooth dark leather, that it had 
 been suppUed with a new back which was lettered, 
 that there was no name of any former possessor 
 written on the cover, and that the margins had 
 been partially ploughed off in binding. On the 
 other hand, Mr. CoUier 's foho is of the edition of 
 1632, is bound in rough Ught-coloured sheep, is 
 neither re-backed nor lettered, the words " Tho. 
 Perkins his Booke," are written in a bold recent 
 hand on the upper cover, and the margins are 
 
 <C 
 
y^ 
 
 62 INQTJIEY INTO 
 
 not mutilated. How tlien, we may ask, could 
 Mr. Collier have possibly identified liis Folio with 
 that formerly in the possession of Mr. Parry, 
 when every word of that gentleman's description 
 must have proved to him that the two volumes 
 were wholly difierent ? 
 
 But on the 19th of July, in the present year 
 (1859), Mr. Collier published a second version of 
 the identification of the Folio, diftering from, and 
 as seems to me, at variance with his former 
 narrative. It proves at least that his memory 
 is treacherous, since his recollection of the facts 
 now are inconsistent with his statement of 
 them some years ago. In the first instance, 
 he informed the reader that he had himself 
 been enabled to identify the volume by means 
 of Mr. Parry's description of it ; in the second ac- 
 count he shifts the responsibility upon Mr. Parry, 
 by stating that that gentleman identified the 
 volume himself, by personal inspection of it ; and 
 he even recounts the exact words of a conversation 
 which according to him took place on the occasion. 
 Mr. Parry however asserts that, to tlie best of his 
 belief, the circumstance thus recorded of the 
 volume having been shown to him never occurred ; 
 and he further stated, in conversation with the 
 writer, that the incidents of liis taking and 
 
THE MS. COKEECTIONH, ETC. 63 
 
 handing hack the Folio were simply impossible, 
 inasmuch as on the occasion alluded to he was, 
 in consequence of an accident, halting along the 
 road on two crutches, the management of which 
 occupied both his hands, and must certainly 
 have totally prevented his handling a folio 
 volume. 
 
 Subjoined is Mr. Collier's second narrative, 
 followed by Mr. Parry's reply to it -.— 
 '^ To the Editor of the Times. 
 " Sir,— I feel most unwillingly compelled to say one 
 other word respecting the corrected folio of Shakespeare's 
 works in 1632, which came into my hands in 1849. 
 
 " According to Mr. Hamilton's letter, inserted in your 
 paper of the 16th inst., Mr. Parry states that the book 
 which he owned, and which was given to him by his re- 
 lative, Mr. George Gray, about fifty years ago, was an 
 edition different from the foho of 1632, with different 
 corrections. 
 
 "I saw Mr. Parry twice upon the subject in the year 
 1853,— first at his house in St. John's Wood, when he 
 told me (as he had previously told a common friend) 
 that he had recognized the corrections instantly, from 
 the fac-simile which accompanied the earliest edition of 
 my Notes and Emendations, 8vo, 1852. Very soon after- 
 wards, for greater satisfaction, I brought the corrected 
 foho of 1632 from Maidenhead to London, and took it 
 to St. John's Wood, but I failed to meet with Mr. Parry 
 
64 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 at home. I therefore paid a third visit to that gentle- 
 man, again carrying the book with me. I met him com- 
 ing from his house, and I informed him that I had the 
 corrected foHo of 1682 under my arm, and that I was 
 sorry he could not then examine it, as I wished. He 
 replied, — ' If you will let me see it now, I shall be able 
 to state at once whether it was ever my book.' I there- 
 fore showed it to him on the spot, and, after looking at it 
 in several places, he gave it back to me with these 
 words : — ' That was my book, it is the same, but it has 
 been much ill-used since it was in my possession.' 
 
 "I took Mr. Parry's word without hesitation; and it 
 certainly gave me increased faith in the emendations, to 
 which I never applied a microscope or magnifying glass 
 beyond my own spectacles. I was then living in the 
 house of my brother-in-law; and, almost from day to 
 day, I showed him such of the emendations of Shake- 
 speare's text in the corrected folio of 1632 as seemed 
 most striking or important. 
 
 " If there be upon the volume any pencillings by me, 
 beyond crosses, ticks, and lines, they will speak for 
 themselves ; they have escaped my recollection, and, as 
 I stated in my former letter, I have not seen the book 
 for several years. Perhaps the microscope used by Mr. 
 Hamilton might discover that the plumbago of my pen- 
 cil was the same as that of other marks, said to be in 
 connexion with some of the emendations. 
 
 "J. PAYNE COLLIER. 
 '* Maidenhead^ July 16." 
 
'171E MS. C<3RRECTION8, ETC. 65 
 
 "Jaly 28, 1859, 
 
 " My dear Sir, — In reply to your application I have 
 only to make the following statement, in which you 
 will see that Mr. Collier's memory and mine are in 
 question. 
 
 " In Mr. Collier's letter to The Times, printed July 19, 
 1859, he states that he was coming to call on me in 1853 
 with ' the corrected folio of 1632 under his arm,' and that 
 he showed it to me on the road, and that I gave it back 
 to him with these words, ' that was my book — it is the 
 same ; but it has been nluch ill-used since it was in my 
 possession.' 
 
 " Now, I believe Mr. Collier to be utterly incapable of 
 making any statement which is not strictly in accordance 
 with his belief. I remember well meeting him, as he < 
 says, in the road, and as I was then very lame, from 
 having hurt my knee by a fall, and was using sticks to 
 assist me in walking, he kindly did not allow me to turn 
 back, but walked with me in the direction I was going. 
 I well remember some of the conversation we had ^ 
 
 during our walk ; but I have not the slightest recol- 
 lection that the volume of Shalcspere was then under his 
 arm, or of my having asserted that ' it was my book.' 
 
 " Previously to this interview with Mr. Collier he had 
 shown me the fac-simile which he mentions in his letter, 
 when I immediately said, on seeing it, that it was from 
 my book. I now believe that I was mistaken, and that 
 I was too hasty in so identifying the volume from a 
 fac-simile of a part of a page of it. At that time Mr. V 
 
 Collier knew that there were several corrected folios of 
 
 K 
 
>/ 
 
 66 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 Shakspere in existence, but he did not tell me that there 
 were. At that time I did not know that there was any 
 other corrected folio in existence, and I therefore sup- 
 posed that Mr. Collier's fac-simile could only have been 
 taken from my book. It was not till the 1-ith of this 
 month that I learnt from Sir Frederic Madden that there 
 are five or six corrected fohos now in being, but he 
 (Sir Frederic) did not tell me so till he had laid on the 
 table Mr. Collier's corrected folio, and then he seemed 
 surprised that I did not recognise it. 
 
 " Again I repeat, that having frequently since the 14th 
 of this month, when I saw Sir Frederic Madden, tried 
 to recollect everything about the book, I cannot re- 
 member that Mr. Collier ever showed me the book, but 
 I well remember his showing me the fac-simile. I may 
 / be wrong, and Mr. Collier may be right. 
 
 " I have a very strong impression that my book was a 
 copy of the edition of 1623, and was rather surprised 
 when I saw Mr. Collier's ' Supplemental volume ' (1853) 
 to find that his book was of the edition of 1632. 
 
 " I may also add that I certainly did not tell, and could 
 not have told Mr. Collier, that Mr. Gray ' was partial to 
 the collection of old books,' for I believe he set no value 
 at all on them. 
 
 " Believe me to be, my dear Sir, yours very truly, 
 
 " F. C. PARRY. 
 
 ''Mr. N. E. nuniilton. British Muaeum, W.C." 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 67 
 
 A thii-d narrative is contained in a letter from 
 Mr. Collier to the AthenmLin, June 4tli, 1853.* 
 This presents some points of difference of its own, 
 
 * " Your readers, who have taken so lively an interest in the 
 emendations and alterations of the text of Shakspeare contained 
 in my copy of the folio 1632, will be glad to hear that I have 
 just advanced an important step towards tracing the ownership 
 and history of that remarkable book. The proof that it was in 
 existence, in its annotated state, 50 years ago, is clear and posi- 
 tive ; and upon the foundation of strong probability I am able 
 to carry it back almost to the period when the volume was 
 published. The facts are these :— 
 
 "John Carrick Moore, Esq., of Hyde Park Gate (nephew to Sir 
 John Moore, who fell at Corunna, in Jan. 1809), being in posses- 
 sion of a copy of the * Noks and Emendations ' founded upon my 
 folio 1632, happened to show it to a friend of the name of Parry, 
 residing at St. John's Wood. Mr. Parry remarked that he had 
 once been the owner of a folio 1632, the margins of which were 
 much occupied by manuscript notes in an old hand-writing ; and 
 having read my description of the book, both externally and 
 internally, and having looked at the fac-simile which accom- 
 panied that description, he declared, without a moment's hesi- 
 tation, that this very copy of the folio 1632, had been given to 
 him about 50 years since, by Mr. George Gray, a connexion of 
 his family, who, he believed, had procxired it some years before, 
 from the library of a Roman Catholic family of the name of 
 Perkins, of Upton Court, Berkshire, one member of which had 
 married Arabella Farmer, the heroine of 'The Rape of the 
 Lock.' 
 
 " Those particulars were, as kindly as promptly, communicated 
 to me by Mr. Moore, with -whom I Avas not personally ac- 
 quainted ; and he urged Mr. Parry also to write to me on the 
 subject ; but that gentleman was prevented from doing so by a 
 
68 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 but in the main agrees with that quoted from 
 the Notes and Emendations; and it will be ob- 
 served that neither of these narratives, published 
 
 serious fall, which confined him to his bed. Being, of course, 
 much interested in the question, I soon afterwards took an 
 opportunity of introducing myself to Mr. Moore, who, satisfied 
 that Mr. PaiTy had formerly been the proprietor of my copy of 
 the folio 1632, advised me to call upon that gentleman at his 
 house, Hill Road, St. John's Wood, assuring me that he would 
 be glad to give me all the information in his power. 
 
 " I was, I think, the fii'st person whom Mr. Parry saw after 
 his accident ; and in a long interWew he repeated to me the 
 statement which he had previously made to Mr. Moore, respect- 
 ing the gift of Mr. Gray half a century ago, and his conviction 
 of the identity of the volume. He could not prove the fact, but 
 he had always understood and believed, that Mr. Gray had 
 become possessed of it on the dispersion of the library of the 
 Perkins family at Upton Court, and that it had been in his 
 hands some years before the conclusion of the last century. 
 Mr. Parry had himself had the curiosity to visit Upton Court 
 aboiit 1803 or 1804 ; when a Roman Catholic priest, not less 
 than 80 years old, showed him the library and the then empty 
 shelves, from which the books had been removed. 
 
 " On referring subsequently to the ' Magna Britannia ' of 
 Lysons, under the head of ' Berkshire,' I found various parti- 
 culars regarding the Perkins family at Upton Court, between 
 1635 and 1738 ; but I did not meet with any mention of Thomas 
 Perkins, whose name, it will be remembered, is on the cover of 
 the folio 1632, in question. The name of the distinguished 
 actor of the reigns of James the First and Charles the First, was 
 Richard Perkins ; and Ashmole's Collections, according to 
 Lysons, speak of a Richard Perkins as the husband of Lady 
 Mcrvin, of Upton Court. It is just pos.'^ible that this Richard 
 
THE MS. CORKECTIONS, ETC. 69 
 
 at the time when the occurrence actually took 
 place, countenance in the slightest degree Mr. 
 Collier's subsequent belief that he had exhibited 
 the volume itself to the examination of Mr. Parry. 
 
 Perkins was the actor ; for, although the ' Historia Histrionica ' 
 tells us that he was buried at Clerkenwell, that authority is by 
 no means final : just before it notices the death of Perkins, it 
 speaks of Lowin as having expired in great poverty at Brent- 
 ford, when we know that this ' player ' (so designated in the 
 register) was buried at St. Clement Danes, Strand, on the S-ith 
 of August, 1653. However, it is a mere speculation that the 
 Kichard Perkins who married Lady Mervin may have been the 
 actor, and I am not yet in possession of any other dates or cir- 
 cumstances to guide me. 
 
 " Having put in writing the particulars with which Mr. Parry 
 had so unreservedly favoured me, I took the liberty of forward- 
 ing them to ]VIr. Moore ; and he returned the manuscript with 
 his full approbation as regarded what had originally passed 
 between himself and Mr. Parry. After it was in type, I again 
 waited upon Mr. Parry, only three days ago, in order that I 
 might read the proof to him, and introduce such additions and 
 corrections as he wished to be made. They were few, but not 
 unimportant; and among them was the fact (confirming the 
 probability that Mr. Gray had obtained this copy of the folio 
 1632, from the Perkins library) that Mr. Gray resided at New- 
 bury, not far from Upton Court — a circumstance which Mr. 
 Parry had previously omitted. The connecting link between 
 the book and this library is, therefore, not complete ; and we 
 have still to ascertain, if we can, who was Thomas Perkins, and 
 by whom the notes and emendations were introduced into the 
 folio lt;32. A Francis Perkins died at Upton Court in 1G3."., and 
 he may have been the first purchaser and owner of this second 
 folio of the works of Shakespeare. [" At 
 
70 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 Here the extrinsic evidences against the authen- 
 ticity of the corrected foho of 1 632 may be brought 
 to a close : nor is it to be forgotten that the inter- 
 nal proofs of its spurious character are no less 
 powerful, and have long since been indejDendently 
 urged against it by Singer, Dyce, Knight, Staunton, 
 Halliwell, Ingleby, Grant Wliite, and the whole 
 phalanx of Shaksperian Commentators. That any- 
 one, using due consideration, can still maintain 
 the authority of the volume, seems not possible. 
 
 "At all events, however, it is certain that this very volume 
 was for many years in the possession of Mr. Pariy (how he lost 
 it he knows not), who obtained it from his connexion, ]Mr. 
 George Gray, of Newbm-y. Mr. Parry was well acquainted with 
 the fact that various leaves were wanting ; and he so perfectly 
 recollects its state and condition, the frequent erasures of pas- 
 sages, as well as the handwriting of the numerous marginal and 
 other corrections, that when I asked him, just before I wished 
 him good morning, whether he had any doubt on the point of 
 his previous o^ATiership, he answered me most emphatically in 
 these words — 'I have no more doubt about it, than that you 
 are sitting there.' 
 
 "J. PAYNE COLLIEE. 
 
 " Maidenhead, May 28." 
 
 "P.S. — I ought not to omit the expression of my warmest 
 acknowledgments to both Mr. INIoore and Mr. Pai-ry, for the 
 zealous and ready assistance which they have aflforded me. I 
 hope that if any of the readers of the JtJtcnctnm are in possession 
 of information that may tend to the further elucidation of the 
 subject, they will communicate it with equal alacrity." 
 
THE MS. OOEEECTIONS, ETC. 71 
 
 But the facts I am now about to advert to are 
 far graver than the question of the authenticity 
 of that or any other particular volume. They 
 have reference to a series of systematic forgeries 
 which have been perpetrated, apparently within 
 the last half century, and are in connection gene- 
 rally with the history of Shakspere and Shak- 
 sperian literature, although other subjects have 
 occasionally been introduced. 
 
 The first instance I shall bring forward, as 
 being more nearly related than any other to the 
 question of the annotated edition of 1632, is 
 that of Lord Ellesmere's first edition of Shak- 
 spere's Plays, 1623. This folio his Lordship 
 submitted to my scrutiny, subsequently to the 
 publication in The Times of my remarks on the 
 folio belono'ina' to the Duke of Devonshire. Like 
 it, Lord Ellesmere's foho has also received mar- 
 ginal annotations. In both instances the correc- 
 tions have been made first in pencil and after- 
 wards in ink, the mode of obliteration is charac- 
 teristic and similar, and on examination I recog- 
 nise the same hand-writing in both. 
 
 Beyond the fact that Lord Ellesmere's volume 
 was supposed to be the finest copy of the first 
 folio in existence, little seems to have been known 
 
 < 
 
72 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 about it, until the year 1842, when the late Lord 
 Ellesmere, then Lord Francis Egerton, lent the 
 volume to Mr. Collier. How long it remained in 
 that gentleman's custody I am not aware. But sub- 
 sequently, Mr. Collier published a letter addressed 
 by him to the Eev. Joseph Hunter, in which he 
 mentions the loan of the volume, and states that 
 he has discovered in its pages some important mar- 
 ginal emendations, examples of which he proceeds 
 to cite. The alterations in this first folio are 
 not numerous, but they are frequently identical 
 with those afterwards discovered by Mr. Collier 
 in the folio of 1632 ; the identity in one or 
 two instances being strikingly significant. Prior 
 to their discovery by Mr. CoUier, it does not 
 seem, so far as I can learn, that any alterations 
 were known to exist on the margins at all. He 
 is certainly wrong in attributing them to the time 
 of the Commonwealth ; they are not only modern, 
 but, decidedly, by the same hand as those in 
 his more famous copy of the second edition. 
 I subjoin Mr. CoUier's account of the discovery ; 
 also a Hst of the whole of the corrections found in 
 the edition of 1 623, in which I have been careful 
 to distinguish such as likewise occur in the 
 "Folio" 1632. 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 73 
 
 ''Reasons for a New Edition of Shakespeare's Works. 1842. 
 By Mr. John Payne Collier, p. 13." 
 
