Mickleham.
ON THE PASSAGE FROM "KING LEAR."
(Vol. vii., p. 592.)
Will you allow me to suggest to your ingenious Leeds correspondent (whose communications would be read with only the more pleasure if they evinced a little more respect for the opinions of others) that before he asserts the existence of a certain error which he points out in a passage in King Lear to be "undeniable," it would be desirable that he should support this improved reading by other passages from Shakspeare, or from cotemporary writers, in which the word he proposes occurs? For my own part, I think A. E. B.'s suggestion well worthy of consideration, but I cannot admit that it "demonstrates itself," or "that any attempt to support it by argument would be absurd," for it would unquestionably strengthen his case to show that the verb "recuse" was not entirely obsolete in Shakspeare's time. Neither can I admit that there is an "obvious opposition between means and defects," the two words having no relation to each other. The question is, which of two words must be altered; and at present I must own I am inclined to put more faith in the authority of "the old corrector" than in A. E. B.
Having taken up my pen on this subject, allow me to remark upon the manner in which Mr. Collier's folio is referred to by your correspondent. I have carefully considered many of the emendations proposed, and feel in my own mind satisfied that so great a number that, in the words of your correspondent, demonstrate themselves, could not have been otherwise than adopted from some authority. Even in the instance of the passage from Henry V., "on a table of green friese," which A. E. B. selects, I presume, as being especially absurd, I think "the old corrector" right; although I had frequently cited Theobald's correction as particularly happy, and therefore the new version was at first to me very distasteful. But, whatever opinion may be held as to the value of the book, it is surely unbecoming to the discussion of a literary question to indulge in the unsparing insinuations that have been thrown out on all sides respecting it. I leave out of question the circumstance, that the long and great services of Mr. Collier ought to protect him at least from such unworthy treatment.
Samuel Hickson.
P.S.—Since writing the above, I have seen Mr. Keightley's letter. I hope he will not deprive the readers of "N. & Q." of the benefit of his valuable communications for the offences of one or two. He might consider, first, that his own dignity would suffer least by letting them pass by him "as the idle wind;" and, secondly, that some allowance should be made for gentlemen who engage in controversy on a subject which, strangely enough, next to religion, seems to be most productive of discord.
S. H.
"I have no way, and therefore want no eyes;