Payne Collier's mysterious corrector, of "losses" into "leases." I am sorry to see a reading which we had cherished without any misgiving as a bit of Shaksperian quaintness, and consecrated by the humour of Gray and Charles Lamb, turned into a clumsy misprint. But we must look at real probabilities, not at fancies and predilections. I am afraid "leases" is the likelier word. It has also a special fitness, which has not been hitherto remarked. Many of the wealthy people of Elizabeth's reign, particularly in the middle class, were "fellows that had had leases." It will be recollected that extravagant leases or fines were among the methods by which the possessions of the church were so grievously dilapidated in the age of the Reformation. Those who had a little money to invest, could not do so on more advantageous terms than by obtaining such leases as the necessity or avarice of clerical and other corporations induced them to grant; and the coincident fall in the value of money increased the gain of the lessees, and loss of the corporations, to an extraordinary amount. Throughout Elizabeth's reign parliament was at work in restraining this abuse, by the well-known "disabling acts," restricting the power of bishops and corporations to lease their property. The last was passed, I think, only in 1601. And therefore a "rich fellow" of Dogberry's class was described, to the thorough comprehension and enjoyment of an audience of that day, as one who "had had leases."

Scrutator.

May I be allowed a little space in the pages of "N. & Q." to draw Mr. Collier's attention to some passages in which the old corrector appears to me to have corrupted, rather than improved, the text? Possibly on second thoughts Mr. Collier may be induced to withdraw these readings from the text of his forthcoming edition of our great poet. I give the pages of Mr. Collier's recent volume, and quote according to the old corrector.

Two Gentlemen of Verona, Act II. Sc. 2., p. 21.:

Can for am spoils the sense; it was introduced unnecessarily to make a perfect rhyme, but such rhymes as am and man were common in Shakspeare's time. Loving for lovely is another modernism; lovely is equivalent to the French aimable. "Saul and Jonathan were lovely and pleasant in their lives," &c. The whole passage, which is indeed faulty in the old copies, should, I think, be read thus:

Thus crept in after censure from the next line but one. In Julia's speech, grammar requires on for of.

Measure for Measure, Act IV. Sc. 5., p. 52.:

Fols. "of a credent bulk," read "so credent bulk."

Much Ado about Nothing, Act IV. Sc. 1., p 72.:

When fathers kill their children, they run the risk not merely of being reproached, but of being hanged; but this reading is a mere sophistication by some one who did not understand the true reading, rearward. Leonato threatens to take his daughter's life after having reproached her.

Taming of the Shrew, p. 145.:

"The daughter of Agenor's race" for "the daughter of Agenor" is awkward, but there is a far more decisive objection to this alteration. To compare the beauty of Bianca with the beauty of Europa is a legitimate comparison; but to compare the beauty of Bianca with Europa herself, is of course inadmissible. Here is another corruption introduced in order to produce rhyming couplet; restore the old reading, "the daughter of Agenor had."

The Winter's Tale, Act IV. Sc. 2., p. 191.:

We have here an abortive attempt to correct the nonsensical reading of the old copies, unrolled; but if enrolled itself makes sense, it does so only by introducing tautology. Besides, it leads us away from what I believe to be the true reading, unrogued.

King John, Act V. Sc. 7., p. 212.:

How could death prey upon the king's outward parts without visiting them? Perhaps, however, we have here only a corruption of a genuine text. Query, "ill-visited."

Troilus and Cressida, Act I. Sc. 3., p. 331.:

This, which is also Hanmer's reading, certainly makes sense. Pope read returns. The old copies have retires. I believe Shakspeare wrote "Rechides to chiding fortune." This puzzled the compositor, who gave the nearest common word without regard to the sense.

Troilus and Cressida, Act V. Sc. 1., p. 342.—The disgusting speeches of Thersites are scarcely worth correcting, much less dwelling upon; but there can be little doubt that we should read "male harlot" for "male varlet;" and "preposterous discoverers" (not discolourers) for "preposterous discoveries."

Coriolanus, Act V. Sc. 5., p. 364.:

To ear is to plough. Aufidius complains that he had a share in the harvest, while Coriolanus took all the ploughing to himself. We have only, however, to transpose reap and ear, and this nonsense is at once converted into excellent sense. The old corrector blindly copied the blunder of a corrupt, but not sophisticated, manuscript. This has occurred elsewhere in this collection.

Antony and Cleopatra, Act I. Sc. 5., p. 467.:

This reading was also conjectured by Hanmer. The folios read arme-gaunt. This appears to me a mere misprint for rampaunt, but whether rampaunt was Shakspeare's word, or a transcriber's sophistication for ramping, is more than I can undertake to determine. I believe, however, that one of them is the true reading. At one period to ramp and to prance seem to have been synonymous. Spenser makes the horses of night "fiercely ramp," and Surrey exhibits a prancing lion.

This communication is, I am afraid, already too