 " Lord Francis Egertou was also kind enough to add 
 to the obligation, by lending me his folios of 1623 
 and 1632 ; the first being more than ordinarily interest- 
 ing on account of certain early manuscript corrections in 
 a few of the plays, which will put an end to doubts on 
 some passages of the original text, and will most satisfac- 
 torily illustrate and explain others not hitherto well un- 
 derstood. * * * These corrections in the 
 margin of the printed portion of the folio, are probably 
 as old as the reign of Charles I. Whether they were 
 merely conjectural, or were made from original MSS. of 
 the plays to which the individual might have had access, 
 it is not perhaps possible to ascertain ; it has been stated, 
 these verbal, and sometimes literal, annotations, are only 
 found in a, few of the plays in the commencement of the 
 volume, and from what follows, it will be a matter of 
 deep regret that the corrector of the text carried his 
 labours no further." 
 
74 
 
 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 Manusc?'i])t Corrections in tJie Br idgewater folio, 1623. 
 
 Printed Text of Folio 1G23. 
 As You Like It, p. 191, c. 2. 
 [ Wearing] thy hearer in thy mistris praise 
 
 Do., p. 204, c. 1. 
 I will ore-run thee with polic[e] 
 
 All's Well, p. 234, c. 1. 
 The mistrie of yon lo[?/]elinesse, and finded 
 
 Do., p. 236, c. 1. 
 Where hope is coldest, and despair most [shifts] 
 
 MS. Corrections. 
 
 [Wearying] but afterwards 
 obliterated. This is the printed 
 reading in 1632, 
 
 [y] obliterated. The printed 
 reading- of 1632. 
 
 [n] [y] in ed. 1632. 
 [ffits] fits 1632. 
 
 Measure for Measure, p. 63, col. 2. 
 (The needful bits and curbes to headstrong \tveedes']} [steedes] 
 
 Do., p. 70, c. 1. 
 Owe, and succeed [thy] weaknesse 
 
 Love's Labour Lost, p. 133, c. 1. 
 Disfigure not his [Shop.] 
 
 As You Like It, p. 189, c. 2. 
 After ray flight : now goe [in we] content 
 
 Do., p. 190, c. 2. 
 ^ Why, what's the matter ? 
 
 All'sWell, &C., p. 240, c. 1. 
 [^]nd ere I do begin 
 
 Do., &c., p. 125. c. 1. 
 Laf. You begge more than., word then 
 
 The same cor. has been made in 
 the folio 1632, but afterwards 
 obliterated. 
 
 [this] ivith a trace of pencil The 
 
 cor. in the folio of 163. 
 [shape] slop 1632. 
 
 [we in] we in printed in 1632, 
 [OrL.] in print in 1632. 
 
 [E] The same coiTection is made 
 in folio 1G32. 
 
 [a] witli a trace of i)encil un- 
 derneath, [one] 1632, but 
 blotted, a pencil distinct un- 
 derneath the ink. 
 
THE MS. COEREOTIONS, ETC. 
 Printed Text of Folio 1623. 
 
 [for] 
 
 75 
 
 BIS. Corrections. 
 
 All's AVcll, S:g., p. 252, c. 2. 
 King. I wonder, Sir, [Sir,'] 
 
 I wonder, [Sir,] wives are such monsters to you [since] in ed. 1632, but almost 
 
 wholly obliterated. 
 Winter's Tale, p. 279, c. 1. 
 Of my Boyes face, m[e] thoughts I did me requoyle [y] y 1632 
 
 Do., p. 280, c. 1. 
 My Wife's a Ho[/]y-Horse 
 
 Do., p. 285, c. 2. 
 So sure as th[is] Beard's gray 
 
 Do., p. 294, c. 1. 
 And hand,^ ed love, as you do ; I was wont 
 
 Do., p. 299, c. 1. 
 Above a better, gone ; so must thy gra[y]e 
 
 Do., p. 299, c. 2. 
 Give you all greetings, that a king (a[t] friend) 
 
 [b] b 1632 
 [y] your 1632 
 
 [1] pencil traceable. [1] 1632. 
 
 [c] pencil distinct, 
 [s] as printed in 1632. 
 
76 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 But besides the marginal corrections in Lord 
 Ellesmere's folio, Mr. Collier likewise discovered in 
 the library of Bridgewater House,a series of remark- 
 able documents of the highest interest, supposing 
 
 >_^ them genuine, in regard to the life of Shakspere. 
 
 The particulars of the discover}'- were made public 
 in a letter addressed to Mr. George Amyot in 
 the year 1835. In this letter Mr. Collier dwells 
 at considerable length upon the importance of the 
 documents in question, but does not hint at any- 
 thing in the appearance of the handwriting cal- 
 culated to throw doubts upon their genuineness ; 
 while the particulars stated respecting their being 
 contained in bundles of manuscript, probably un- 
 
 ^ opened since the days of Chancellor Ellesmere, 
 
 would tell strongly in then* favom*. Some of 
 these particulars I transcribe from ]\Ir. Collier's 
 letter. 
 
 However assuring and satisfactory the parti- 
 culars respecting the discovery of these MSS. as 
 thus stated by Mr. Collier, the contents of the 
 documents themselves, when carefully considered, 
 were of a nature not merely to raise suspicion, but 
 to shake belief in them altogether, as I shall 
 presently show. 
 
 In addition to this it was understood that two 
 skilled pala?ographists, the "Rev. Joseph Hunter, 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 77 
 
 and Mr. Black (both of the Public Record Office), 
 having had an opportunity of examining the 
 originals, had privately expressed an opinion 
 adverse to their pretensions as authentic docu- 
 ments, judging from the handwriting. But to 
 Mr. Halliwell is the real merit due of having 
 stated distinctly the whole case against these re- 
 markable documents. This he did in a pamphlet 
 printed "for private circulation only," in 1853, 
 the pamphlet being accompanied by a facsimile 
 of one of the documents in question. His argument 
 is so forcible, that I prefer to quote his own words. 
 
 " When I came to make a personal inspection of these 
 interesting papers, facilities for which were kindly granted 
 by their noble owner, grave doubts were at once created 
 as to their authenticity. The most important of all, the 
 certificate from the players of the Blackfriars' Theatre to 
 the Privy Council in 1589, instead of being either an 
 original or a contemporary copy, is evidently at best 
 merely a late transcript, if it be not altogether a recent 
 fabrication. The question naturally arises, for what pur- 
 pose could a document of this description have been 
 copied in the seventeenth century, presuming it to belong 
 to so early a period ? It is comparatively of recent times <^ 
 that the slightest literary interest has been taken in the 
 history of our early theatres, or even in the biography of 
 Shakespeare ; and, unless it was apparent that papers of 
 this kind were transcribed for some legal or other special 
 
78 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 purpose, there should be great hesitation in accepting the 
 evidence of any other but contemporary authority. The 
 suspicious appearance of this certificate is of itself suf- 
 ficient to justify great difficulties in its reception ; but 
 the doubt thus induced as to the integrity of the collec- 
 tion was considerably increased by an examination of a 
 paper in the same volume purporting to be a warrant 
 appointing Daborne, Shakespeare, Field, and Kirkham, 
 instructors of the children of the Queen's Revels, which 
 unquestionably appears to be a modern forgery. This 
 document is styled by Mr. Collier, " a draft either for a 
 Patent or a Privy Seal." It is not a draft, for the lines 
 are written bookwise, and it is also dated ; neither is it a 
 copy of a patent, as appears from the direction, " Right 
 trustie & well-beloved ;" but, if genuine, it must be 
 considered an abridged transcript of a warrant, under the 
 sign-manual and signet, for a i^atent to be issued. Now 
 if it be shewn that the letters patent to " Daborne 
 & others " were granted on the same day on which Lord 
 Ellesmere's paper is dated, and, if it be further proved 
 that the contents of the latter are altogether inconsistent 
 with the circumstances detailed in the real patent, it 
 will, I think, be conceded that no genuine draft or tran- 
 script of the nature of that printed by Mr. Collier, can 
 possibly exist, 
 
 " It appears that the following note occurs in an entry- 
 book of patents that passed the Great Seal while it was 
 in the hands of Lord Ellesmere, in 7 James I. :— " A 
 Warrant for Robert Daborne and otlicrs, the Queenc's 
 Servants, to bring up and practice children in places by 
 
THE MS. COREECTIONS, ETC. 79 
 
 the name of the Childreu of the Queen's Revells, for the 
 pleasure of her Majestie, 4° Januarii, anno septimo 
 Jacobi." This entry may have suggested the fabrica- 
 tion, the date of the questionable MS. corresponding 
 with that here given ; though it is capable of proof that 
 if it were authentic, it must have been dated previously, 
 for the books of the Signet Office show that the autho- 
 rity for Daborne's warrant was obtained by the influence 
 of Sir Thomas Munson in the previous December, and 
 they also inform us that it was granted "to Robert 
 Daborne, and other Servauntes to the Queen, from time 
 to time, to provide and bring up a convenient number 
 of children to practize in the quality of playing, by the 
 name of the Children of the Eevells to the Queene, in 
 the White Fryers, London, or any other convenient place 
 where he shall thinke fit." The enrolment of the in- 
 strument, which was issued in the form of letters patent 
 under the Great Seal, recites, " Whereas the Queen, our 
 dearest wyfe, hathe for hir pleasure and recreacion, 
 when shee shall thinke it fitt to have any playes or 
 shewes, appoynted hir servantes Robert Daborne, Phil- 
 lipe Rosseter, John Tarbock, Richard Jones, and Ro- 
 bert Browne, to provide and bring upp a convenient 
 nomber of Children, whoe shalbe called Children of hir 
 Revelles, Know yee that wee have appoynted and 
 authorised, and by theis presentes do authorize and 
 appoynte the saide Robert Daborne, &c. from tyme to 
 tyme, to provide, keepe and bring upp a convenient 
 nomber of children, and them to practice and exercise 
 in the quality of playing, by the name of Children of 
 
/ 
 
 80 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 the Revells to the Qiieene, within the White Fryers in 
 the suburbs of our Citty of London, or in any other 
 convenyent place where they shall thinke fitt for that 
 purpose." This patent is dated January 4th, 7 Jac. I., 
 1609-10, so that any draft, or projected w^an-ant, ex- 
 hibiting other names than the above, could not possibly 
 have had this exact date. It will be observed that the 
 names, with the exception of that of Daborne, are en- 
 tirely different in the two documents, and this company 
 of children was to play at the Whitefriars, not at the 
 Blackfriars. The fabricator seems to have relied on the 
 supposition that the entry relative to Daborne and 
 others referred to the latter theatre ; and consequently 
 inserted the name of Edward Kirkham, who is known 
 to have been one of the instructors of the children of 
 the Revels at the Blackfriars in the year I6OI5, There 
 is, in fact, no reasonable supposition on which the 
 Ellesmere paper can be regarded as authentic. Had no 
 date been attached to it, it might have been said that 
 the whole related merely to some contemplated arrange- 
 ment w^hich was afterwards altered ; although even in 
 that case, the form of the copy would alone have been a 
 serious reason against its reception. In its present 
 state, it is clearly impossible to reconcile it with the 
 contents of the enrolment just quoted. Fortunately for 
 the interests of truth, indications of forgery are detected 
 in trifling circumstances, that are almost invariably neg- 
 lected by the inventor, however ingeniously the decep- 
 tion be contrived. Were it not for this, the search for 
 historical truth would yield results sufficiently uncertain 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 81 
 
 to deter the most enthusiastic enquirer from pursuing 
 the investigation. 
 
 " The remaining Shakesperian MSS. in the possession 
 of the Earl of Ellesmere, consist of a letter of Daniel 
 the poet, mentioning the great dramatist as a can- 
 didate for the Mastership of the Queen's Eevels ; ac- 
 counts in which a performance of Othello is stated to 
 have taken place in the year 1 602 ; a remarkable paper 
 detailing the value of the shares held by Shakespeare 
 and others in the Blackfriars Theatre ; and the presumed 
 early copy of a letter signed "H. S.," supposed to have 
 been written by Lord Southampton, and containing sin- 
 gular notices of Burbage and Shakespeare. The first 
 two of them I have not seen, the volume including only 
 a recent transcript of Daniel's letter ; but the other two, 
 which have been carefully inspected, present an appear- 
 ance by no means satisfactory. Although the caligraphy 
 is of a highly skilful character, and, judging solely from 
 a fac-simile of the letter, I should certainly have ac- 
 cepted it as genuine, yet an examination of the original 
 leads to a different judgment ; the paper and ink not 
 appearing to belong to so early a date. It is a suspi- 
 cious circumstance that both these documents are 
 written in an unusually large character on folio leaves 
 of paper^ by the sayne hand, and are evidently not con- 
 temporaneous copies. Again may the question be asked, 
 Why should transcripts of such papers have been made 
 after the pariod to which the originals are supposed to 
 refer? It is also curious that copies only of these im- 
 portant records should be preserved ; and the whole 
 
8-A INQUIRY INTO 
 
 matter is surrounded by the gravest suspicions and diffi- 
 culties. 
 
 "Only one record-reader, as far as I know, viz., the 
 Rev. Joseph Hunter, has made a personal examination 
 of these MSS. He has not yet expressed any opinion 
 publicly, but I have reason to think that his views on 
 the subject coincide with my own. It is clearly Mr. 
 Collier's duty, as a lover of truth, to have the originals 
 carefully scrutinized by the best judges of the day." 
 
 On the 17tli of November, 1859, I had an 
 opportunity of carefully examining these Bridge- 
 water MSS. for myself, in company with Sir 
 Frederic Madden and Dr. Kingsley. How it was 
 Mr. Collier deceived himself as to their real 
 character I will not attempt to speculate. 
 With one exception, which manifests some dex- 
 terity of execution, these documents display their 
 spurious character at a glance ; whilst two of the 
 number (the Daborne warrant and Daniel's let- 
 ter), are such manifest forgeries, that it seems 
 incredible how they could have cheated Mr. 
 Collier's observation, even under the circumstances 
 of excitement described by him as consequent 
 upon their discovery.* 
 
 * ""When first I obtained permission to look thronp:li the 
 Bridgewater MSS. in detail, I conjectured that it would be nearly 
 impossible to turn over so many state papers and snch a bulk of 
 roiTf'sponrlence, jiriratp niul oflioinl, '(\ithmit meetinfr with 
 
^ . 
 
 --1'* 
 
 ^ ^5 1^1 j^^ VI .1 T^i^T^H^ 
 
 ' • ^.i \A D 0- 
 
 ^ H'^rJ air 1 
 
 ^> — , ? ^''^* v^ s 
 
 
 ^ *• L J I ^t ^ * 
 
 5 . 1, i- ^ I '5 ^ j! 
 
 in'"- 
 
 n 
 
 
 
,1:1 
 
 
 CI 
 
 f5^'434go^<^*W.t2>* 
 
 1 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 83 
 
 Annexed is a fac-simile of the spurious 
 Daborne warrant. Independently of every other 
 evidence of its fictitious character, the form alone 
 in which it is drawn, is sufficient to make one 
 
 something illustrative of the subject to which I have devoted 
 so many years ; but I certainly never anticipated being so for- 
 tunate as to obtain particulars so new, curious, and important, 
 regarding a poet who, above all others, ancient or modern, 
 native or foreign, has been the object of admiration. When I 
 took up the copy of Lord Southampton's letter and glanced 
 over it hastily, I could scarcely believe my eyes to see such 
 names as Shakespeare and Burbage in connection in a manu- 
 script of the time. There was a remarkable coincidence also 
 in the discovery, for it happened on the anniversary of Shake- 
 speare's birth and death. I will not attempt to describe my 
 joy and surprise, and I can only liken it to the unexpected gra- 
 tification I experienced two or three years ago, when I turned 
 out, from some ancient depositories of the Duke of Devonshire, 
 the original designs of Inigo Jones, not only for the scenery, 
 but for the dresses and characters of the different masques by 
 Ben Jonson, Campion, Townsend, &c., presented at Court in 
 the reigns of our first James and Charles. The sketches were 
 sometimes accompanied by explanations in the handwriting of 
 the great artist, a few of which incidentally illustrate Shake- 
 speare, who, however, was never employed for any of these 
 royal entertainments. Annexed to one of the drawings was the 
 following written description, from whence we learn how the 
 actor of the part of Falstaff was usually habited in the time of 
 Shakespeare. 
 
 '"Like a Sir Jon Falstaft': in a roabe of russet, quite low, 
 with a great belley, like a swolen man, long moustacheos, the 
 sheows [shoes] shorte, and out of them great toes like naked 
 feete : buskins to sheaw a great swolen leg. A cupp comiiij 
 
.7- 
 
 84 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 look upon it with the greatest doubt, the style of 
 the Sovereign being placed after the opening 
 words of the body of the warrant ; a position in- 
 conceivable in any authentic instrument. A 
 minute of the genuine document, which differs 
 wholly from the above, was discovered by Mr. 
 HalKwell, in an entry-book of Patents that 
 passed the Great Seal while it was in the hands 
 of Lord Ellesmere in 7 James I ;* and which is 
 entirely confirmed by an entry made by the Chan- 
 cellor's riding-clerk in the " Book of Warrants 
 which have passed the Great Seal," amongst the 
 Bridgewater MSS. ; thus affording another proof 
 of the spurious nature of the warrant published 
 by Mr. Collier. 
 
