e truth of his assertion, that he
has not even seen Jackson's book for near a quarter of a century, and
that he had not the slightest reason to doubt that the conjecture of
_behood_ for _behave_ was his own property?[2]

But there is another gentleman who, although he has never whispered a
remonstrance to us upon the subject, has even more grounds of complaint
than MR. SINGER, for the treatment which he has received in our
columns; we mean our valued friend and contributor MR. COLLIER, who we
feel has received some injustice in our pages. But the fact is that,
holding, as we do unchanged, the opinion which we originally expressed
of the great value of the _Notes and Emendations_--knowing MR.
COLLIER'S character to be above suspicion--and believing that the
result of all the discussions to which the _Notes and Emendations_ have
given rise, will eventually be to satisfy the world of their great
value,--_we_ have not looked so strictly as we ought to have done, and
as we shall do in future, to the tone in which they have been discussed
in "N. & Q."

And here let us take the opportunity of offering a few suggestions
which we think worthy of being borne in mind in all discussions on the
text of Shakspeare, whether the object under consideration be what
Shakspeare actually wrote, or what Shakspeare really meant by what he
did write.

First, as to this latter point. Some years ago a distinguished scholar,
when engaged in translating Goethe's _Faust_, came to a passage involved
in considerable obscurity, and which he found was interpreted very
differently by different admirers of the poem. Unable, under these
circumstances, to procure any satisfactory solution of the poet's
meaning, the translator applied to Goethe himself, and received from him
the candid reply which we think it far from improbable that Shakspeare
himself might give with reference to many passages in his own
writings,--"That {263} he was very sorry he could not assist him, but
he really did not know exactly what he meant when he wrote it." We
doubt not some of our contributors could supply us with many similar
avowals.

This opinion will no doubt offend many of those blind worshippers of
Shakspeare, who will not believe that he could have written a passage
which is not perfect, and who, consequently, will not be sat