Queries.
QUERIES AS TO MR. COLLIER'S "NOTES AND EMENDATIONS."
Query 1. Does Mr. Collier claim a copyright in the Emendations on the Text of Shakspeare lately published by him, and derived from MS. corrections in his old copy of the folio of 1632? He seems to intimate as much in what he says at p. 13. of his Introduction, when he speaks of a certain phrase never being again seen in any edition of Shakspeare, "unless it be reproduced by some one who, having no right to use the emendations of our folio 1632, adheres of necessity to the
antiquated blunder, and pertinaciously attempts to justify it."
I doubt much whether he is entitled to any such privilege. If the words as restored were really those of Shakspeare, as is alleged, I do not see how the writer of the MS. corrections could himself claim any property in them; and if he had none, much less can Mr. Collier have. It would be a pity were the public to be deprived of the benefit of the corrections by the use of them being exclusively confined to Mr. Collier's editions.
Query 2. Does the writer of the MS. corrections occasionally give reasons in support of the changes proposed? At p. 306., Mr. Collier says: "The manuscript corrector assures us that although the intention of the dramatist is evident, a decided misprint has crept into the line."
Again, at p. 305., Mr. Collier says: "For 'senseless obstinate,' the corrector of the folio 1632 states that we must substitute words," &c. Again, at p. 352.: "A note in the folio 1632, induces us to believe that Shakspeare did not use the term," &c. The MS. corrector is also sometimes made to tell us, that a certain error is the printer's, and another that of the copyist. Perhaps these are only rhetorical forms of expression, to intimate that certain corrections appeared on the margin of the folio 1632, and Mr. Collier's own opinion of their propriety.
Scotus.
Edinburgh.