 Much as these five documentsf vary in manner 
 and style of execution, no one, I think, who 
 
 fourth like a beake— a great head and balde, and a little cap 
 aUa Venetiane greay— a rodd and a scroule of parchment.' " — 
 Neio Facts regarding the Life of Shakespeare, in a Letter to Tliomas 
 Amyol,from J. Payne Collier, 1835. 
 
 It is somewhat remarkable that neither this drawing nor 
 the description of Falstaflf are to be found in the Shakspere 
 Society's volume, edited by J. E. Planche, Esq., from the Duke 
 of Devonshire's Library. The language of the " description " 
 is, to say the least, suspicious. — [H.] 
 
 * See Observations on the Shaksperian Forgeries, by James 
 O. Halliwell, Esq., 1853, p. 5. 
 
 t These documents are given in Appendix I. 
 
THE MS. COHllKCTIONS, ETC. 85 
 
 examines them Ccarefiilly (tracing through the 
 whole of them simihirities in the forms of cer- 
 tain letters, and even identity of mistakes), can 
 doubt but that they are all the work of one pen. 
 Nor can I too pointedly reiterate my belief that 
 the ivhole of the forgeries treated of in this volume 
 have been executed hy one hand. The same 
 exaa-^erations, the same blunders, and even the 
 same excellencies in performance being observable 
 in Mr. Colher's corrected foho, 1632, in Lord 
 EUesmere's folio, 1623, in the Bridgewater Manu- 
 scripts under discussion, and in the Dulwich 
 forgeries, and the document in the State Paper 
 Office described further on. In regard to the two 
 former, indeed, this fact is pretty well indicated, 
 not only by the handwriting itself, but by the 
 similar use of pencil marks to direct the ink cor- 
 rections, and by a precisely similar mode of erasure. 
 
 I pass from the Bridgewater Papers to an 
 examination of the manuscripts in Dulwich 
 College ; and I commence by stating certain facts 
 relative to the misinterpretation of a letter to 
 Nvhich I have already alluded in the Preface, and 
 where the question is not of a spurious document, 
 but of a mis-read copy of one that is genuine. 
 
 Tn 1841 Mr. Collier edited for the Shakspere 
 
86 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 Society a volume, entitled " Memoirs of Edward 
 Alleyn." Amongst the Documents published by 
 Mr. Collier in this volume is one correctly stated 
 to be an original letter from Mrs. Alleyn, wife of 
 the founder of Dulwich College, and addressed to 
 her husband. The letter in itself is interesting ; 
 but the point upon which Mr. Collier mainly 
 insists, as constituting its pecuhar value, is a 
 paragraph he prints as contained in it, relative to 
 " Mr. Shakespeare of the Globe," and from which 
 he proceeds to draw various deductions. On 
 collating this letter with the original, it appears 
 to have been entirely misread by Mr. Collier, as 
 there is not the smallest trace of authority for 
 any allusion to Shakspere, or to any of the 
 words concerning him found there by Mr. Collier, 
 and printed hy him as forming part of the 
 original document. I subjoin the w^hole of 
 Mr. Colher's remarks and comments upon the 
 letter, because his description of the physical 
 appearance of its lower margin defaced by damp, 
 and the passage in the letter at which the leaf 
 turns over, are sufficient to identify the actual 
 paper which he had before him, proving it to 
 be the same as I have myself since examined, 
 and not, as might possibly be suggested, another 
 
laM^ 
 
 
^J'HE MS. COETIECTIONS, ETC. 87 
 
 copy ill which the contents were altered ; and, in 
 addition, because his account of the difficulties 
 attendant on deciphering it, lead one to the 
 conclusion that he had himself minutely ex- 
 amined it. 
 
 " Of this date we have a very interesting letter from 
 Mrs. Alleyn to her husband, written and subscribed by 
 the person ordinarily employed : it is remarkable, be- 
 cause it contains a mention of Shakespeare, who is 
 spoken of as ' of the Globe ;' and though it throws no 
 new light upon our great dramatist's character, except- 
 ing as it shows that he was on good terms with Alleyn's 
 family, any document containing merely his name must 
 be considered valuable. The paper on which the letter 
 was written is in a most decayed state, especially at 
 the bottom, where it breaks and drops away in dust and 
 fragments at the slightest touch. The notice of Shake- 
 speare is near the commencement of a postscrijjt on the 
 lower part of the page, where the paper is most rotten, 
 and sevei'al deficiencies occur, which it is impossible to 
 supply : all that remains is extremely difficult to be 
 deciphered * We will insert it, and defer further re- 
 marks until afterwards, only premising that the address 
 
 * This description, both as to the decayed state of the paper, 
 as well as to the difficulty of deciphering the handwriting, 
 seems to me a very exaggerated one. On the latter point, the 
 accompanying fac-simile will enable the reader to form an inde- 
 pendent judgment. — I H.] 
 
88 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 has completely disappeared, so that we cannot tell where 
 AUeyn was at the time ; nor, indeed, excepting from 
 internal evidence, can we decide that it was sent to him. 
 Upon this point, however, there can be no doubt." — 
 Memoirs of AUeyn, ed. Collier, p. 62. 
 
 I contrast on opposite pages two versions of 
 this document ; the first is a copy made by my- 
 self, and containing a true reading of the original, 
 the second is that pubhshed by Mr. Collier in the 
 Memoirs of AUeyn, p. 62. I have broken the 
 lines, both in my version of the document and in 
 that of Mr. Collier, in exact accordance with the 
 written document, so that the reader may see at a 
 glance the average number of words contained in 
 a line, and be thereby enabled to judge for himself 
 of the actual impossibility of the paragraph in 
 question having ever been contained in the 
 original document where Mr. Collier avers that 
 he found it. At the same time it will be observed 
 that portions of three damaged lines are still 
 legible, which are incompatible with the Shak- 
 spere 'paragraph, and in regard to which Mr. 
 Collier is wholly silent. I need not remark that 
 a case of misreading, and miscopying, however 
 gross, is not to be confounded with the innu- 
 merable forgeries, (by whomsoever perpetrated,) 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 89 
 
 vvliicli it is the object of this volume to bring 
 to light; but it is for the literary world to 
 estimate the magnitude and the character of the 
 wrong done to literature by announcements of 
 such a nature and of so deliberate a kind. 
 
 The thirty-two minor blunders, literal and 
 verbal, which occur in Mr. ColKer's professedly 
 verbatim and literatim copy of this letter of 
 Mrs. Alleyn, are of less importance, although not 
 undeserving of reprehension. The Eev. A. Dyce, 
 in his " Strictures on Mr. Collier's New Edition 
 of Shakespeare, 1858," has pubhshed a series of 
 alleged misstatements and inaccuracies committed 
 by Mr. Collier, which would be incredible, were 
 they not vouched for by the name of a scholar of 
 Mr. Dyce's unimpeachable truth and accuracy. 
 
90 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 Copy of 3Irs. Allepis Letter, preserved at Dulwich College, 
 verbatim, literatim, and line for line. 
 
 JHESUS. 
 
 My intyre and welbeloved sweete harte still it joyes me and longe I 
 pray god maye I joye to heare of your Lealthe and welfare as you of ours. 
 AUmighty God be tliancked my owne selfe your selfe and my mother and 
 whole house are in good healthe and about us the sycknes doth cease 
 and likely more and more by godes healpe to cease. All the companyes 
 be come hoame and well for ought we knowe, but that Browne of 
 the Boares head is dead and dyed very pore. He went not into the 
 owne coiuitrye at all, and all of your ;, company ar well at theyr owne houses. 
 My father is at the corte, but Avheare the court ys I know not. 
 I am of your owne mynde that it is needles to meete my fathere 
 at Basynge, the Inceiiayntye beinge as it ys, I commend your 
 discreation. It were a sore joui-ney to lease your labour besyd expenses 
 and change of ayre might hurte you, therfore you are resolved upon 
 the best course. For your cominge hoame I am not to advyse you, 
 neither will I ; use your owne discreation, yet I longe and am very 
 desyrous to see you,and my poore and symple opinion is,yf it shall please 
 you, you maye safely come hoame. Heare is none now sycke neare 
 us : yet let it not be as I wyll but at your owne best lykynge. I am 
 glad to heare you take delight in hauckinge and thoughe you 
 liavo ^worne your appayrell to rags, the best ys you knowe 
 
 wheare to have better, and as wellcome to me shall you be with 
 your rags as yf you were in cloathe of gold or velvet. Trye 
 and see. I have payd fyfty shillings for your rent for the Avarfc, 
 not in towne the Lordes rent. Mr. Woodward, my Lordes bayly was , but poynted 
 his deputy who receaved all the rentes. I had witnesses with 
 me at the payment of the money and have his quittance, but 
 the quyttance cost me a groat, they sayd it was the baylives 
 fee. You know best whether you were wont to paye it : yf not, 
 they made a symple woman of me. You shall receave a letter 
 from the Joyner hym selfe and a prynted bill, and so with my 
 
THE MS. COET^ECTIONS, ETC. 91 
 
 Mrs. Alleyn's Letter, as printed in the "Memoirs of Alleyn,"^:*. 62, 
 eel. J. P. Collier, 1841. 
 
 "JHESUS. 
 " My in tyre and welbeloved sweete harte, still it joyes me and longe, T 
 pray god, may I joye to heare of your healtlie and welfare, as of oui-s. 
 AUmiglity god be thanked, my own selfe, your selfe and my mother, and 
 whole house are in good healthe, and about us the sycknes dothe cease 
 and likely more and more by gods healpe to cease. All the companyes 
 be come home and well for ought we knowe, but that Browne of 
 the Boares head is dead, and dyed very pore. He went not into the 
 countrye at all, and all of yom- owne company ar well at there owne houses. 
 My father is at the corte, but wheare the carte ys I know not. 
 I am of your owne mynde, that it is needles to meete my father 
 at Basynge: the entertaynment beinge as it is, I comend your 
 discreation. It tueare a sore journey to lease your labour, lesydc expenses, 
 and change of ayre mighte hurte you ; therfore you are resolved upon 
 the best course. For your commge lioame I am not to advyse you, 
 neither will I : use your owne discreation, yet I longe and am very 
 desyrous to see you ; and my poore and simple opinion is, yf it shall please 
 you, you maye safely come hoame. Heare is none now sycke neare 
 us ; yet let it not be as I wyll, but at your owne best lykynge. I am 
 glad to heare you take delight in hauckinge, and thoughe you 
 have worne your appayrell to rags, the best ys you knowe 
 where to have better, and as wellcome to me shall you be with 
 your rags, as yf you were in cloathe of gold or velvet. Trye 
 and see. I have payd fyfty shillings for your rent for the warfe, 
 the Lordes rent. Mr. Woodward, my Lordes bayly, was not in townc but poynted 
 his deputy who receaved all the rentes. I had witnesses with 
 me at the payment of the money, and have his quittance, but 
 the quyttance cost me a groat : they sayd it was the baylives 
 fee. You knowe best whether you were wont to paye it ; yf not, 
 they made a symple woman of me. You shall receave a letter 
 from the .Toyner hym selfe, and a prynted bill ; and so with my 
 
God 
 
 > 
 
 ^- INQUIRY INTO 
 
 Mrs. AUeyn's Letter—continntd. 
 liurable and harty comendations to your owne selfe, Mr. Chaloners 
 and liis wyfe, with thanckes for your kJ^lde usage, with my good 
 mothers kyndest commendations with the rest of youi- houshould 
 . . . die is well but can not speake, I ende prayenge allmighty^ 
 his still to blesse us for ^ mercyes sake, and so sweete harte 
 once more farwell till we meete, which I hope shall not 
 be longe. This xxth of October 1603. 
 
 Aboute a Aveeke agoe there [cam]e a youthe who said he was 
 Mr. Frauncis Chalo[ner]s man .... Id have borrow[e]d x' to 
 
 bought have , things for [h]is Mr t hyra 
 
 Cominge without . . . token d 
 
 I would have 
 
 & I bene su 
 
 and inquire after the fellow and said he had lent hym a horse. I 
 feare me he gulled hym, thoughe he gulled not ^. The youthe 
 was a prety youthe and hansom in appayrell, we know not ^ became 
 of hym. ]\Ir.Bromflfeild commendes hym : he was heare yesterdaye. Nicke 
 and Jeamesbe well, and commend them, so dothe Mr. Cooke and his Meife 
 in the kyndest sorte, and so once more in the hartiest manner 
 farwell e 
 
 Your faithfull and lovinge weife 
 
 JoANK Allkyne. 
 
 us 
 what 
 
THE MS. CUEKECTIONS, ETC. 93 
 
 Mrs. AUeijn's Letter (ed. J. F. Collier)— continued. 
 Imniblo and harty comendations to your owne selfe, Mr. Clialoners 
 and his wyfo, with thankes for your kynde usage, with my good 
 mothers kyndest comendHtions with the rest of your househouU 
 
 * * he is well but can not speake, I ende prayinge allmighty god 
 to blesse you for his mercyes sake, and so sweete harte 
 
 * * noe more. Fariodl till we meete, which I hope shall not 
 be longe. This xxth of October 1603. 
 
 " Aboute a weeke a goe there came a youthe who said he was 
 Mr. Frauncis Chaloner who would have borrowed x" to 
 have bought things for * * * and said he was known 
 xanto you, and Mr. Shakespeare of the globe, Avho came 
 
 * * * said he knewe hym not, only he herde of hym that he was 
 a roge * * * so he was glade we did not lend him 
 
 the monney * * * Eichard Johnes [went] to seeke 
 
 and inquire after the fellow, and said he had lent hym a horse. I 
 
 feare me he gulled hym, thoughe he gulled not us. The youthe 
 
 was a pi-ety youthe, and hansom in appayrell :• we knowe not what became 
 
 of hym. Mr. Benfield commendes hym ; he was heare yesterdaye. Nicke 
 
 and Jeames be well, and comend them : so doth Mr. Cooke and his wiefe 
 
 in the kyndest sorte, and so once more in the hartiest manner 
 
 farwell. 
 
 " Your faithful! and lovinge inicf<\ 
 
 " JoANE Alleyse." 
 
> 
 
 94 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 Dulwich College, however, is not without its 
 forgeries. Of these I shall cite three examples, 
 all of them first printed by Mr. Collier, in the 
 same volume as that from which the inaccurate 
 copy of Mrs. Alleyn's letter is already quoted, and 
 all of them (as he states in the body of that work) 
 discovered by him. 
 
 The first of these which I shall notice is a 
 letter of John Marston, printed in the Memoirs of 
 Alleyii, p. 154, and which will be found in the 
 Appendix to this volume. 
 
 In its general aspect the writing of this letter 
 certainly resembles Marston's genuine hand, and 
 has no doubt been executed by some one to 
 whom that hand was familiar ; but I soon noticed 
 the existence of numerous modern pencil-marks 
 imderlying the ink, and on looking closely into 
 the document, detected that the whole of the letter 
 had been first traced out in pencil, after the same 
 fashion as the pencilling in the annotated folio oj 
 Shaksjyeres Plays, 1632 ; and I may here remark 
 that the existence of this system of pencilling in 
 this letter at Dulwich College, as well as in Mr. 
 CoUier's and Lord EUesmere's folios, seems of much 
 importance in tracing these various fictitious docu- 
 ments up to one source, although other forgeries 
 exist in the same libraries in which pencil-marks 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 95 
 
 cannot be discovered, bnt which nevertheless there 
 is reason for believing were perpetrated by the same 
 hand. Of such forgeries I proceed to mention two : 
 both of them in the library at Dulwich, both re- 
 lating to Shakspere, and both, as before said, first 
 published in the Memoirs of Alleyn, (p. 13.) 
 The first of these, the verses commencing, — 
 
 " Sweet Nedde, nowe wynne an other wager," 
 
 is a forgery from beginning to end, although 
 executed with singular dexterity. In the second 
 the document itself is genuine, and is noticed 
 in his " Inquiry " by Malone, but the " List of 
 Players " added to it, in which Shakspere's name 
 occurs, is a modern addition. Mr. ColHer was 
 the first to notice and publish this "List of 
 Players;" but although he draws attention to 
 the circumstance that Malone, while mentioning 
 the letter, is altogether silent as to the remarkable 
 " List " appended to it, he does not appear to 
 regard this as a ground for suspecting the 
 authenticity of the List, but seems to think that a 
 satisfactory explanation may be found by sup- 
 posing that Malone had "reserved" it for his 
 Life of Shakspere : the true explanation, doubt- 
 less, being, that when Malone examined the 
 document, the " List " in question was not there, 
 
9G INQUIRY INTO 
 
 but has been added since his time. Any one 
 who will compare the character of the hand in 
 which the "List" is written, mth the letter 
 signed H. S. in the Bridgewater library, will 
 probably arrive at the conclusion I have done, 
 that they are by the same hand. 
 
