New-York tribune., 1874-07-17

conveying the Inference that they had certain
value Perhaps he had been annoyed 80 much Dy the
scribes concerning their scripture that he resolved Oh
the puroining in order to prevent any other editor
from being equally annoyed. Whatever DIS motiVe'
be has committed a serious blunder. The con-
tributors will never forgive him. They don't care
they SAVIOR the money that is vile lucre Dut tney
refuse 10 pardon in this or any other wOriu' INC o'
wretch who steals the product OF their Drains WIN
the-in all likelihood deliberate purpose of pain'ng
il off as his own AZ they have preserved no copy VI
their eifusions, they sincerely believe they nave
been deprived of the greenest laurels by tho mon
strous misconduct - 20 state 1t mildly OF ,"o
fuerive EP. If they can conceive Of no other
purpose on his part than that OF coiu, u,Dooue"
plagiarism. they should remember how frederic the
Great caused the arrest of Yotare after his leaving
Berlin on the preext that the latter med lated pub
fishing as his some of the royal verses gwen
him for supervision, when. in fact, the philosopher
OF Ferney would not have fathered them Tor the
whole of Frederics kingdom.
The quotation Of the 1l2th sonnet OF Shakespeare
in William Pages lecture on the Poet last WINTER
as evidence of the authenticity of the Chandos por
trait has since caused much discussion, ana must DO
still remembered. The sonnet runs:
Your love and pity doth the impression ill
For what care who calls me well or ILL.,
50 you O'eTg green my bad, my good aiiOW
You are my a,l-tle-wOrli aud must strlye
80 know my shamos and praises from your tonsue'
None else to me. nor TO none alive,
That my strePd sense or changes rlght OF "ro"a
Ia so profound abysm throw all care
or others voices, that my adder's sohse
TO critic ana 10 nitterer stoppe are;
Mark bow with my neglect 40 dispense
You strongly IN my purpose pred
That all the word beside metnDBS arc ucbu'
Mr. Page explained literally the second line,
(Which vulgar scandal stampd upon my brow"
expressing the conviction that it had direct refer
encc 20 a scar discovered in the ChaudOs portrait
over the eye of the dramatis and 80 verifying 1t as
a transcript from life Persons who have made
Profound study of the sonnets claim, and seem 10
show concusively Gerald Massey has published
large and able volume on the subject that very few
of the sOnnets are personal; that the ll2th, with
Others was written by the poet for his intimate
friend and patron the Earl of southampton llienry
Wrothesley) who is supposed to be speaking there
in his own person. The language is addressed to
Elizabeth Vernon whom the Earl was in love with,
and afterward married. He had fallen into disgrace
at court AS he had done before, and as it was easy
for 50 hot otheaded a man to do, particularly while
the ab5urdly van cxacting, exasperating, cholenc,
and overbearing Elizabeth on the throne. Mis-
tress Vernon was in constant sorrow for the out
breaks of temper the brols and unfortunate scrapes
her lover was necessarily falling into For tins rea-
son the Earl-through his friend Shakespeare
pours out his heart to his mistress in the lines quoted
This explanation makes the sonnet perfectly clear;
while the understanding of it as personal to tho
poet renders it striking instance of tacas non
.aceRd).