10 s. x. NOV. 28, 1908.] NOTES AND QUERIES.
425
as in the case of Capell's vile, for " wilde "
of the Folio (V. ii. 369), where he says :
" 'Wild ' seems, I think, too weak in Char-
mian's mouth, in comparison with vile"
In-line with his criticism of Spedding, does
not Furness seem to forget that he is exalt-
ing not Shakespeare, but Capell ? Spedding
accepts the burden of proof, and tries to
show that autumn is a strong word in com-
parison with the weak " Anthony " of the
Folio, and it seems to me that, in all fairness,
his argument deserves to be considered on
its merits.
Theobald's emendation appears to be objected to by Furness mainly as seconding Corson (The Nation, 28 Aug., 1873 ; quoted by Spedding in * N. & Q.'), who observes, " It could hardly be said that an autumn grows the more by reaping," &c. this in reply to Theobald's " How could an Antony grow the more by reaping ? " It may be admitted that each contestant is correct. We are concerned only with the fact that the poet says Antony's bounty was such that it transcended the usual limitations of something (an " Anthony " or an autumn} that was harvested, since it " grew the more" by reaping. While making the comparison, the poet expressly states the exception, thus allowing the simile to carry its own modifica- tion. We do not repudiate the other figures in this passage, and say : " How could it be that Antony's legs bestrid the ocean ? " & c. Had not the compositor' s reader nodded when he came to" autumn " in the original, we can believe there would have been no objecting voice.
To retain the misprint " Anthony," we are forced into the position of stating tamely and illogically that " his [Antony's] bounty ... .an Antony it was," by which a part is accepted as being equal to the whole. Antony's other qualities and achievements find adequate description ; why not his bounty ? Is the latter to be considered the indescribable sum-total of the man, which, in despair of any fitting term, must be called " an Antony " ? Furness says that, in the absence of a happier emendation than autumn, he will endeavour, for himself, "to extract from ' Anthony ' what meaning I may of inexhaustible perfection in face, in form, in voice, in bounty " ; but, as shown, the Folio text does not require him to extract such meaning. from " Anthony " except in the case of " bounty," which makes the reading " Anthony " all the more suspicious.
In view of the plausible origin of the reader's mistake, the evidently intended
contrast with " winter," the associated
idea of " reaping," the exquisite image of
bounty gained by admitting the proposed
emendation, and the weakness of the Folio
reading, whereby Antony's bounty alone
is said to be an Antony to the exclusion
of his other qualities referred to, I cannot
see on what grounds we should be justified
in rejecting autumn. E. MERTON DEY.
St. Louis.
' THE OLD-TIME PARSON.' I thank you for your kind review of my book (ante, p. 359). The volume is not one of the series of " Antiquary's Books," and was written in accordance with the directions of the publishers, who wished me to combine instruction with humour, and not to be too severely historical. As I stated in the pre- face, the book makes no pretension to be a complete and regular history of the clerical office. I find it somewhat difficult to dis- cover in some cases the original author of a story. Magee was credited with the " tomtit " saying, but I had already been informed that John Gregg, afterwards Bishop of Cork, uttered the saying with regard to a sermon of his predecessor Fitz- gerald. Wilberforce's " the devil is dead " story is a century or two earlier than his time ; but there is little doubt that he used it. I am obliged to the reviewer for his- correction of one misprint. I have no doubt there are others. I did not say that ton was the old English form of " town," and expressly stated that Chaucer's " parson of a town " was the vicar of a village. The whole subject is, of course, discussed in ' Words and Places ' ton, the rudely forti- fied homestead, then the nucleus of a village, and finally what we understand by a town. Perhaps new theories have upset this notion ; if so, I should be glad to learn. Does the reviewer maintain that " sidesman " is not a contracted form of " synod's man " ? If so, he is opposed to the leading authorities,. e.g., Sir Walter Phillimore ; or does he quarrel only with my use of the word " cor- ruption " ? If he will refer to the last line in the book, he will see that it is part of a quotation from Fuller. " Clerus Britannise gloria mundi " is certainly correct, and it will be found in Fuller's ' Worthies ' not " stupor," as the reviewer incorrectly states.
P. H. DlTCHFIELD.
PALL MALL, No. 93. MB, MACMICHAEL states (ante, p. 336), in connexion with " The Star and Garter Tavern," Pall Mall, that No. 93 had " been Evans's, and later