 But of the various documents which I believe 
 to be spm^ious, the most remarkable is the fol- 
 lowing : — 
 
 To the right honorable the LI of her IM"' most 
 honorable priuie Counsell 
 
 The humble petition of Thomas Pope Richard Bur- 
 badge John Hemings Augustine PhilUps Will"' Shake- 
 speare Will™ Kempe Will™ Slye Nicholas Tooley and 
 others seruauntes to the right honorable the L. Cham- 
 berlaine to her Ma^**" — Sheweth most humbly that yo" 
 petitioners are owners and players of the priuate 
 house or theater in the precinct and libertie of the 
 Blackfriers x^"^ hath beene for manie yeares vsed and 
 occupied for the playing of tragedies commedies his- 
 tories enterludes rnd playes. That the same by reason 
 of having beene soe long built hath falne into great decaye 
 and that besides the reparation thereof it hath beene 
 found necessarie to make the same more conuenient for 
 the entertainement of auditories comming thereto 
 That to this end yo' petitioners haue all and eche of them 
 putt down sommes of money according to their shares in 
 
THE MS. COERECTTONS, ETC. 97 
 
 the saide theater and w'"'' they haue iustly and honestlie 
 gained by the exercise of their qualitie of Stage players 
 but that certaine persons (some of them of honour) 
 inhabitantes of the precinct and libertie of the Black- 
 friers haue as yo"" petitioners are enfourmed besought yo'' 
 honorable Lps not to permitt the saide priuate house anie 
 longer to remaine open but hereafter to be shutt vpp 
 and closed to the manifest and great iniurie of yo"" peti- 
 tioners who haue no other meanes whereby to mainteine 
 their wiues and families but by the exersise of their 
 qualitie as they haue heretofore done. Furthermore 
 that in the summer season yo'" petitioners are able to 
 playe at their newe built house on the Bankside callde 
 the Globe but that in the winter they are compelled to 
 come to the Blackfriers and if yo'' honorable Lps give 
 consent vnto that w'"'' is prayde against yo'' petitioners 
 they will not onely while the winter endureth loose the 
 meanes whereby they nowe support them selues and 
 their families but be vnable to practise them selues in 
 anie playes or enterluds when calde vpon to performe 
 for the recreation and solace of her Ma*'^ and her 
 honorable Court as they haue beene hertofore accustomed. 
 The humble prayer of yo'" petitioners therefore is that 
 yo'' hon^'*' Lps will graunt permission to finishe the repa- 
 rations and alterations they haue begunne and as yo'' 
 petitioners haue hitherto beene well ordred in their 
 behauiour and iust in their dealinges that yo'^ honorable 
 Lps will not inhibit them from acting at their aboue 
 named priuate house in the precinct and libertie of the 
 Blackfriers and yo'' petitioners as in dutie most bounden 
 
 o 
 
98 INQUIKY INTO 
 
 will euer praye for the encreasing honour and happinesse 
 of your honorable Lps.* 
 
 Up to this point, the value of any addition, 
 however slight, to the knowledge we possess 
 regarding Shakspere's history, has alone given 
 importance to the inquiry whether the documents 
 from which such additional facts were taken, 
 were genuine, as they professed to be. But the 
 document above printed, claims, at the present 
 moment, the dignity and credit of a Public 
 Eecord. It is preserved in Her Majesty's State 
 Paper Office, bears upon it the official stamp of 
 
 "/^ that office, and forms one of a collection of public 
 
 papers of undoubted genuineness. Yet there can 
 be little question that it belongs to the same set 
 oi forgeries as those already investigated : that by 
 some means, yet to be traced, it has been surrep- 
 
 y' titiously introduced among the Eecords where it 
 
 is now found ; and in the course of official routine 
 has received with the rest the stamp of authen- 
 ticity. 
 
 A fac-simile of it is given by Mr. Halliwell, 
 
 in his folio Shakspere, 1853, (vol. i. p. 137), who 
 
 states that it was discovered by Mr. Collier in the 
 
 y state Paper Office; and Mr. Collier prints it in 
 
 ' Document preserved in H.M.'s State Paper Office, Do- 
 mestic Series,— Elizabeth, ITiOH, Bumllc 222. 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. fi9 
 
 liis Annals of the Stage (1831), with the following 
 notice:— " This remarkable paper has, perhaps, 
 never seen the Hght from the moment it was 
 presented, until it was very recently discovered. 
 It is seven years anterior to the date of any other 
 authentic record which contains the name of our 
 great di-amatist."* 
 
 * The following is the entire passage in which Mr. Collier 
 states the discovery of the record. " The Blackfriars Theatre, 
 built in 1576, seems, after the lapse of twenty years, to have 
 required extensive repaii-s, if, indeed' it were not at the end of 
 that period entirely rebuilt. This undertaking, in 1596, seems 
 to have alarmed some of the mhabitants of the Liberty ; and- 
 not a few of them, ' some of honour,' petitioned the Privy Coun- 
 cil, in order that the players might not be allowed to complete 
 it, and that their fm'ther performances in that precinct might 
 be prevented. A copy of the docimiei^jb containing this re- 
 quest, is preserved in the State Paper OflBce, and to it is ap- 
 pended a much more curious paper — a counter petition by the 
 Lord Chamberlain's players, entreating that they might be per- 
 mitted to continue their work upon the theatre, in order to 
 render it more commodious, and that their performances there 
 might not be interrupted. It does not appear to be the origi- 
 nal, but a copy without the signatures, and it contains at the 
 commencement, an enumeration of the principal actors who 
 were parties to it. They occur in the followmg order, and it 
 will be instantly remarked, not only that the name of Shake- 
 speare is found among them, but that he comes fifth in the 
 enumeration : — 
 
 Tliomas Pope, 
 
 Richard Eurbagc, 
 
 John Hemings, 
 
100 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 This petition bears no date, and is written on 
 half a sheet of foolscap paper, without water-mark, 
 and which, from the appearance of the edges, I 
 should think had probably once formed the fly- 
 leaf of some folio volume. A supposed date of 
 1596 has been placed upon it in pencil by one of 
 the gentlemen in the State Paper Office. Its 
 execution is very neat, and with any one not 
 minutely acquainted with the fictitious hand of 
 these Shakspere forgeries it might readily pass as 
 genuine. But an examination of the handwriting 
 
 Augustine PhiUips, 
 
 William Shakespeare, 
 
 AVilliam Kempe, 
 
 "William Slye, 
 
 Nicholas Tooley. 
 •' This remarkable paper has, perhaps, never seen the light from 
 the moment it was presented, until it was very recently disco- 
 vered. It is seven years anterior to the date of any other au- 
 thentic record, A\hich contains the name of our great dramatist, 
 and it mr.y warrant various conjectures as to the rank he held 
 in the company in 1596, as a poet and as a player." — Collier, 
 Annah of the Stafje, vol. i. p. 207. 
 
 I endeavoured but unsuccessfully to see this " petition of the 
 inhabitants," mentioned at the commencement of the above quo- 
 tation. In reply to an official request for the production of the 
 document, Charles Lechmere, Esq., Assistant Keeper of State 
 Papers, writes, " I have referred to the Calendar of 1590, but I 
 do not find any entry of the Petition from the inhabitants of the 
 Blackfriars." Thus of these two documents, one is an undouhted 
 for<ierii — tJie very existence of tlic other seems prohlematieid I — [II.] 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 101 
 
 generally, the forms of some of the letters in 
 particular, and the spurious appearance of the 
 ink, led me to the belief not only that the paper 
 was not authentic, but that it had been executed 
 by the same hand as the fictitious documents 
 already discussed. This conviction I made known 
 to the Eight Hon. the Master of the Eolls, who 
 was good enough to direct an ofiicial inquiry into 
 the authenticity of the document. 
 
 In accordance with this direction, on the 30th 
 of January, Sir Francis Palgrave, Deputy Keeper 
 of Public Eecords, T. Duffus Hardy, Esq., Assist- 
 ant Keeper of PubHc Eecords, and Professor 
 Brewer, Eeader at the Eolls, met Sir Frederic 
 Madden and myself for the purpose of investiga- 
 tion, and after a minute and careful examination 
 the following unanimous decision was arrived at as 
 to the fact of its undoubtedly spurious character. 
 
 " We, the undersigned, at the desire of the 
 Master of the Eolls, have carefully examined the 
 document hereunto annexed, purporting to be a 
 petition to the Lords of Her Majesty's Privy 
 Council, from Thomas Pope, Eichard Burbadge, 
 John Hemings, Augustine Phillips, WiUiam 
 Shakespeare, William Kempe, William Slye, 
 Nicholas Tooley, and others, in answer to a 
 petition from the Inhabitants of the Liberty of 
 
102 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 the Blackfriars ; and we are of opinion, that the 
 document in question is spurious. 
 " 30th Jamiaiy, 1860. 
 
 " FEA. PALGEAYE, K.H., Deputy-Keeper 
 
 of H. M. Pxiblic Eecords. 
 " FEEDEEIC MADDEN, K.H., Keeper of 
 
 tlie MSS., British Museum. 
 " J. S. BEEWEE, M.A., Eeader at the Eolls. 
 " T. DUFFUS HAEDY, Assistant-Keeper of 
 
 Eecords. 
 " N. E. S. A. HAMILTON, Assistant, Dep : of 
 MSS., British Museum." 
 
 " I direct this paper to be appended to the 
 undated document now last in the Bundle, marked 
 222, Eliz. 159G. 
 
 " 2 February, 1860, 
 
 " JOHN EOMILLY, Master of the Eolls." 
 
 So far, then, as relates to this document, the 
 question must be considered as set at rest : 
 and it is almost unnecessary to point out the 
 weight of the decision, not alone in regard to 
 this condemned forgery, but in respect of its 
 bearing upon the other writings here treated of. 
 Before a new edition of Shakspere is issued, or a 
 new life of Shakspere written, it will be neces- 
 sary that the whole of the hitherto supposed 
 basis of the Poet's history should be rigorously 
 examined, and no eftbrt spared to discover the per- 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 103 
 
 petrator of that treason against the Majesty of 
 English literature, which it has been my object 
 to denounce. 
 
 I here bring this list of fabrications to a close. 
 It exhausts neither the whole of the documents 
 which actual examination convinces me are ficti- 
 tious, nor yet of those which I have only reason to 
 suspect. But before concluding I wish to offer an 
 observation respecting a volume in the possession 
 of Mr. Collier, to which he has frequently drawn 
 the attention of the public, but the authenticity of 
 which has never, I believe, been sufficiently in- 
 quired into. I allude to a manuscript volume 
 of Ballads, stated by its owner to have been 
 written about the time of the Protectorate, and 
 from which he has at various times published 
 extracts. The most noticeable of these, which I 
 have seen, is a ballad entitled " The Inchanted 
 Island," the plot of which bears some resem- 
 blance to The Tempest; and which was pub- 
 lished by Mr. Collier in a letter to the Eev. 
 Joseph Hunter, in the year 1839. Far am I 
 from hinting that Mr. Collier has any unreadiness 
 to submit it to the most searching scrutiny. It 
 is, indeed, through a fac-simile furnished by that 
 gentleman to Mr. Halliwell, that I am enabled to 
 form any opinion on the subject. But no one, I 
 think, experienced in ancient handwritings can 
 
104 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 look at that fac-simile,* without feeling the 
 gravest doubts in regard to its authenticity, which 
 the intrinsic character of the verses themselves by 
 no means serves to allay. Mr. Collier would 
 certainly be doing good ser^dce to the cause of 
 truth and literature, by bringing the volume in 
 question before a competent tribunal; while at 
 the same time he might satisfy literary curiosity, 
 by producing a remarkable document in connec- 
 tion with the history of Shakspere, various parti- 
 culars in regard to whicli were minutely stated by 
 him in a letter to the Athenseum Dec. 6th, 1856,t 
 
 * Published by Mr. Halliwell in the first volume of his Folio 
 Shakspere, p. 312. 
 
 t " SHAKESPEARE AND HIS " RICHARD THE SECOND." 
 
 " Maidenhead, Dec. 3. 
 
 " I am afraid that I shall still further exasperate my Shake- 
 spearian adversaries (I wish I could say with Henry the Sixth, 
 ' Let me embrace these sour adversaries ') when I infoi-m yonr 
 readers that I have recently found another document, very 
 curiously and importantly illustrating what Coleridge used to 
 call ' Shakespeare's greatest historical play ' — * Richard the 
 Second.' 
 
 " All authorities mention that shortly before the ' insurrection' 
 of the Earls of Essex, Southampton, Ac.,— early in 16(tl— Sir 
 Gilly Merrick, Cuff, and some others of their friends, negotiated 
 with the Company of Actors usually playing at the Rlackfriars 
 and Globe Theatres, in order to procure the representation of 
 ' Richard the Second ' on the evening anterior to the rising. It 
 was this circumstance which made Queen Elizabeth afterwards 
 say to Lambard, when he presented to lier his Pandects of 
 Records in the Tower, ' I am Richard the Second : knoM' you 
 
THE MS. CORKFX'TIONS, ETC. 105 
 
 in wliich he places its discovery on record, (al- 
 though he does not mention where he found it,) but 
 which I believe he has never yet published, and 
 which, so far as I am aware, no one has yet seen. 
 
 not that ?' Certain it is, that a tragedy entitled ' Eichard the 
 Second ' was acted by the players of the Lord Chamberlain, of 
 whom Shakespeare was one, on Saturday, the 7th of February, 
 the evening before the defeat of the insane enterprise headed by 
 the disappointed and irritated Earl of Essex. It had been the 
 intention of the company to have acted some other more popular 
 play on that night; but friends of the Earl of Essex had an in- 
 terview with some of the leaders of the association ; and at the 
 instance of those friends the tragedy of 'Eichard the Second,' 
 (then considered ' an old play ' and not likely to be attractive,) 
 was substituted. To compensate the actors for their trouble, 
 and for the probable loss they should sustain by the revival of 
 an old drama, the exhibition of which, it was supposed, would 
 advance the purposes of the insurgents, Sir Gilly Merrick and 
 others, as was sworn upon their trial, agreed to give the per- 
 formers 40s. beyond the money that might be taken at the 
 doors. 
 
 " The document I have recovered is the account given by 
 Augustine Phillipps, ' Servant unto the Lord Chamberlain, and 
 one of his I'layers,' of what passed at the interview between the 
 friends of the Earl of Essex and the members of the company, 
 when the former consented to pay, and the latter to accept, 40s. 
 on condition that they should substitute ' Eichard the Second ' 
 for the play it had been their intention to perform on Saturday, 
 the 7th of February, 1601. The date of the paper is the ' 18th 
 of February, 1600;' but at that time the new year did not com- 
 mence until the 26th of March, so that the ' 18th of February, 
 1600,' was, in fact, the 18th of February, 1601. 
 
 " Tt appears that, on the failure of the ' insurrection,' cortaiii 
 persons were appointed by the Crown t(i taki' the proliniinarv 
 
 r 
 
106 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 I think the above is sufficient to satisfy the 
 reader that a series of skilful forgeries has 
 been practised at some late period, and ap- 
 parently by some one person, on the literary 
 
 examinations of the diflferent witnesses against the offenders, 
 and as Shakespeare was still an actor among the Lord Chamber- 
 lain's servants, as well as an author solely employed by them, 
 it might have happened that he would be the witness, or one of 
 the witnesses, to prove the agreement. We do not even know 
 that he was present when it was entered into ; for Phillipps tells 
 us that the friends of the Earl of Essex— viz., Sir Charles Pryce, 
 Jostlyne Pryce, and the Lord Monteagle (he does not mention 
 Merrick nor Cuff) — ' spake with some of the Players in the pre- 
 sence of this examinant,'— but he does not give the names of the 
 other players, and it is very possible that Phillipps was the sole 
 witness to the fact on the an-aignmcnt and trial of the prisoners. 
 He distinctly gives the title of the play, calling it ' The Deposing 
 and killing King PJchard the Second,' but he does not inform 
 us what newer and more attractive drama it was to displace, at 
 the instance of the two Pryces and Lord Monteagle. 
 
 " This examination is signed by Augustine Phillix^ips in his own 
 firm hand, and with both his names at length, and not merely 
 ' A. PhUlips,' as it appears at the close of his will, dated the 
 4:th of May, 1605, and proved by his widow on the 13th of the 
 same month. He survived his examination, therefore, only 
 about four years, and died at his country residence at Mortlake. 
 (' IVIemoirs of the Actors in Shakespeare's Plays,' 8vo. 1846, 
 p. 83.) 
 
