Are of themselves armour of proof, against

A bastinado, and will tire ten beadles.—C-G. 186 b;

and the phrase “to sit down with a disgrace” occurs something like a dozen times on his pages, especially frequently in the collaborated plays—that is to say, in the earlier period of his work, to which The Fatal Dowry belongs. It is probable, and not unnatural, that the labors of the partners in composition overlapped on this bit of the Scene, but metrical analysis claims with as much certainty as can attach to this test in the case of so short a passage that it is substantially Massinger’s, and should go rather with what preceeds than with what comes after it, the verse being all one piece with that of the former section. It has 37 per cent. double endings and 41 per cent. run-on lines.

[IV, i,] opens with a prose passage for all the world like that of Woman is a Weathercock, I, ii, with its picture of the dandy, his parasites, and the pert page who forms a sort of chorus with his caustic asides; and writes itself down indisputably as by the same author. Novall Junior and his coterie appear here as in their former presentation in [II, ii]. We have again the same racy comedy, the same faltering of the vehicle between verse and prose (see [ll. 61–8]; [137–153]). After the clearing of the stage of all save Romont and young Novall, uninterrupted verse ensues, which, despite a rather notable parallel in The Beggars’ Bush, D. IX, 9 to [l. 174], is evidently Field’s also. An analogue of [ll. 180–1] is discoverable in Amends for Ladies (M. 421), as is of the reference ( [l. 197]) to “fairies’ treasure” in Woman is a Weathercock (M. 344). Novall’s exclamation ( [l. 182]), Pox of this gun! and his retort ( [l. 201]), Good devil to your rogueship! are Fieldian, and the entire passage possesses a vigor and an easy naturalness which declare his authorship. It is not improbable, however, that his contribution ends with the fragmentary [l. 207], and that the remaining four lines of the Scene are a Massinger tag. The Maid of Honour (C-G. 28 a) furnishes a striking parallel for [ll. 208–9], while for [210–1] cf. C-G. 192 a. The metrical tests for [IV, i], confirm Field: 22 per cent. double endings; 22 per cent. run-on lines.

With the next Scene the hand of Massinger is once more in evidence with all its accustomed manifestations. One interested in his duplication of characteristic phrasing may refer for comparison [ll. 13–4] to C-G. 299 b; [l. 17] to C-G. 241 a; [ll. 24–6] to C-G. 547 b; [ll. 29–30] to C-G. 425 b; [l. 57] to C-G. 41 b, 70 b; [l. 94] to C-G. 182 b. The Scene contains 32 per cent. double endings and 37 per cent. run-on lines. The authorship of its two songs is less certain. Field was more given to song-writing than was Massinger, and the second of this pair is reminiscent in its conception of the Grace Seldom episode in Amends for Ladies (II, i).

The short [IV, iii] is by Massinger. In evidence of him are its 36 per cent. of double endings and 55 per cent. of run-on lines, its involved sentence structure, and the familiar phrasing which makes itself manifest even in so brief a passage (e. g.: To play the parasite, [l. 7]—cf. [V, iii, 78] and C-G. 334 b. Cf. also [ll. 9–10] with D. III, 476; and [l. 22] with C-G. 40 b, 153 a, 262 b.).

The same dramatist’s work continues through the last Scene of the Act. This, the emotional climax of the play, representing a quasi-judicial procedure, affords him abundant opportunity for fervid moralizing and speech-making, of which he takes advantage most typically. Massinger commonplaces are [l. 29], Made shipwreck of your faith (cf. C-G. 55 b, 235 a, 414 b); [l. 56], In the forbidden labyrinth of lust (cf. C-G. 298 b); [l. 89], Angels guard me! (cf. C-G. 59 b, 475 b); [l. 118–9], and yield myself Most miserably guilty (cf. C-G. 61 b, 66 b, 130 a; D. VI, 354); etc.; while within a year or so of the time when he wrote referring to “those famed matrons” ([l. 70]), he expatiated upon them in detail (see The Virgin Martyr, C-G. 33 a). Yet more specific parallels may be found: for [l. 63] cf. C-G. 179 a; [ll. 76–7], cf. C-G. 28 a; [l. 78], cf. C-G. 32 b; [ll. 162–3], cf. C-G. 3 b, in a passage wherein there is a certain similarity of situation; [l. 177], cf. D. IX, 7. Were any further confirmation needed for Massinger’s authorship, the metrical tests would supply it, with their 36 per cent. double endings and 34 per cent. run-on lines.

The most cursory reading of [V, i] is sufficient to establish the conviction that its author is not identical with that of the earlier comic passages—is not Field, but Massinger. The humor, such as it is, is of a graver, more restrained sort—satiric rather than burlesque; it has lost lightness and verve, and approaches to high-comedy and even to moralizing. One feels that the confession of the tailor-gallant is no mere fun-making devise, but a caustic attack upon social conditions against which the writer nurtured a grudge. Massingerian are such expressions as And now I think on’t better ([l. 77]—cf. C-G. 57 b, 468 a, 615 a; D. XI, 28), and use a conscience ([l. 90]—cf. C-G. 444 a, 453 a), while the metrical evidence of 36 per cent. double endings and 29 per cent. run-on lines fortifies a case concerning which all commentators are in agreement. But despite the unanimity of critical opinion hitherto, I am not sure that Field did not contribute a minor touch here and there to the Scene. Such contribution, if a fact, must have been small, for the Massinger flavor is unmistakable throughout; yet in the Plague on’t! and the ’Slid!, in the play upon words ([ll. 13–4], [20–1], [44]), which is rare with Massinger and common with Field, in the line, I only know [thee] now to hate thee deadly: (cf. Amends for Ladies, M. 421: I never more Will hear or see thee, but will hate thee deadly.), we may, perhaps, detect a hint of his hand.

[Scene ii] (which in the Quarto ends with the reconciliation of Charalois and Romont, the entry of Du Croy, Charmi, etc. being marked as the beginning of a third Scene, though the place is unchanged and the action continuous, wherefore modern editors disregard the Quarto’s division and count Scene ii as including all the remainder of the Act) presents the usual distinctive earmarks of a Massinger passage. The last third of it, however ([ll. 80–121]), has, on account of the presence of several rhymes, been commonly assigned to Field. No doubt his hand is here discernable; [l. 118], mark’d me out the way how to defend it, is scarcely a Massinger construction either; but I cannot think Field’s presence here more than that of a reviser, just as in the latter half of [I, ii]. The language remains more Massinger’s than Field’s; and while the passage is over-short for metrical tests to be decisive, the 39 per cent. of double endings and 35 per cent. of run-on lines which it yields (for the earlier part of the Scene the figures are respectively 28 per cent. and 35 per cent.) are corroborative of Massinger’s authorship. Cf. also [ll. 96–8] with this from The Renegado (C-G. 157 a):

This applause