CRITICAL NOTES.

ACT I., SCENE I.

Page 80. Like signiors and rich burghers of the flood. The old copies have "burghers on the flood." Corrected by Steevens. See the quotation from As You Like It, in foot-note 5.

P. 81. And see my wealthy Andrew dock'd in sand. - So Rowe. The old copies have "Andrew docks in sand." Hardly worth noting.

P. 82. Salar. Why, then you are in love.

Anto.

Fie, fie!

So the old copies, leaving the verse defective. Dyce says, "I have little doubt that Shakespeare wrote 'In love! fie, fie!'"

P. 84.

Who, I'm very sure,

If they should speak, would almost damn those ears, &c. - Instead of who, the old copies have when, leaving would damn without a subject. Collier's second folio retains when, and changes would to 'twould, which Dyce adopts. The correction of when to who was made by Rowe.

P. 85. Is that any thing now?- The old copies read "It is that any thing now." Hardly deserving of notice, but that Collier retains the old reading, and attempts to explain it.

P. 87. I owe you much, and, like a wilful youth,

That which I owe is lost. Instead of wilful, Warburton folio has wasteful. The latter

proposed witless, and Collier's second

is a plausible change.

197

ACT I., SCENE II.

P. 89. It is no small happiness, therefore, to be seated in the - So the folio. The quartos have “no mean happiness." I prefer to be without the jingle of mean and mean.

mean.

P. 90. Will, no doubt, never be chosen by any rightly, but one who shall rightly love. So the first quarto has the latter clause. The other old copies read "who you shall rightly love."

P. 90. And he makes it a great appropriation to his own good parts, that he can shoe him himself. - Collier's second folio reads "approbation of his own good parts." Shakespeare has no other instance of appropriation; but he uses approbation for proof; and in that sense the word certainly accords well with the context.

P. 91. If a throstle sing, he falls straight a-capering. — The old copies have Trassell for throstle. Is trassell an old form of throstle? Probably th was sounded like t, in the latter word, and, in the former, a as in what or in chap: so that trassell and trostle would be but putting different letters for the same sound.

P. 92. What think you of the Scottish lord, his neighbour? – So the quartos. The folio substitutes other for Scottish; doubtless on account of King James. It may be worth noting that Collier's second folio substitutes Irish for other.

ACT I., SCENE III.

P. 95. There be land-rats and water-rats, land-thieves and water-thieves, I mean pirates. So Collier's second folio; the old copies, "water theeves, and land theeves"; which would naturally mean that the land-thieves were pirates.

How much we would. One of the quartos and the folio read "How much he would"; the other quarto, "How much ye would." The correction is Walker's.

P. 98. Was this inserted to make interest good?- Collier's second folio substitutes inferred for inserted. The Poet uses infer for bring in or introduce, and that meaning fits the context well. See foot-note 15.

P. 98. A goodly apple rotten at the heart:

O, what a godly outside falsehood hath! - So Rowe and Walker. Instead of godly, the old copies have goodly, the word having probably been repeated by mistake from the preceding line. And Walker remarks that "goodly and godly, and, in like manner, good and God, have been confounded in various passages of our old writers."

P. 101. Whose own hard dealing teaches them suspect. - So the second folio. The originals have "hard dealings teaches." Confusion of singulars and plurals is among the commonest misprints.

ACT II., SCENE I.

P. 102. The shadow'd livery of the burning Sun.-So Collier's second folio; the old copies, "the burnisht Sun." Modern editions print "burnish'd Sun," but the epithet is surely an odd one, to say the least.

P. 103. But, if my father had not scanted me,

And hedged me by his will. The old copies read "by his wit"; and wit has been explained" sagacity and power of mind." The word was indeed used in a way to include that meaning; but wit is here undoubtedly a misprint for will, which was often written wil. The change is approved by several expressions used in i. 2: "Curb'd by the will of a dead father ;" and "perform your father's will,;" and "by the manner of my father's will." Corrected by Capell.

ACT II., SCENE II.

P. 108. Do you not know me, father?— Here not is wanting in the old copies, but is indispensible to the sense of the passage. Supplied by Dyce.

P. 112. Nay, you must not deny me: I must go

With you to Belmont. - The old copies print this speech as prose, and are without Nay at the beginning of it. But the speech was clearly meant to be verse, and Nay completes it as such. It was added by Hanmer and Capell.

ACT II., SCENE IV.

P. 115. And whiter than the paper that it writ on

Is the fair hand that writ. - So Hanmer. In the first line, that is wanting in the old copies, and is fairly required for the verse.

ACT II., SCENE V.

Go you before me, sirrah;

P. 118.

Say, I will come.

Laun.

I'll go before you, sir. —So Walker. The old copies read "I will go before, sir." Hanmer rectified the metre by printing " Sir, I will go before."

P. 119. How like a younker or a prodigal. So Rowe. Instead of younker, the old copies have younger; a palpable misprint.

P. 120. I'll watch as long for you then. Come, approach. Come is Pope's insertion; justifiable, probably, on the score of metre. I suspect that Ritson was right in proposing to read “I'll watch as long for you.-Come, then, approach."

ACT II., SCENE VI.

- So Johnson and Col

P. 125. Gilded tombs do worms infold. lier's second folio; the old copies, "Gilded timber doe," &c.·

ACT II., SCENE VII.

P. 127. And even then, his eye being big with tears. - Instead of then, the old copies have there; doubtless repeated by mistake from the line before. Corrected by Dyce.