 " His j)rominence in the company in the spring of ICOl, no 
 doubt, led to the selection of him as the person chiefly to be 
 negotiated with by the Pryces and Lord Monteagle, and after- 
 wards as the witness in Court to the agreement for the repre- 
 sentation of ' Richard the Second ' His name comes third in 
 the liot of actors prefixed to the folio of Shakespeare's AVorks in 
 
THE MS. OOERECTIUNS, ETC. 107 
 
 world. Corrections of Sliakspere's text, pretend- 
 ing to be of the seventeenth, have been proved 
 to be of the nineteenth century. Documents 
 professedly original, relating important facts 
 concerning him, have been shown to have no 
 older or more venerable date than this or the 
 last generation. I cannot disguise from myself 
 or my readers, that these discoveries are far 
 from rejoicing me. On the contrary they seem 
 more suited to give a feeling of sadness. How 
 far has the subtle poison, of which I have by 
 accident succeeded in tracking a few traces, 
 circulated " unknown to men " throughout the 
 body of our literature.^ Many of the records of 
 the past, on which we are wont to rely, exist 
 only in print, and any test of their truth 
 
 1632, being only postponed to those of Heminge, the acknow- 
 ledged head of the association, and of Burbadge, the great 
 tragedian. 
 
 " The title and the whole body of this interesting document is 
 in the not-easily-lcgible handwriting of Lord Chief Justice 
 Popham, and it is counter-signed by him, Mr. Justice Anderson, 
 and Edw. Tenner, who was, I believe, at that date one of the 
 Queen's Serjeants. It may be recollected that Popham was one 
 of the Judges who went with Sir Thomas Egerton, then Keeper 
 of the Great Seal, to Essex House, in order, if possible, to 
 reason with the Earl upon the madness as well as treasonablc- 
 ness of hit? proceedings." 
 
 " J. PAYNE COLLIEP." 
 
108 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 beyond the doubtful one of internal evidence 
 cannot now be brought to bear. What if " Old 
 Correctors " Avere abroad then, and prudently de- 
 stroyed the means of discovering their youtli ! In 
 any case, without pushing suspicion beyond the 
 soberest limits, the sight of successful deception 
 is painful and unsettling. A distressing habit of 
 doubt is apt to fasten on the mind, and a sense of 
 helpless insecurity to overpower all other feelings. 
 
 But the history of past or present literary 
 forgeries, does not warrant any excessive scepti- 
 cism. The skill, dishonesty and knowledge, requi- 
 site for their successful perpetration, do not often 
 meet in one individual ; neither are the com- 
 mercial advantages sufficiently tempting to call 
 forth many or frequent attempts. 
 
 "We cannot always penetrate the motives of 
 crime, nor, indeed, is it always necessary that we 
 should do this ; but the good practical moral 
 derivable from the present case, is, that greater 
 caution in the reception of new discoveries should 
 be practised than has been usual of late ; and that 
 no amount of incompetent laudation, however 
 sincere or boisterous, can guarantee to the pubhc 
 the authenticity of recently announced Manuscript 
 Documents. 
 
THE MS. COERECTIONS, ETC. 109 
 
 APPENDIX T, 
 
 THE BRIDGEWATER SHAKSPERE FORGERIES. 
 
 In the Library at Bridgewater House, is a large folio 
 containing six documents. These are all forgeries, except- 
 ing the 4th, which is genuine, and is headed, " The 
 opinions of the two Chief Justices of either bench con- 
 cerning the jurisdiccon authoritie and liberties claymed 
 by the Cittizens of London within the precincte of the late 
 dissolved howses of the white and black Fryers of London 
 delivered the xxvijth of Januarie, 1579." 
 
 A fac-simile of the fifth document in the series, executed 
 by Mr. Netherclift, will be found at p. 83. The resemblance 
 between the character and forms of the letters in this 
 document and in the marginal corrections in the Duke of 
 Devonshire's " folio," is very striking. 
 
 The text shows the exact reading of the Bridgewater 
 MSS. Numerous verbal and literal inaccuracies exist in 
 the professedly verbatim et litteratim copies printed by Mr. 
 Collier in his iVeio Facts, 1835. 
 
110 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 No. I. 
 For avoiding of the playhouse in the Blache Friers. 
 Impr. Richard Burbidge owith the Fee, and is alsoe a 
 sharer therein. His interest he rateth at the grosse 
 summe of 1000 li for the Fee, and for his foure 
 Shares the summe of 933 li 6s 8d 
 
 1933 li 6s 8d 
 Item Laz Fletcher owith three shares "w"" he rateth at 700 li, 
 that is at 7 years purchase for eche share, or 
 33 li 6s 8d one yeare with an other. 
 
 700 U 
 Item "W. Shakspeare asketh for the "Wardrobe and pro- 
 perties of the same playhouse 500 li, and for his 4 
 shares, the same as his fellowes 
 Fletcher, viz. 933 li 63 8d. 
 
 Item Hemiuges and Condell eche 2 shares 
 Item Joseph Taylor one share and an halfe 
 Item Lowing one share and an halfe 
 Item Foure more playeres with one halfe share vnto eche of 
 them t^ 466 11 13s 4d 
 
 Burbidge and 
 
 1433 li 
 
 63 8d 
 
 933 li 
 
 6s 8d 
 
 35011 
 
 
 35011 
 
 
 Sum" totalis 6166 13 4 
 
 Moreover, tlie hired men of the companie demaund some 
 recompence for their greate losse, and the Widowes and 
 Orphanes of players, who are paide by the sharers at 
 divers rates and proporcons, soc as in the wliole it will coste 
 the Lo. Mayor and Citizens at the least 7000 li. 
 
THE MS. COERECTIONS, ETC. Ill 
 
 No II. 
 
 To the Right honorable Sir Thomas Egerto7i, Knight, 
 Lord Keeper of the great Seale of England. 
 
 I will not indeavour, Hight honorable, to thanke you ia 
 wordes for this new great and vnlookt for favor showne vnto 
 me, whereby I am bound to you for ever, and hope one day 
 with true harte and simple skill to prove that I am not 
 vnmindfuU. 
 
 Most earnestly doe I wishe I could praise as your 
 Honour has knowne to deserue, for then should I, like 
 my maister Spencer, whose memorie your Honor cherish- 
 eth, leave behinde me some worthie worke, to be treasured 
 by posteritie; What my pore muse could perforine in 
 haste is here set downe, and though it be farre below what 
 other poets and better pennes have written it commeth from 
 a gratefull harte and therefore maye be accepted. I shall 
 now be able to Hue free from those cares and troubles that 
 hetherto haue been my continuall and wearisome compa- 
 nions. But a little time is paste since I was called vpon to 
 thanke yo' honor for my brothers advancement and nowe I 
 thanke you for my owne w'''' double kindnes will alwaies re- 
 ceive double gratefullnes at both our handes. 
 
 I cannot but knowe that I am lesse deseruing then some 
 that sued by other of the nobilitie vnto her Ma"" for this 
 roome, if M. Drayton my good friend had bene chosen I 
 should not have murmured for sure I am he wold have filled 
 it most excellentlie ; but it seemeth to myne humble iudgo- 
 ment that one which is the authour of playes now daylic 
 presented on the publick stages of Loudon and the possessor 
 of no small gaines, and moreover himself an actor in the 
 
112 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 kinges companie of Commedias, could not with reason pre- 
 tend to be m' of the Queenes Ma"'* Eeuelles for asmuclias 
 be wold sometimes be asked to approue and allowe of his 
 owne writinge. Therfore he and more of like qualitie can 
 not iustly be disappointed because through yo' Honors gra- 
 cious interposition tlie chance was haply myne. I owe tliis 
 and all else to yo' Honors and if euer I haue time and 
 abilitie to finishe anie noble vndertakiug as god graunt one 
 daye I shall, the worke will rather be yo' Honors then 
 myne. God maketh a poet but his creation wold be in 
 vaine if patrones did not make him to line. Yo' Honor hath 
 ever showne yo"" selfe the friend of desert, and pitty it were 
 if this should be the first exception to the rule. It shall not 
 be whiles my poore witt and strength doe remaine to me, 
 though the verses w'''' I nowe sende be indeede noe proofe of 
 myne abilitie I onely intreat yo' Honor to accept the same 
 the rather as an earnest of my good will then as an example 
 of my good deede. In all thinges I am yo' Honors 
 Most bouuden in dutie and 
 obseruance, 
 
 S. Dan YELL 
 
THE MS. COKRECTIONS, ETC. 113 
 
 No. III. 
 
 These are to sertifie yo^ right honorable LI tliaf her 
 Ma'*" poore playeres, James Burbidge, Eichard Bur- 
 bidge, John Laneham, Thomas Greene, Eobert Wilson, 
 John Taylor, Anth. Wadeson, Thomas Pope, George Peele, 
 Augustine Phillippes, Nicholas Towley, William Shakespeare, 
 William Kempe, William Johnson, Baptiste Goodale, and 
 Eobert Armyn, being all of them sharers in the blacke 
 Fryers playehouse, have neuer giuen cause of displeasure, in 
 that they haue brought into their playes maters of state 
 and Eeligiou, vnfitt to be handled by them or to be pre- 
 sented before lewde spectators ; neither hath anie complainte 
 in that kinde ever beene preferred against them or anie of 
 them. Wherefore they truste moste humblie in yo'' LI 
 consideracon of their former good behauiour, beinge at 
 all tymes readic and willing to yeelde obedience to anie coiu- 
 aund whatsoever your LI in your wisedome maye thinkc 
 in such case meete, &c. 
 
 Novr., iryHd. 
 
 No. lY.— Genuine. 
 
114 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 No. V. 
 
 Right trustie and wellbeloved &c. James &c. To all 
 Mayors, SberiiFes, Justices of the peace &c. Whereas the 
 Queene our dearest wife hath for her pleasure and recreacon 
 appointed her servauntes Eobert Daborne &c. to prouide and 
 bring uppe a convenient nomber of children who shalbe 
 called the children of her Ma"^ revelles, Kjiowe yee that 
 We have appointed and authorized and by these presentes doe 
 appoint and authorize the saide Eobei't Daborne, Willm 
 Sliakespeare, Nathaniel Field, and Edward Kii-khain from 
 time to time to prouide and bring vpp a convenient nomber 
 of children, and them to instruct and exercise in the qualitie 
 of playing Tragedies Comedies &c. by the name of the 
 children of the reuelles to the Queene, within the blacke 
 Fryers in our Cittie of London and els where within our realms 
 of England. Wherefore we will and commaund you and 
 everie of you to permitte her said servauntes to keepe a con- 
 venient nomber of children by the name of the children of 
 the reuelles to the Queene, and them to exercise in the 
 qualitie of playing acording to our Royall pleasure. Pro- 
 vided allwayes that noe playes &c. slialbe by them presented, 
 but such playes &c. as haue receiued tlie aprobacon and allow- 
 ance of our Maister of the Reuelles for tlie tyme being. 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 115 
 
 And these our Ires shalbe yo' sufficient warraunt in this 
 behalfe. In Witnesse whereof &c. 4° die Janii. 1609. 
 
 Bl Fr and globe 
 Wh Fr and parishe garden 
 Curten and fortune 
 Hope and Swanue 
 
 All in 
 & ueere 
 London 
 
 Proude pouertie 
 Widdowes mite 
 Antonio kinsmen 
 Triumph of truth 
 Touchstone 
 Mirror of life 
 Grissell 
 Engl tragedie 
 False Friendes 
 Hate and loue 
 Taming of S 
 K. Edw. 2 
 
 Stayed. 
 
116 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 No. YI. 
 
 My verie honored Lo. the manie good offices I haue 
 receiued at yo' Lps handes wh"^ ought to make me backward 
 in asking further favors onely imbouldeueth me to require 
 more in the same kinde. To' Lp. wilbe warned howe here- 
 after you graunt anie sute seeing it draweth on more and 
 greater demaundes : this w"^ now presseth is to request yo' 
 Lp. in all you can to be good to the poore players of the 
 blacke Fryers who call them selues by authoritie the Servantes 
 of his Ma"^ and aske for the proteccon of their most gracious 
 maister and Soueraigne in this the tyme of there treble.^ They 
 are threatened by the Lo. Maior and Aldermen of Loudon 
 never friendly to their calling w"" the distruccon of their 
 meanes of liuelihood by the pulling downe of theu' plaie- 
 house w'^'' is a priuate theatre and hath never giuen ocasion 
 of anger by anie disorders. These bearers are two of the 
 chiefs of the companie, one of them by name Eichard 
 Burbidge who humblie sueth for yo' Lps kinde helpe for 
 that he is a man famous as our english Eoscius one who 
 fitteth the action to the worde and the word to the action 
 most adraira[b]ly. By the exercise of his qualitie industry 
 and good behaviour he hath become possessed of the Blacke 
 Fryers playhouse w'^'' hath bene imployed for playes 
 sithence it was builded by his Father now nere 50 yeres 
 agone. The other is a man uo whitt lesse deseruiug fauor 
 and my especial fricnde till of late an actor of good account 
 in the c\impauie, now a sharer in tlie same, and writer of 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 117 
 
 some of our best english playes w''' as your Lp. knoweth 
 were most singulerly liked of Quene Elizabeth when the 
 cumpanie was called vppon to performe before her Ma'"" at 
 Court at Christmas and Shrove tide. His most gracious 
 Ma"" King James alsoe since his coming to the crowne hath 
 extended his Eoyall favour to the companie in diners waies 
 and at sundrie tymes. This other hath to name William 
 Shakespeare and they are both of one countie and indeede 
 allmost of one towne, both are right famous in their qualities 
 though it longeth not of yo' Lo. grauitie and wisdome to 
 resort vnto the places where they are wont to delight the 
 publique eare. Their trust and sute nowe is not to bee 
 molested in their waye of life whereby they maintaine 
 themselues and their wines and families (being both maried 
 and of good reputacon) as well as the widowes and orphanes 
 of some of their dead fellows. Yo"" Lo. most bounden at 
 com. H. b. 
 
 Copia vera. 
 
118 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 APPENDIX II. 
 
 Forgeries among the Documents at Dulwich College: 
 with Extracts from Mr. J. P. Collier's Remarks upon 
 them. 
 
 No. I. 
 
 " But there is another paper of a very similar kind, 
 apparently referring to the preceding, or to some other like 
 contest, but containing several remarkable allusions, which 
 Malone did not notice. Perhaps it never met his eye, or 
 perhaps he reserved it for his Life of Shakespeare, and was 
 unwilling to forestall that production by inserting it else- 
 where. It seems to be of a later date, and it mentions not 
 only Tarlton, Knell, and Bentley, but Kempe, Phillips, and 
 Pope, while Alleyn's rival Burbage is sneered at as " Eoscius 
 Eichard," and Shakespeare introduced under the name of 
 Will, by which we have Thomas Heywood's authoritie (in 
 his " Hierarchic of the blessed Angels," 1635, p. 206) for 
 saying he was known among his companions. The paper is 
 in verse, and runs precisely as follows : 
 
 " Sweet Nedde, nowe wynnc an other wager 
 For thine old friende and Fellow stager ; 
 Tarlton himself thou dost cxcell, 
 And Bentley beato, and conquer Knell, 
 And nowc shall Kempe orccomo aswell. 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 119 
 
 The moneys downe, the place the Hope, 
 Phillipes shall hide his head and Pope. 
 Fear not, the victorie is thyne ; 
 Thou still as macheles Ned shall shyne. 
 If Roscius Richard foames and fumes, 
 The globe shall have but emptie roomes ; 
 If thou doest act ; and Willes newe playe 
 Shall be rehearst some other daye. 
 Consent, then, Nedde ; doe us this grace : 
 Thou cannot faile in anie case ; 
 For in the triall, come what maye, 
 All sides shall brave Ned AUin saye." 
 
 Memoirs of Alleyn, p. 13, ed. J. P. Collier, 1841. 
 
 No. II. 
 
 " Mai one also appears to have reserved another circum- 
 tance, of very considerable importance in relation to Shake- 
 speare, for his life of the poet. To the last-quoted document, 
 but in a different hand and in different ink, is appended a 
 list of the king's players. The name of Shakespeare there 
 occurs second, and as it could not be written at the bottom 
 of the letter of the Council to the Lord Mayor, &c. prior to 
 the date of that letter, it proves that up to 9th April, IG04, 
 our great dramatist continued to be numbered among the 
 actors of the company. Hitherto the last trace we have had 
 of Shakespeare as actually on the stage, has been as one of 
 the performers in Ben Jonson's ' Sejanus,'' which was pro- 
 
120 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 duced iu 1603. We will insert tlie list as it stands at the 
 foot of the Councirs letter to the Lord Mayor, &c. 
 
 " Ks Com p. 
 Burbidge 
 Shakespeare 
 rietcher 
 Phillips 
 Condle 
 Hemminges 
 Armyn 
 Slye 
 Cowley 
 Hostler 
 Day." 
 
 Memoirs of Alley n, p. 68. 
 
 No. III. 
 
 " The following iindated note from Marston to Henslowe 
 may not be unfitly introduced liere : it refers to a play by 
 Marston on the subject of Columbus, of which we hear on 
 no other authority. It is one of the scraps of correspondence 
 between Henslowe and the poets in his emploj^, existing at 
 Dulwich College, of the major part of which Malone has 
 given copies, but omitting tlie subsequent, which is certainly 
 one of the most interesting of tl>e wliolo collection. 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 121 
 
 " Mr. Hensloe, at the rose on the Bankside. 
 " If you like my play of Columbus, it is verie well and you 
 shall give me no more than twentie poundes for it, but If 
 nott, lett mee have it by this Bearer againe, as I knowe the 
 kinges men will-freelie give mee as much for it, and the 
 profitts of the third daye moreover. 
 
