d the opposite blunder, by misprinting "surly" _surely_.
Another piece of evidence, to prove that "surely" was the poet's word in
_The Taming of the Shrew_, has comparatively recently fallen in my way; I
did not know of its existence in 1844, or it would have been of
considerable use to me. It is a _unique_ quarto of the play, which came out
some years before the folio 1623, and is not to be confounded with the
quarto of _The Taming of the Shrew_, with the date of 1631 on the
title-page. This new authority has the line exactly as it is given in the
folio 1623, which, in truth, was printed from it. It is now before me.

J. PAYNE COLLIER.

July 10.

_Critical Digest of various Readings in the Works of Shakspeare._--There is
much activity in the literary world just now about the text of Shakspeare:
but one most essential work, in reference to that text, still remains to be
performed,--I mean, the publication of a complete digest of _all_ the
various readings, in a concise shape, such as those which we possess in
relation to the MSS. and other editions of nearly every classical author.

At present, all editions of Shakspeare which claim to be considered
critical, contain much loose information on readings, mixed up with notes
(frequently very diffuse) on miscellaneous topics. This is not in the least
what we require: we need a regular _digest_ of readings, wholly distinct
from long debates about their value.

What I mean will be plain to any one who is familiar with any good critical
edition of the Greek New Testament, or with such books as Gaisford's
_Herodotus_, the Berlin _Aristotle_, the Zurich _Plato_, and the like. We
ought to have, first, a good text of Shakspeare: such as may represent, as
fairly as possible, the real results of the labours of the soundest
critics; and, secondly, page by page, at the foot of that text, the
following particulars:

I. All the readings of the folios, which should be cited as A, B, C, and D.

II. All the readings of the quartos, which might be cited separately in
each play that possesses them, either as a, b, c, d; or as 1, 2, 3, and 4.

III. A succinct summary of all the respectable criticisms, in the way of
conjecture, on the text. This is especially needed. The recent volumes of
Messrs. Collier, Singer, and Dyce, show that even editors of Shakspeare
scarcely know the history of all the emendations. Let their precise
_pedigree_ be in the last case recorded with the most absolut