gue, that his eye had scarcely anything of that language which,
by preparing the spectator for the coming sentence, enchains the
attention, that his voice was neither silvery nor mellifluous.
Nevertheless, by a subtlety of discrimination, that seemed almost
intuitive, by a force of judgment and a fervency of mind, that were
simply exquisite and irresistible, this was the very man who could
at any moment, by an inflection of his voice or by the syncope of a
chuckle, move his audience at pleasure to tears or to laughter. He could
haunt their memories for years afterwards with the infinite tenderness
of his ejaculation as Hamlet, of "The fair Ophelia!" He could convulse
them with merriment by his hesitating utterance as Falstaff of "A
shirt--and a half!" Incidentally it is remarked by the biographer of
Henderson that the qualifications requisite to constitute a reader of
especial excellence seem to be these, "a good ear, a voice capable
of inflexion, an understanding of, and taste for, the beauties of the
author." Added to this, there must be, of course, a feeling, an ardour,
an enthusiasm sufficient at all times to ensure their rapid and vivid
manifestation. Richly endowed in this way, however, though Henderson
was, his gifts were weighted, as we have seen were those also of
Betterton, by a variety of physical defects, some of which were almost
painfully conspicuous. Insomuch was this the case, in the latter
instance, that Tony Aston has oddly observed, in regard to the all
but peerless tragedian, "He was better to meet than to follow; for
his aspect [the writer evidently means, here, when met] was serious,
venerable, and majestic; in his latter time a little paralytic."
Accepting at once as reasonable and as accurate what has thus been
asserted by those who have made the art of elocution their especial and
chosen study for analysis, it is surely impossible not to recognise at
a glance how enormously a reader must, by necessity, be advantaged, who,
in addition to the intellectual and emotional gifts already enumerated,
possesses those personal attributes and physical endowments in which
a reader, otherwise of surpassing excellence, like Henderson, and an
actor, in other respects of incomparable ability, like Betterton, was
each in turn so glaringly deficient.

Whatever is here said in regard to Charles Dickens, it should be
borne in mind, is written and published during the lifetime of his own
immediate contemporaries. He