 " Soe I rest yours 
 
 " John Maeston." 
 
 3Iemoirs of Alleyn, p. 154. 
 
122 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 APPENDIX. III. 
 
 THE INCHANTED ISLAND. 
 
 Tlie following is the ballad alluded to p. 102, and printed 
 by Mr. J. P. Collier, in " Farther Particulars regard- 
 ing Shakespeare and his Works. In a letter to the 
 Eev. Joseph Hunter, F.S.A., from J. Payne Collier, F.S.A. 
 London. Thomas Eodd, Great Newport Street, Long Acre, 
 1839." 
 
 " I will now," (says Mr. Collier) " introduce to your notice 
 a production in verse, in my opinion written subsequently to 
 The Tempest, and adopting all or most of its principal inci- 
 dents. I once thought it possible that tliis ballad (for such 
 it is) might have preceded the play, but I now am satisfied 
 that it is a later production, and that the writer was ac- 
 quainted with The Tempest, though he does not employ a 
 single name found in it. My conjecture is that it was pub- 
 lished (if pubhshed at all, of w^hich we have no evidence but 
 probability) during the period when the theatres were closed 
 (viz. from about 1642 to 1660), in order, by putting the 
 stories of discontinued dramas into easy rhyme, to give tlie 
 public some species of amusement founded upon old plays, 
 although the severity of the Puritans in those times would 
 not allow the performance of theatrical entertainments. 
 Hence Jordan's ballads, derived from The Merchant of Venice, 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 123 
 
 The Winter's Tale, Much ado about Nothing, &c. quoted in 
 my letter to the Eev. A. Dyce. I also mentioned to him on 
 that occasion the ballad to which I am now adverting, and, 
 having since gone over it with him, I believe he concurs with 
 me in thinking that it is posterior to Shakespeare's Tempest. 
 The late Mr. Douce, who also had several opportunities of 
 reading it, at first hoped that it was the long-sought original 
 of that wonderful drama; and when I last saw him and 
 spoke of it, he was disposed to think that the play and the 
 ballad were derived from one common source ; but though 
 the copying of particular expressions cannot be detected, 
 there are such strong general reseniblances, that 1 feel as- 
 sured that the writer of the ballad must have known, if he 
 did not in part use, the play. The initials at the end of the 
 MS. led me, when first I saw it, to conjecture that Eobert 
 Greene, who died in 1592, might be the author of it, but it 
 is decidedly of too modern a cast and structure for him, and, 
 as I before observed, my conjecture is that it was written 
 about the period of the Protectorate. 
 
 I have never met with nor heard of any printed copy of it ; 
 but it is inserted in the MS. volume I have had for years in 
 my possession, the particular contents of which may be seen 
 in my letter to the Rev. A. Dyce. The ballads appear to 
 be of all ages during the century between the opening of the 
 reign of Elizabeth and the time of the Eestoration. 
 
 Mr. Douce called it " one of the most beautiful ballads he 
 had ever read," and shook his venerable head (as was his 
 wont) with admii'ing energy and antiquarian enthusiasm at 
 different passages in it ; but I am by no means prepared to 
 give it so high a character. It is certainly vastly better, 
 both in style and sentiment, than any thing of the sort Jor- 
 dan has written, and to whom the initials R. G. at the end 
 
124 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 cau apply, it would be vain to conjecture. Robert Gomer- 
 sall was a poet of no mean eminence, about that period or a 
 little earlier (he died in 1646) ; but it was not at all in the 
 manner of any thing he has left behind him. It runs thus : — 
 
 THE INCHANTED ISLAND, 
 
 In Arragon there livde a king, 
 
 Who had a daughter sweete as Spring, 
 
 A little playful childe. 
 He lovde his studie and his booke ; 
 The toyles of state he could not brooke. 
 
 Of temper still and milde. 
 
 He left them to his Brother's care. 
 Who soone usurped the throne unware, 
 
 Andtarnd his Brother forth. 
 The studious king Geraldo hight, 
 His daughter Ida, deare as sight 
 
 To him who knew her worth. 
 
 The Brother who usurped the throne 
 Was by the name Benormo knowne, 
 
 Of cruell harte and bolde. 
 He turned his niece and Brother forth 
 To wander east, west, north, or south,* 
 
 All in the winter colde. 
 
 Long time he journeyd up and downe, 
 The head all bare that wore a crowne, 
 And Ida in liis hand, 
 
 * For the rhyme we should read "south or north," and lor 
 the sense it ansAVCrs equally well. The transcriber Mas not a 
 very accurate penman. — [C] 
 
THE MS. CUERECTIONS, ETC. 125 
 
 Till that they reachd the broad sea side 
 Where marchant ships at anchor ride 
 From many a distant land. 
 
 Imbarking ther, in one of these, 
 They were by force of windes and seas 
 
 Driven wide for many a mile ; 
 Till at the last they shelter found, 
 The maister and his men all drownd, 
 
 In the inchanted Isle. 
 
 Geraldo and his daughter faire. 
 The onelie two that landed there, 
 
 Were savde by myracle ; 
 And, sooth to say, in dangerous houre 
 He had some more than human powi-e, 
 
 As seemeth by what befell. 
 
 He brought with him a magicke booke, 
 Whereon his eye did oft times looke, 
 
 That wrought him wonders gi-eat. 
 A magicke staffe he had alsoe, 
 That angi-ie fiendes compelld to goe 
 
 To doe his bidding straight. 
 
 The spirites of the earth and aire, 
 Fnseene, yet fleeting every where. 
 
 To crosse him could not chuse. 
 All this by studie he had gaiud 
 While he in Arragon remaind, 
 
 But never thought to use. 
 
 When landed on thinchanted Isle 
 His little Ida's morning smile 
 
 Made him forgett his woe : 
 
126 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 And thus within a cavern dreare 
 They livde for many a yeare ifere, 
 For heaven had will'd it soe. 
 
 His blacke lockes turnd all silver gi-ay, 
 But ever time he wore away, 
 
 To teach his childe intent ; 
 And as she into beautie grew 
 In knowledge she advanced to [o] 
 
 As wise as innocent. 
 
 Most lovlie was she to beholde ; 
 Her haire was like to sunn litt golde, 
 
 And blue as heaven her eye. 
 When she was in her fifteenth yeere 
 Her daintie forme was like the deere * 
 
 Sportfull with majestic. 
 
 The Demons who the land had held 
 By might of magicke he expelld, 
 
 Save such as he did neede ; 
 And servaunts of the ayre he kept 
 To watch o'er Ida when she slept, 
 
 Or on swift message speede. 
 
 And all this while in Arragon 
 Benormo raignde, who had a son 
 
 Now growne to mans estate : 
 His sire in all things most unlike 
 Of courage tried, yet slow to strike, 
 
 Not turning love to hate. 
 
 * This couplet is transposed in the MSS. with tlie figures J and 
 2 against the lines, to indicate the order in which they were io 
 be read. — [C.j 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 127 
 
 Alfonso was the Princes name, 
 
 It chancd posthaste a message came 
 
 Just then to Arragon 
 From Sicilie to son and sire. 
 Which did their presence soone desire 
 To see Sicilia's son 
 
 Fast tyed in the niiptiall band 
 To Naples daugliters lovelie hand, 
 
 And they to go consent. 
 So in a galley on a day 
 To Sicilie they tooke their way, 
 
 'J'hither to saile intent. 
 
 Geraldo by his magicke art 
 Knew even the hour of their depart 
 
 For distant Sicilie : 
 He knew alsoe that they must passe 
 Neare to the isle whereon he was. 
 
 And tliat revenge was nie. 
 
 He caUde his spirites of the aire 
 Commanding them a storme prepare 
 
 To cast them on that shore. 
 The gallant barke came sailing on 
 With silken sailes from Arragon 
 
 And manie a gnilded ore. 
 
 But gilded ore and silken saile 
 Might not against the storm prevaile : 
 
 The windes blew hie aud loude. 
 The sailes were rent, the ores were broke 
 The ship was split by lightning stroke 
 
 That burste from angrie cloude. 
 
128 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 But such Geraldoe's powre that day 
 That though the ship was cast away, 
 
 Of all the crue not one, 
 Not even the shipboy, then was drowned, 
 And old Benormo on drie ground 
 
 Imbracde his dearest son. 
 
 About the isle they wandered long- 
 For still some spirite led them wrong- 
 Till they were wearie growne ; 
 Then came to olde Geraldoe's cell, 
 Where he and lovelie Ida dwell ; 
 
 Though scene they were not knowne. 
 
 Much marvelled they in such a place 
 To sec an Eremit's wringled face,, 
 
 More at the maid they start : 
 And soone as did Alfonso see 
 Ida so beautifull but hee 
 
 Felt love within his hart. 
 
 Benormo heard with griefe and shame 
 Geraldo call him by his name. 
 
 His brothers voyce well knowne. 
 Upon his aged knees he fell, 
 And wept that he did ere rebell 
 
 Against his brother's throne. 
 
 Brother, he cried, forgive my crime ! 
 I sweare, since that u[n]happie time 
 
 I have not tasted peace. 
 Ecturne and take againe your crowne. 
 Which at your feete I will lay downe, 
 
 And soc our jarres surcease. 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 129 
 
 Never, Giraldo said, will I 
 Ascend that seat of soverainty ; 
 
 But I all wrongs forgett. 
 I have a daughter, you a son, 
 And they shall raigne ore Arragon, 
 
 And on my throne be sett. 
 
 My head is all too olde to bear 
 
 The weight of crownes and kingdomes care, 
 
 Peace in my bookes I find. 
 Gold crownes beseeme not silver lockes. 
 Like sunbeames upon whitend rockes. 
 
 They mocke the tranquill miude. 
 
 Benormo, worne with cares of state, 
 Which worldlie sorrowes aye create, 
 
 Sawe the advice was good. 
 The tide of love betwixt the paire, 
 Alfonso young and Ida faire, 
 
 Had suddaine reacht the flood. 
 
 A galley, too, that was sent out 
 From Sicilie in feare and doubt, 
 
 As having heard the wracke, 
 Arrived at the inchanted Isle, 
 And took them all in little while 
 
 Unto Messina backe. 
 
 But ere his leave Geraldo tooke 
 
 Of the strange isle, he burnt his booke 
 
 And broke his magi eke wand. 
 His arte forbid he aye forswore, 
 Never to deale in magicke more 
 
 The while the earth shuld stand. 
 
 S 
 
130 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 From that daie forth the Isle has beene 
 By wandering sailors never seene. 
 
 Some say 'tis buryed deepe 
 Beneath the sea, which breakes and rores 
 Above its savage rockie shores, 
 
 Nor ere is kno^wTie to sleepe. 
 
 In Sicilie the paire was wed, 
 To Arragon there after sped, 
 
 With fathers who them blessed.* 
 Alfonso rulde for many a yeare, 
 His people lovde him farre and neare, 
 
 But Ida lovde him best. 
 
 Finis. R. G. 
 
 * In the MS it stands " blesse," but the rhyme clearly re- 
 quires "blessed," no doubt an error of transcription.— [C] 
 
THE MS. CORKECTIONS, ETC. 13 L 
 
 APPENDIX IV. 
 
 COREESPONDENCE IN THE TIMES EEOM 
 JULY 2, TO AUGUST 1, 1859.* 
 
 To the Editor of The Times. 
 
 Sir, — Perhaps amid tlie press and distraction of politics 
 which are now agitating the great world, you can find room 
 for the account of a most extraordinary deception which has 
 been practised in the republic of letters, some details of 
 which I now beg to lay before you. 
 
 In 1852 Mr. John Payne Collier published a volume con- 
 taining numerous and important Notes and Emendations of 
 the text of Shakspere, made, as he stated, on the faith of a 
 copy of the folio edition of 1632, purchased by him of Mr. 
 Thomas Eodd in 1849, and exhibiting a vast number of mar- 
 ginal corrections and alterations in a handwriting asserted 
 by Mr. Collier to be, to the best of his belief, contemporary, 
 or nearly so, with the date of the edition. 
 
 Such has been the efi"ect of that publication throughout 
 
 * It has been thought advisable to reprint in a consecutive 
 form the whole of the Correspondence which appeared in The 
 Times on Tlie Shaksperian Discovery, notwithstanding that por- 
 tions of it have been already quoted in the preceding pages. 
 
132 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 Europe that since tlie date of its issue the text of Shakspere 
 has been extensively changed, and this, notwithstanding the 
 strongest remonstrance and opposition from various quarters. 
 I need not go over this ground, familiar as it is to all vrho 
 know anything of the literary history of the last ten years. 
 
 In 1853 Mr. Collier published a second edition of his 
 work, together with an edition of Shakspere founded on the 
 corrected folio ; and in 1856 what professed to be a complete 
 list of all the readings. 
 
 "I have," says he, in his preface to this last work 
 (p. Ixxix.), " often gone over the thousands of marks of all 
 kinds in its margins ; but I will take this opportunity of 
 pointing out two emendations of considerable importance, 
 which happening not to be in the margins, and being written 
 with very pale ink, escaped my eye until^ome time after 
 the appearance of my second edition, as well as of the one- 
 volume Shakespeare. For the purpose of the later portion of 
 my present work I have recently re-examined every line 
 and letter of tlie foho 1632, and I can safely assert that no 
 other sin of omission on my part can be discovered." 
 
 These publications were accompanied by what professed 
 to be a minute account of the appearance and history of 
 the recently-discovered folio. It is, however, notorious, 
 that by a considerable number of persons interested in the 
 subject, the descriptions thus given were never deemed suf- 
 ficient or satisfactory in a matter of such deep literary im- 
 portance. 
 
 In common with others, I had often desired to see the 
 volume, which meanwhile had become tlie property of the 
 Duke of Devonshire. This wish lias at length been gratified. 
 Some two months ago his Grace, the present Duke, liberally 
 placed the folio in the hands of Sir Frederic Madden, 
 
THE MS. COEEECTIONS, ETC. 133 
 
 Keeper of the MSS. in the British Museum, withi the un- 
 derstauding that, while it should be kept by Sir Frederic 
 Madden in the strictest custody, it might yet be examined, 
 under proper restrictions, by any and all literary persons 
 who were anxious to do so. I at once seized the opportu- 
 nity, and determined, avoiding all Shaksperian criticism, 
 to attempt an accurate and unbiased description of the 
 volume from the literary point of view alone. Discoveries 
 soon occurred, to which it seems advisable immediate pub- 
 licity should be given, and which I now send you in as clear 
 a manner as the narrow scope of a letter will permit. 
 
 The volume is bound in rough calf (probably about the 
 middle of George II.'s reign), the water-mark of the leaves 
 pasted inside the cover being a crown surmounting the 
 letters " Gr. 'R"^Georgiics Rex), and the Dutch lion within a 
 paling, with the legend pro patrid ;* and there is evidence 
 to sliow that the corrections, though intended to resemble a 
 hand of the middle of the 17th century, could not have been 
 written on the margins of the volume until after it was 
 bound, and consequently not at the earliest, until towards 
 the middle of the 18th. 
 
 I should enter more minutely into this feature of the 
 case, did not the corrections themselves, when closely ex- 
 amined, furnish facts so precise and so startling in their 
 character that all collateral and constructive evidence seems 
 unnecessary and insignificant. 
 
 * I have recently investigated this point minutely, and am of 
 opinion that the binding is even later than I had at first 
 imagined. Paper of the same texture, and with the same water- 
 mark, was in common use from 1760 to 1780. See Haldimand 
 Correspondence, in the British Museum. I have seen a water- 
 mark almost identical m Dutch foolscap of the present day. — [IL] 
 
134 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 They at first eight seem to be of two kinds, — those, namely, 
 which have been allowed to remain, and those which have 
 been obliterated with more or less success, sometimes by 
 erasure with a penknife or the employment of chemical 
 agency, and sometimes by tearing and cutting away parts of 
 the margin. The corrections thus variously obliterated are 
 probably almost as numerous as those suffered to remain, 
 and in importance equal to them. Whole lines, entire words, 
 and stage directions have been attempted to be got rid of, 
 though in many instances without success, as a glance at the 
 various readings of a first portion of Hamlet, which I sub- 
 join, will show. 
 
 Of the corrections allowed to stand, some, on a hasty 
 glance, might, so far as the handwriting is concerned, pass 
 as genuine, while others have been strangely tampered 
 with, touched up, or painted over, a modern character being 
 dexterously altered by touches of the pen into a more 
 antique form. There is, moreover, a kind of exaggeration 
 in the shape of the letters throughout, difiicult, if not im- 
 possible, to reconcile with a belief in the genuineness of the 
 hand ; not to mention the frequent and strange juxtaposi- 
 tion of stiff Chancery capital letters of the form in use two 
 centuries ago with others of a quite modern appearance : and 
 it is well here to state that all the corrections are evidently 
 by one hand ; and that, consequently, whatever invalidates 
 or destroys the credit of a part, must be considered equally 
 damaging and fatal to the whole. 
 
