And Mr Collier approves of this variation, as "making the dialogue run quite consistently."
Measure for Measure.—In the Duke's speech, at the opening of the play, a formidable difficulty presents itself. Addressing Escalus, of whose statesmanlike qualities he has the highest opinion, the Duke says, as all the editions give it—
"Of government the properties to unfold,
Would seem in me to affect speech and discourse,
Since I am put to know that your own science
Exceeds in that the lists of all advice
My strength can give you. Then no more remains
But that, to your sufficiency, as your worth is able,
And let them work."
The two last lines of this passage have been a grievous stumbling-block to the commentators. The variorum men, with Johnson at their head, have made nothing of it. Mr Singer reads—
"Then no more remains
But there to your sufficiency as your worth is able,
And let them work;"
which seems quite as dark and perplexing as the original text. Mr Collier's man, cutting the knot with desperate hook, which slashes away a good many words, gives us—
"Then no more remains,
But add to your sufficiency your worth,
And let them work."
These words are sufficiently intelligible; but this is not to rectify Shakespeare's text—it is to re-write it; and this no man can be permitted to do. As a private speculation of our own, we venture to propose the following, altering merely one word of the authentic version—
"Then no more remains,
But that (to your sufficiency as your worth is able)
You let them work."
The Duke has remarked that he is not competent to give Escalus any advice on matters of public policy, as he is much better versed in such affairs than himself. He then goes on to say, "No more remains, but that (seeing your worth is able—that is, is equal—to your sufficiency or acquired knowledge) you should let the two, your worth and your sufficiency, work together for the good of your country." Or it might be allowable to introduce "equal" into the text, thereby making the sense still plainer—
"Then no more remains
But that (to your sufficiency as your worth is equal)
You let them work."
But if any auxiliar authority could be found for the use of the word "able" as here employed (a point about which we are doubtful, though not desperate), we should prefer to retain it in the text. By making the words to and as change places, we obtain a still more perspicuous reading—
"Then no more remains,
But that (as your sufficiency to your worth is equal)
You let them work."
Mr Collier remarks (p. 42), "Near the end of Mrs Overdone's speech, 'is' is required before the words 'to be chopped off.' It is deficient in all printed copies, and is inserted in manuscript in the corrected folio 1632." We can inform Mr Collier that the word "is" stands, in this place, in the variorum edition of 1786.
Act I. Scene 4.—The Duke, who has abdicated for a time in favour of Angelo, says, in allusion to the abuses which Angelo is expected to correct—
"I have on Angelo imposed my office,
Who may, in the ambush of my name, strike home,
And yet, my nature never in the sight,
To do it slander."
The corrector of Mr Collier's folio suggests to draw on slander; and as a gloss or explanation of an antiquated or awkward expression, this variation may be accepted; but it certainly has no title to be admitted into the text as the authentic language of Shakespeare. The change of" story" into "scorn" (Scene 6), is perhaps admissible. Alluding to a false species of repentance, the friar, in Act II. Scene 3., says that such insufficient
"Sorrow is always towards ourselves, not heaven,
Showing we would not spare heaven, as we love it,
But as we stand in fear."
On the margin of Mr Collier's folio, "serve "is written, and "spare" is scored out. We greatly prefer the
