New-York tribune., 1876-02-05
to be done by foreigner. Too much cannot be said
in praise of the industry and the patience shown In


in praise of the industry and the patience shown In
the successful execution of so vast project.
Indeed one may be ashamed Of pointing ont minor
defects in a German work devoted to Shakespeare
when one remembers what Germans have done ior
the great Englishman, and when one sees what KIND
Of Shakespearean criticism English periodicals. Oh
high standing not ashamed TO print. Sr'
Jryinc's appearance in "Macbeth" was the occasion
of some astonishing remarks on the text of that
play. The Saturday Reriew rghtly-f Mr.. Grant
White will allow me to say so-condemned bis read
ing of the passage II it were done when 'tis DONE
then 'twere well"-with a full stop after well
rightly, but on the wrong ground. The true reason
for cOndemning il il that it is change from the
original text, when the original text gives perfect
sense The Saturdays reason is that it does Mt like
it, / need not point ont what the consequences
would be-and have been--if everybody is to cut
and carve the text to his own mind. This is what
many editors have done, and is one reason why the
text was 80 long kept III unsatisfactory state
Mr.. Whites note the passage is as usual, ingenI-
GUS and thoughtful. The meaning he contends Tor
eff it were done endedl when It's done lperformedl
lis the true meaning. What Mr.. White fails to per
ceive-or to state--is that tins meaning may be
brought ont with equal cearness, and that the
thought is better carried on by adhering 10 the
punctuation which he rejects.
On the same principle The Saturday presently oh
jects to the phrase Act w. Scene 3, 81 pull in rcso-
luton" and coOlly remarks that it would surely be
better to say &c pail" Mr.. Irving says "pnli," and
The Saturday tells he is supported by some all-
thoriy saying The truth is that pull Is the only
reading that has any authority, can be found IN
any edition of the slightest importance. II ia the
reading of every edition from the first folio down to
and including johnson. "Pall" was Johnson's con
iaot VIII ho
same hbertine spirit The Saturday advises Mr.. Irving
to be grammatical" and in his defiance of Macduil
read damned be he :" instead of damned be him."
The former is pure conjecture again, hut 1t SUITS
The SafaI9dy as il did Pope. who invented IT. Ihe
AheprWm writes in a not less reckless way III
speaks If certain innovations in the text rs detcns-
bc enough" aud of the full stop after "well," says
IT is "reading against which nothing can he adj
yanced except that il is scarcely required" an OBJ
lection which is final though the writer does not
suspect it. In Act l., Scene 7, Mr.. living at first
read "Vaulting ambition, which o'erleaps itself,
And falls on the other sde.' the last
word being an Interpolation by Hammer, and
according TO The Athcnaam, "pardonabiy' intro
duced by Mr.. Irving. 1t is unnecessary, and was
therefore objectionable. 1he sentence is broken in
upon by the entrance of LGdy Macbch, and is finer
in effect from being left unfinished; Mr.. Irving
afterward saw and proved. Mr.. Irving, as a rule.
shows a right reverence for the text but he allows
himself al times the straugest license.
In the noble soiloquy Of Macbeth on hearing Of Iii
wife's death, beginning
"She should have died hereafter;
There would have been "a tine for such word etc,
Mr. Irving alters should INTO would = being
the first human being who found any causc for dis
satisfaction with the line as Shakespeare wrote II
and he has cung to his innovation, wanton as il Is.
In the third scene of the same act he reads May of
life" for "way of fe:" which is just as needless as
the other and was conjecture of that most prosaic
of critics. Dr. Johnson
In a different yet hardly less curious vein is th"
remark of The 4McHGWt on the recent reduced fac
snile OF the first folio; 70 the publishers of which.
exclaims that journal, "belong the merit Of having
done more to faclate the critical stuly of the text
Of our great dramatirt than all the Shakcspearc
clubs and societies put together" The type we are
told is as distinct ~ in a genuine copy of the
original; which leads one TO wonder whether the
writer ever saw a copy of the original, or of the
Stanton fac-simile, which is Of the size of the
original. When such things these are possible IN
England, criticism of German shortcomings ought to
be very lenicnt indeed.
judged by its general merits, schmiits Lexicon
stands in no need OF lenty. The most cxacting
critics will agree in pronouncing il awork of the
most solid excellence. G.w.s r.