 At times the correction first put in the margin has been 
 obliterated, and a second emendation substituted in its stead, 
 of which I will mention two examples which occur in Cym- 
 belim (fol. 1632, p. 400, col. 1) :— 
 
 " With Oakcs unshakeablc and loaihig Waters," 
 
THE MS. COREECTIONS, ETC. 135 
 
 where Oahs has first been made into Cliffes, and subse- 
 quently into Rockes. Again (p. 401, col. 2) : — 
 
 " Whose Eoof s as low as ours : Sleepe Boyes, this gate," 
 on tlie margin (a pencil cross having been made in the first 
 instance) Sleepe is corrected into Sweete, afterwards Sweete 
 has been crossed out, and Stooj^e written above. 
 
 There is scarcely a single page throughout the volume in 
 which these obliterations do not occur. At the time they 
 were effected it ispossible the obliteration may have appeared 
 complete ; but the action of the atmosphere in the course of 
 some years seems in the majority of instances to have so far 
 negatived the chemical agency as to enable the corrections 
 to be readily deciphered. Examples of these accompany 
 this letter, and I shall be surprised if in the hands of Shak- 
 sperian critics they do not furnish a clue to the real history 
 of the corrector and his corrections. 
 
 I now come to the most astounding result of these inves- 
 tigations, in comparison with which all other facts concern- 
 ing the corrected folio become insignificant. On a close 
 examination of the margins they are found to be covered 
 with an infinite number of faint 'pencil-marks and correc- 
 tions, in obedience to which the supposed old corrector has 
 made his emendations. These pencil corrections have not 
 even the pretence of antiquity in character or spelling, but 
 are written in a bold hand of the present century. A re- 
 markable instance occurs in Richard III. (fol. 1G32, p. 181, 
 col. 2), where the stage direction, "with the body," is 
 written in pencil in a clear modern hand, while over this the 
 ink corrector writes in the antique and smaller character 
 " with the dead bodie," the word " dead " being seemingly 
 inserted to cover over the entire space occupied by the 
 larger pencil writing, and " bodie " instead of " body " to 
 
136 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 give Ihe requisite appearance of antiquity. Further on, iu 
 the tragedy of Hamlet (fol. 1632, p. 187, col. 1) :— 
 
 " And crooke the pregnant Hindgos of the knee," 
 " begging " occurs in pencil in the opposite margin, in the 
 same modern hand, evidently with the intention of super- 
 seding "pregnant" in the text. The entire passage from, 
 "Why should the poore be flatter'd?" to "As I doe thee. 
 Something too much of this " was afterwards struck out. 
 The ink corrector, probably thrown off his guard by this, 
 neglected to copy over and afterwards rub out the pencil 
 alteration, according to his usual plan, and by this oversight 
 we seem to obtain as clear a view of the modus operandi as if 
 we had looked over the corrector's shoulder and seen the 
 entire work in process of fabrication. I give several further 
 instances where the modern pencil-writing can be distinctly 
 seen underneath the old ink correction ; and I should add 
 that in parts of the volume, page after page occurs in which 
 commas, notes of admiration and interrogation, &c., are 
 deleted or inserted in obedience to pencil indications of 
 precisely the same modern character and appearance as those 
 employed in correcting the press at the present day. Twelfth 
 Night (fol. 1632, p. 258, col. 1) :— " I take these wise men, 
 that crow so at these set kind of fooles, no better than the 
 fooles Zanies." The corrector makes it "to he no better 
 than," «&c. Here the antique " to be " is written over a 
 modern pencil "to be" still clearly legible. A few lines 
 further down the letter I is added in the margin over a 
 pencil I. 
 
 In Hamlet (fol. 1632, p. 278, coL 1) :— 
 
 " Oh, most pernicious woman!" 
 is made into — 
 
 "Oh, most pernicious and perfidious woman !" 
 
THE MS. COKEECTIONS, ETC. 137 
 
 But here, again, the " perfidious " of the corrector can be 
 seen to be above a pencil " perfidious" written in a perfectly 
 modern hand. 
 
 In Hamlet (fol. 1632, p. 276, col. 2) the line 
 
 " Locke too't, T charge you ; come your way," 
 has been altered by the corrector into 
 
 " Looke too't, I charge you ; so new come your way " 
 in the inner margin. The words " so now," in faint pencil 
 and in a modern hand, on the outer margin, are distinctly 
 visible. Immediately below tliis, and before 
 
 <' Enter Hamlet, Horatio, Marcellus," 
 the corrector has inserted " Sc. 4." This would seem to 
 have been done in obedience to a pencil "IV." in the 
 margin. 
 
 In King John (fol. 1632, p. 6, col. 2), 
 
 " Austria and France shoot in each other's mouth. 
 The corrector adds, as a direction, at this line "aside ;" 
 the same word "aside" occurs likewise in pencil in a 
 modern hand on the outer margin. 
 
 I have thus endeavoured to give, in a dispassionate 
 manner, and as clearly as the limited scope of a letter will 
 admit, the grounds upon which I conceive it positively esta- 
 blished that the emendations, as tliey are called, of this folio 
 copy of Shahpere, have been made in the margins within 
 the present century. What further deductions may be 
 drawn from the large mass of hitherto unpublished altera- 
 tions which the folio contains I leave others to datermine. 
 They may or may not be the means of identifying particular 
 persons or particular dates, but in the main issue arc com- 
 paratively unimportant. 
 
138 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 While I am persoually responsible for the conclusions 1 
 have been driven to by the discovery of the above-mentioned 
 facts, the accuracy of the facts themselves and the fidelity of 
 my statement of them have been carefully and scrupulously 
 examined by men having greater ability and experience in 
 such matters than I can lay claim to. Moreover, these are 
 points which may be tested by any persons interested in the 
 subject, and who will be at the pains of verifying for them- 
 selves the truth of what I have here advanced. I have 
 only to add that I hope shortly to lay before the public, in 
 another form and in fuller detail, other particulars relating 
 to this remarkable volume. 
 
 I am, &c., 
 N. E. S. A. HAMILTON. 
 
 Department of MS8., 
 
 British Museum, June 22. 
 
 LETTER II. 
 To the Editor of the Times. 
 
 SiK, — I trust to your sense of justice, to say nothing of my 
 ancient connection with your establishment (see especially 
 the Times of the summer of 1819), for the insertion of this 
 letter with as much prominence as you gave to that of INlr. 
 Hamilton in your paper of July 2. As I live entirely in the 
 country, and take in only a weekly publication, I did not 
 see your paper containing that letter until an hour ago. I 
 shall reply to it briefly and positively. 
 
 First, as to the pencillings in the corrected folio, 1G32, 
 which I accidentally discovered. I never made a single 
 pencil-mark on the pages of the book, excepting crosses, 
 
THE MS. COEEECTIONS, ETC. 139 
 
 ticks, or lines, to direct my attentiou to particular emenda- 
 tions.* I have not seen it for four or five years, but I 
 remember that on the board at the end (there was no fly- 
 leaf there) I wrote various words, and made several notes, 
 which I never attempted to erase. There they probably 
 remain ; and if tlie pencilmgs of which Mr. Hamilton speaks, 
 in the body of the volume, were made by me, they may be 
 compared with my writing on the last board, and by that 
 writing I may be convicted, unless somebody, which I do 
 not believe, have taken the pains to imitate my hand. 
 AV^hat is clearly meant, though somewhat darkly expressed, 
 is that I am the author both of the pencillings and of the 
 notes in ink. 
 
 I have asserted the contrary on oath in an affidavit 
 sworn and filed in the Queen's Bench, on Jan. 8, 1856. I 
 assert the contrary now, and if any person will give me 
 the opportunity, I am ready to confirm it by my viva voce 
 testimony, and to encounter the most minute, the most 
 searching, and the most hostile examination. 
 
 I have shown and sworn that this very book was in the 
 possession of a gentleman named Parry about half a century 
 ago, given to him by a relation named George Gray. Mr. 
 Parry recognized it instantly, annotated as it is now ; and 
 since it came into my hands, in 1849, I have not made the 
 slightest addition to the notes in pencil or in ink. 
 
 Then, as to the binding. I contend that it is con- 
 siderably older than the reign of George IT., and that the 
 
 * I ought to add, that I drew pencil lines round 18 additional 
 fac-similes from the volume, admirably executed by Mr. Nether- 
 clift, copies of which I fm-nished to my friends, to enable them 
 the better to judge of the general mass of emendations.— [C] 
 
140 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 date of the fly-leaf affords no criterion as to the date when 
 tlie leather covering was put on, and for this reason, that 
 flj-leaves are often added at a subsequent period for the pro- 
 tection of the title-page, because the original ones have been 
 torn or destroyed. Upon my own shelves I have several 
 distinct proofs of this fact, but I will only mention one. It 
 is a copy of Samuel Daniel's Panegyricke Congratulatory, folio 
 (1603), which the poet presented to the Countess of Pem- 
 broke ; Daniel wrote her name on the gilt vellum cover, 
 and she put her signature on the title-page. It is likely 
 that Daniel also placed an inscription on the fly-leaf, which 
 has disappeared, perhaps to gratify the cupidity of some 
 autograph collector. A comparatively modern substitute 
 has been inserted ; it has no water-mark, but a moment's 
 inspection is enough to show that it was much posterior to 
 the time when the book was printed. 
 
 The rough calf binding of the corrected folio, 1632, I 
 contend is old ; it is the same as Lord EUesmere's copy of 
 the same edition ; the fly-leaf described by Mr. Hamilton is 
 comparatively new; but I have all along admitted, privately 
 and in print, that the rough calf binding of the corrected 
 folio, 1632, was the second or third coat the book had worn. 
 
 In the same way, as to imperfect erasures and altera- 
 tions of emendations, denoting changes of mind or better 
 information on the part of the maker of the old marginal 
 notes, I have been as distinct and emphatic as anybody, in 
 both the editions of my volume of Notes and Emendations in 
 1852 and 1853. Mr. Hamilton can, I think, point out 
 nothing that I have not anticipated. 
 
 Soon after I discovered the volume, and before I had 
 written more than a letter or two in the Athenaeum upon it, 
 produced it before the Council of the Shakspeare Society — 
 
THE MS. COERECTIONS, ETC. 141 
 
 at tlie general meeting of that body— at two or three even- 
 ing assemblies of the Society of Antiquaries; and in order 
 that it might not escape the severest scrutiny by daylight, I 
 advertised that it would be left for a whole morning in the 
 library of that society for the inspection of anybody who 
 .N-ished to examine it. I did not see Mr. Hamilton there, 
 but no one who inspected it discovered, or at least pointed 
 out, any of the pencil-marks which it seems are now visible. 
 I shall say nothing of the indisputable character of 
 many of the emendations. The Kev. Mr. Dyce has de- 
 clared, in his own handwriting, that ' some of them are so 
 admirable that they can hardly be conjectural,' and in the 
 course of his recent impressions of the works of Shakspeare, 
 he has pronounced such as he unavoidably adopted, irre- 
 sistible, indubitable, infallible, &c. All this I might have 
 appropriated to myself; and, having 'burnt the corrected 
 folio, 1632, I might have established for myself a brighter 
 Shak'speariLn reputation than all the commentators put 
 together. If, therefore, I have committed a fraud, it has 
 been merely gratuitous. I certainly preferred a different 
 course, in spite of the warning given me by a friend in the 
 outset, that my enemies would never forgive my discovery, 
 and that their hostility would outlive my existence. 
 
 I am determined not to make the poor remainder of my 
 life miserable by fm-ther irritating contests ; this is the last 
 word I shall ever submit to say upon the subject in print, 
 but if the matter be brought before a proper legal tribunal, 
 I shall be prepared in every way to vindicate my integrity. 
 
 May I be allowed to add a word in answer to certain 
 paragraphs stating that the late Duke of Devonshire gave 
 me a large sum for my corrected folio, 1632? It was a 
 free gift on my part, frankly accepted by his Grace, although 
 
142 INQCJIEY INTO 
 
 he afterwards (kuowing of my family bereavements and con- 
 sequent expenses) unsuccessfully endeavoured to persuade 
 me to accept £250 for the volume. The Duke was at 
 Chatsworth when I sent my letter to him, stating that the 
 book was a poor return for the many essential and substan- 
 tial favours I had received at his hands during a period of 
 thirty years, and on June 20, 1853, his Grace wrote me a 
 letter containing the following words : — 
 
 " It is impossible for me to express how much I am gra- 
 tified by your present, on which I shall place great value, 
 not only for the merits and interest that accompany it, but 
 as a proof of your enduring friendship and approbation." 
 
 It is clear, therefore, that if without motive I imposed 
 upon the public, I did not without conscience victimise the 
 man to whom I was already so deeply indebted. 
 
 I am, &c., J. PAYNE COLLIER. 
 
 Riverside, Maidenhead, July 5. 
 
 LETTER III. 
 
 To the Editor of the Times. 
 
 SiE, — As it has been suggested to me that I should put 
 on record some observations regarding the singular Shak- 
 sperian discovery recently made in the MSS. department 
 here, I hope this letter will be sufficient explanation for my 
 appearance on the scene in the discussion now going on re- 
 garding it. 
 
 There are three kinds of evidence that may be brought to 
 bear on a literary forgery. The intrinsic literary character 
 of the document is one of these. Another is of a palajolo- 
 
TIIE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 143 
 
 gical kind, and its value is to be estimated by the amount 
 of experience and antiquarian erudition and skill of the critic. 
 There is a third to which I would more particularly invite 
 attention in this letter, and that rests on the physical 
 scrutiny of the document, by the aids which science has 
 placed in our hands. 
 
 There is, indeed, another direction in which such an 
 inquiry may be pursued, and which has to deal in circum- 
 stantial evidence — such as individual handwriting, or the 
 tracing of analogous documents into a single channel, or in 
 other details highly interesting to the literary " detective," 
 but not congenial to an officer of the British Museum. The 
 officers, indeed, of a great national establishment like the 
 Museum owe a duty to the public, and, in a certain sense 
 occupy a judicial position in questions like this under dis- 
 cussion. Thus, while our object is not to trace the hand in 
 a forgery, it is our duty to denounce the forgeiy itself. It is 
 in this spirit that I have approached the subject, and it is 
 with the physical aspects of it alone that I have to deal. 
 
 Mr. Hamilton, a gentleman at the time only slightly 
 known to me as an officer of this establishment, informed me 
 some days since that the Duke of Devonshire had intrusted 
 the far-famed Collier's Shahjm-e to the hands of my col- 
 league. Sir Frederic Madden, for the inspection of literary 
 men ; and Mr. Hamilton further informed me of the doubts 
 which, after a careful scrutiny of the volume, had arisen in 
 his mind regarding its genuineness. His reasons for these 
 doubts he has since made public by liis letter in The Times. 
 On his mentioning the existence of a vast number of par- 
 tially obliterated pencil-marks, which seemed anticipatory of 
 tlie ink "emendations" of "the old commentator," I 
 suggested the use of an instrument whicli ba? already done 
 
144 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 good service in an analogous case (tliat of the Siraonides' 
 Uranius) — the microscope. This simple test of tlie character 
 of these emendations I brought to bear on them, and with 
 the following results. Firstly, as to any question that 
 might be raised concerning the presence of the pencil-marks, 
 asserted to be so plentifully distributed down the margin, 
 the answer is, they are there. The microscope reveals the 
 particles of plumbago in the hollows of the paper, and in no 
 case that I have yet examined does it fail to bring this fact 
 forward into incontrovertible reality. Secondly, the ink 
 presents a rather singular aspect under the microscope. Its 
 appearance in many cases on, rather than in, the paper, 
 suggested the idea of its being a water-colour paint rather 
 than an ink ; it has a remarkable lustre, and the distribution 
 of particles of colouring matter in it seem unlike that in 
 inks, ancient or modern, that T have yet examined. 
 
 This view is somewhat confirmed by a taste, unlike the 
 styptic taste of ordinary inks, which it imparts to the tongue, 
 and by its substance evidently yielding to the action of 
 damp. But on this point, as on another, to which attention 
 will presently be drawn, it was not possible to arrive at a 
 satisfactory conclusion in the absence of the Duke of Devon- 
 shire's permission to make a few experiments on the volume. 
 
 His Grace visited the Museum yesterday, and was good 
 enough to give me his consent to this. The result has been 
 that the suspicions previously entertained regarding the ink 
 were confirmed. 
 
 It proves to be a paint removable, with the exception of a 
 slight stain, by mere water, while, on the other hand, its 
 colouring matter resists the action of chymical agents wliich 
 rapidly change inks, ancient or modern, whose colour is due 
 to iron. In some places, indeed, this paint seems to have 
 
THE MS. COERECTTONS, EI^C. 
 
 145 
 
 become mixed, accidentally or otherwise, with ordinary ink, 
 but its prevailing character is that of a paint formed perhaps 
 of sepia, or of sepia mixed with a little Indian ink. This, 
 however, is of secondary importance in comparison with the 
 other point which has been alluded to. This point involves, 
 indeed, the most important question that has arisen, and 
 concerns the relative dates of the modern-looking pencil- 
 marks and the old emendations of the text which are m ink. 
 The pencil-marks are of different kinds. Some are d\ in- 
 dicative of the deletion of stops or letters in the text, and to 
 which alterations in ink, I believe, invariably respond. 
 Others, again, belong to the various modes at present m use 
 to indicate corrigenda for the press. Some may, perhaps, 
 be the " crosses, ticks, or lines," which Mr. Collier intro- 
 duced himself. But there are others again in which whole 
 syllables or words in pencil are not so effectually rubbed out 
 as not to be still traceable and legible, and even the charac- 
 ter of the handwriting discernible, while in near neighbour- 
 hood to them the same syllable or word is repeated in the 
 paint-like ink before described. The pencil is in a modern- 
 looking hand, the ink in a quaint, antique-looking writing. 
 In several cases, however, the ink word and the pencil word 
 occupy the same ground in the margin, and are one over the 
 other. The question that arises in these cases, of whether 
 these two writings are both ancient or both modern, or one 
 ancient and the other modern, is a question for the antiquary 
 or palcBOgraphist. The question of whether the pencil is an- 
 tecedent or subsequent to the ink, is resolvable into a 
 physical inquiry as to whether tlie ink overlies the pencil, or 
 the pencil is superposed upon the ink. The answer to this 
 question is as follows : — 
 
 I have nowhere been able to detect the pencil-mark 
 clearly overlying the ink, though in several places the pencil 
 
146 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 stops abruptly at the ink, and in some seems to be just 
 traceable through its translucent substance, while lacking 
 there the general metallic lustre of the plumbago. But the 
 question is set at rest by the removal by water of the ink, 
 in instances where the ink and the pencil intersected each 
 other. The first case I chose for this was a m in Richard II., 
 p. 36. A pencil tick crossed the m, intersecting each limb of 
 that letter. The pencil was barely visible through the first 
 stroke, and not at all visible under the second stroke of the 
 n. On damping off the ink in the first stroke, however, the 
 pencil-mark became much plainer than before, and even when 
 as much of the ink-stain as possible was removed, the pencil 
 still runs through the ink line in unbroken, even continuit}\ 
 Had the pencil been superposed on the ink, it must have 
 lain superficially upon its lustrous surface and have been 
 removed in the washing. We must, I think, be led by this 
 to the inference that the pencil underlies the ink — that is to 
 say, was antecedent to it in its date ; while, also, it is 
 evident that the "old commentator" bad done his best to 
 rub out the pencil writing before lie introduced its ink 
 substitute. 
 
 Now, it is clear that evidence of this kind cannot by itself 
 establish a forgery. It is on palaeographical grounds alone 
 that the modern character of the peuciUings can be esta- 
 blished ; but, this point once determined in the affirmative, 
 the result of the physical inquiry certainly will be to make 
 this " old commentator" far less venerable. 
 
 J am, Sir, your obedient servant, 
 
 NEVIL STORY MASKELYNE, 
 
 Kieper of the Mineral Department. 
 Mineral Dtpartineiil, 
 
 British Museum, Jiihj 18. 
 
THE MS. C0RBECTI0N8, ETC. 
 
 141 
 
 LETTEB IV. 
 
 To the Editor of the Times. 
 Sir -When bringing before your notice, in my letter of 
 the 22nd of June, various reasons which induced me to 
 question the genuineness of Mr. Collier's annotated folio of 
 1632, I stated that my main ground, for repudiating the 
 authenticity of the supposed ancient corrections, lay m the 
 fact that, while they were made in an antique handwriting 
 and spelling, having some resemblance to that used m the 17th 
 century, they could be shown in numerous instances to be 
 written sometimes by the side of and sometimes actually 
 upon the same space as similar pencil emendations made on 
 the margins in a modern hand, in a modern spelling, and to 
 the best of my belief within the present century. Since 
 writing that letter to you I have deemed it my duty to go 
 over a further portion of the volume with the greatest 
 possible scrupulousness. The results at which I arrive are 
 the same; and I am now prepared to say that what I then 
 considered highly probable as to the spurious nature of the 
 corrections, is now, to my mind, absolutely certain. That m 
 the great majority of instances the crosses, ticks, and the 
 literal and verbal emendations occurring in pencil through- 
 out the volume are intended to direct the ink corrections, is 
 evident to every one who has examined the book with 
 reference to that point. The instances in which I miss almost 
 entirely the presence of pencil indications are where a whole 
 line of text or a stage direction is inserted; but here, from 
 the obvious difficulty of rubbing out entire sentences, the 
 annotator would naturally have avoided making his emenda- 
 tions first in pencil. In several cases, where whole words are 
 
148 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 written in pencil, it is a suspicious circumstance that the 
 pencil spelling is modern, while that of the ink is old— for 
 instance, "body," " ofials," in pencil; "bodie," " ofTalls," in 
 iuk. The pencil-marks, which occur by hundreds, though 
 naturally faint from having been partially rubbed out, are, 
 nevertheless, visible and distinct; in some cases, indeed, 
 have not been rubbed out at all. It is impossible to convey 
 to the reader, without the aid of facsimiles, an exact idea of 
 their perfectly current and modei'n form. I can only state 
 that they appear to me clearly of this century, and, in fact, 
 as if written but yesterday. Tet, that they were placed on 
 the margins previously to the antique-looking ink corrections, 
 which in many instances they actually underlie, has been 
 proved by Mr. Maskelyue, keeper of the mineral depart- 
 ment. Whatever, therefore, be the intrinsic worth we may 
 attach to such of the suggestions as are not found elsewhere, 
 they must strictly be regarded as coming before us in a hand 
 not of the 17th, but of the 19th century, and judged of from 
 that point of view alone. 
 
 In regard to the ink corrections it should be stated that, 
 although at first sight they bear considerable resemblance 
 to the set Chancery hand of the 17th century, yet on a 
 minute examination they will not readily support that 
 character, their genuineness on palseographic grounds alone 
 being very suspicious, not to say impossible; while the 
 spurious character of the ink itself has been proved by Mr. 
 Maskelyne. 
 
 One point alone remained, which it seemed absolutely 
 impossible to reconcile with the belief that the corrections 
 were of quite recent date ; namely, the statement made in 
 various publications by Mr. Collier, and also in his letter 
 published in The Times on the 5th of the present month, 
 
THE MS. COEEECTIONS, ETC. 
 
 149 
 
 that the volmne and its corrections had been identified by 
 its former possessor, Mr. Parry, as being in the same state 
 as when in his hands half a century ago. "I have shovvn 
 and sworn," * Mr. Collier says, in the letter above referred 
 to " that this very book was in the possession of a gentle- 
 man named Parry about half a century ago, given to him 
 by a relation named George Gray. Mr. Parry recognised it 
 instantly, annotated as it is now." Here, apparently, was 
 positive evidence. But not so. A common friend ot Mr. 
 Collier and Mr. Parry, anxious to clear away the aspersions 
 cast upon the folio, and to offer to the world a guarantee 
 that the volume was in the same condition as to corrections, 
 at the present moment, as when first in Mr. Parry's hands, 
 requested that gentleman to go to the Museum and ident^y 
 the volume. With this object Mr. Parry called upon Sir 
 Frederic Madden on the morning of to-day (July 13th). 
 His surprise was hardly less than our own to find, on the 
 vokmie being shown to him, that it differed in edition, m 
 binding, in corrections-in fact, in every particular m which 
 a book can differ-from the folio Shakspere formerly m his 
 possession, and which he expected to have placed before 
 
 him. . r? i.1 • 
 
 Thus has the last testimony to the authenticity of this 
 volume tailed as completely and more remarkably than any 
 of the preceding. If any one still thinks to maintam its 
 integrity, it must clearly be on different or rather on oppo^ 
 site evidence to that hitherto adduced in its behalf. I 
 forbear to comment on facts which I cannot elucidate, but 
 
 * On referring to Mr. Collier's affidavit made in the Queen's 
 Bench, January 8, 1856, I do not find that ho actually swore to 
 the identiflcatiou of the volume by Mr. rairy.-H- 
 
150 INQUIRY INTO 
 
 tbe world will no doubt anxiously wish for explanations 
 which the interests of literature seem imperatively to de- 
 mand. 
 
 As it has been objected that my opinion in regard to the 
 modern character of the cover and binding is incorrect, I 
 think it right to state that I have since made inquiries on 
 the subject, both of men intimately acquainted with large 
 libraries, and also of practical bookbinders. The reply I 
 obtain from both entirely confirms my original statement. 
 Eough sheep (not rough calf), such as this volume is bound 
 in, is of late introduction, hardly reaching back to the first 
 Georges, while the brown Bristol millboard which stifiens 
 the cover is still more recent, a gray and softer kind of 
 board having been employed till within the last hundred 
 years.* 
 
 Eegarding the main question, I have nothing further to 
 add ; but before concluding I deem it my duty to notice 
 two points in Mr. Collier's letter. In the first place, he 
 says, " I never made a single pencil-mark on the pages of 
 the book, excepting crosses, ticks, or lines to direct my 
 attention to particular emendations," whereas sentences and 
 notes occur in Mr. Collier's handwriting throughout the 
 margins. I build nothing on this beyond the reflection that 
 a gentleman may in perfect good faith make statements con- 
 trary to fact, and which he would probably not have put 
 forth if his recollection were more exact. 
 
 The second is the following assertion made by Mr. Col- 
 lier in regard to my letter. He says, — " What is clearly 
 meant, though somewhat darkly expressed, is that I am the 
 author both of the pencillings and of the notes in ink." 
 
 * Sec note p. 133. 
 
THE MS. COKEECTIONS, ETC. 151 
 
 Now I wish to say that I never "clearly meant" or 
 -darkly expressed" anything of the kind. My statement 
 was that I considered a literary deception had been prac- 
 tised-a belief which I still maintain to be borne out by 
 facts, and which I see no reason to modify or abandon. 
 There I am well content to leave a subject which I entered 
 into, not in the spirit of a controversialist, still less as a 
 
 personal accuser. 
 
 I am. Sir, your obedient servant, 
 
 N. E. S. A. HAMILTON. 
 
 Department of MSS-, 
 British Museum, July 13. 
 
 LETTER T. 
 
 To the Editor of the Times. 
 Sir,— I feel most unwillingly compelled to say one other 
 word 'respecting the corrected folio of Shakspeare's works 
 in 1632, which came into my hands in 1849. 
 
 According to Mr. Hamilton's letter, inserted in your 
 paper of the 16th inst., Mr. Parry states that the book 
 which he owned, and which was given to him by his rela- 
 tive, Mr. George Gray, about 50 years ago, was an edition 
 different from the folio of 1632, with different corrections. 
 
 I saw Mr. Parry twice upon the subject in the year 1853 
 -first at his house in St. John's Wood, when he told me (as 
 he had previously told a common friend), that he had recog- 
 nized the corrections instantly, from the fac-simile which 
 accompanied the earliest edition of my Notes and Emenda- 
 8vo, 1852. Very soon afterwards, for greater satis- 
 
 ttons. 
 
152 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 faction, I brought the corrected folio of 1(332 from Maiden- 
 head to London, and took it to St. John's Wood, but T failed 
 to meet ^vith Mr. Parry at home. I therefore paid a third 
 visit to that gentleman, again carrying the book with me. 
 I met him coming from his house, and I informed him that 
 I had the corrected folio of 1632 under my arm, and that I 
 was sorry he could not then examine it, as I wished. He 
 replied — " If you will let me see it now, I shaU be able to 
 state at once whether it was ever my book." I therefore 
 showed it to him on the spot, and, after looking at it in 
 several places, he gave it back to me with these words : — 
 " That was my book, it is the same, but it has been much 
 ill-used since it was in my possession." 
 
 I took Mr. Parry's word without hesitation ; and it cer- 
 tainly gave me increased faith in the emendations, to which 
 I never applied a microscope or magnifying glass beyond my 
 own spectacles. I was then living in the house of my 
 brother-in-law ; and, almost from day to day, I showed him 
 such of the emendations of Shakspeare's text in the corrected 
 folio of J 632 as seemed most striking or important. 
 
 If there be upon the volume any pencillings by me, be- 
 yond crosses, ticks, and lines, they will speak for themselves ; 
 they have escaped my recollection, and, as I stated in my 
 former letter, I have not seen the book for several years. 
 Perhaps the microscope used by Mr. Hamilton might dis- 
 cover that the plumbago of my pencil was the same as that 
 of other marks, said to be in connection with some of the 
 emendations. 
 
 J. PAYNE COLLIEE. 
 
 Maidenhead, July l(j. 
 
THE MS. CORRECTIONS, ETC. 153 
 
 LETTEE TI. 
 
 To the Editor of the Times. 
 Sir,— I beg to forward you tlie following communication, 
 whicli I have just received from Mr. Parry in reference to 
 Mr. Collier's letter of the 16th inst. 
 
 I may add, that Mr. Parry states, in conversation, that his 
 Shakspere was bound in smooth dark leather, with a new 
 back, which was lettered, that there was no name of any 
 former possessor written on the cover ; and that part of the 
 margins containing the emendations had been ploughed off 
 by the carelessness of the binder. 
 
 On the other hand, Mr. Collier's folio is of the edition 
 of 1632 ; it is bound in rough light-coloured sheep, not 
 re-backed nor lettered at all ; has on the upper cover, 
 written in a bold recent hand, '' Tho. Perkins his Booke :" 
 and the corrections have not been injured by the binding. 
 I am, Sii', your obedient servant, 
 
 N. E. S. A. HAMILTON. 
 Department of MSS., 
 
 3)-itish Museum, July 29. 
 
 ''July 28, 1859. 
 " My dear Sir,— In reply to your application I have only 
 to make the following statement, in which you will see that 
 Mr. Collier's memory and mine are in question. 
 
 " In Mr. Collier's letter to The Times, printed July 19, 
 1859, he states that he was coming to call on me in 1853 
 with'' the corrected folio of 1632 under his arm,' and that 
 he showed it to me on the road, and that I gave it back to 
 
 X 
 
154 INQUIEY INTO 
 
 liiin with these words, ' That was my book — it is the 
 same ; but it has been much ill-used siuce it was in my 
 possession." 
 
 " Now, I believe Mr. Collier to be utterly incapable of 
 making any statement which is not strictly in accordance 
 Avith his belief. I remember well meeting him, as he says, 
 in the road, and as I was then very lame, from having hurt 
 my knee by a fall, and was using sticks to assist me in 
 walking, he kindly did not allow me to turn back, but walked 
 with me in the direction I was going. I well remember 
 some of the conversation we had during our walk ; but I 
 have not the slightest recollection that the volume of 
 Shahspere was then under his arm, or of my having asserted 
 that ' it was my book.* 
 
 " Previously to this interview with Mr. Collier he had 
 shown me the facsimile which he mentions in his letter, when 
 I immediately said, on seeing it, that it was from my book. 
 I now believe that I was mistaken, and that I was too hasty 
 in so identifying the volume from a fac-simile of a part of a 
 page of it. At that time Mr. Collier knew that there were 
 several corrected folios of Shakspere in existence, but he 
 did not tell me that there were. At that time I did not 
 know that there was any other corrected folio in existence, 
 and I therefore supposed that Mr. Collier's fac-simile could 
 only have been taken from my book. It was not till the 
 14th of this month that I learnt from Sir Frederic Madden 
 that there are five or six corrected folios now in being, but 
 he (Sir Frederic) did not tell me so till he had laid on the 
 table Mr. Collier's corrected folio, and then he seemed sur- 
 prised that I did not recognise it. 
 
 "Again I repeat, that having frequently since the lltli 
 of this month, when I saw Sir Fi'cdcric Madden, tried to 
 
THE MS. COKEECTIONS, ETC. 155 
 
 recollect everything about the book, I cannot remember 
 that Mr. Collier ever showed me the book, but I well re- 
 member his showing me the fac-simile. I may be wrong, 
 and Mr. Collier may be right. 
 
 " I have a very strong impression that my book was a copy 
 of the edition of 1623, and was rather surprised when T saw 
 Mr. Collier's ' Supplemental volume ' (1853) to find that his 
 book was of the edition of 1632. 
 
 " I may also add that I certainly did not tell, and could 
 not have told Mr. Collier, that Mr. Gray ' was partial to the 
 collection of old books,' for I believe he set no value at all 
 on them. 
 
 " Believe me to be, my dear Sir, yours very truly, 
 
 " P. C. PAEET. 
 
 Mr. N. E. Eamiltm, 
 British Museum, W.C' 
 
LONDON: 
 
 riLLIAM CLOTVES AND SONS, STAMFORD STEEET 
 AND CHARING CROSS. 
 
■Af 
 
This book IS DVJ*^" 
 
 I,D 21-100^- 
 
 .li;49(B7l46sl6)476 
 
214467 
 
 ^ BOUND BY ^ 
 
mm 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^^um>( 
 
 IML. 
 
 
 
 
 
 tip 
 
 Hi' 
 
 iiiiiii 
 
 * 
 
 ^.iK'HI^^ 
 
 ^1 
 
 m