o a
dilemma in his affairs, by vainly proceeding upon his own head, and was
afterwards afraid to look his governing servant and counsellor in the
face; what a copious, and distressful harangue have I seen him make with
his looks, while the house has been in one continued roar for several
minutes, before he could prevail with his courage to speak a word to
him! then might you have, at once, read in his face _vexation_--that his
own measures, which he had piqued himself upon, had failed. _Envy_--of
his servant's superior wit--_distress_--to retrieve, the occasion he
had lost. _Shame_--to confess his folly; and yet a sullen desire, to be
reconciled and better advised for the future! what tragedy ever showed
us such a tumult of passions rising at once in one bosom! or what
buskined hero standing under the load of them, could have more
effectually moved his spectators, by the most pathetic speech, than poor
miserable Nokes did, by this silent eloquence, and piteous plight of his
features?

His person was of the middle size, his voice clear and audible; his
natural countenance grave and sober; but the moment he spoke, the
settled seriousness of his features was utterly discharged, and a dry,
drolling, or laughing levity took such full possession of him, that I
can only refer the idea of him to your imagination. In some of his low
characters, that became it, he had a shuffling shamble in his gait, with
so contented an ignorance in his aspect, and an awkward absurdity in his
gesture, that had you not known him, you could not have believed, that
naturally he could have had a grain of common sense. In a word, I am
tempted to sum up the character of Nokes, as a comedian, in a parody of
what Shakspeare's _Mark Antony_ says of _Brutus_ as a hero.

His life was laughter, and the ludicrous
So mix'd, in him, that nature might stand up,
And say to all the world--this was an _actor_.

MISCELLANY.

THEOBALDUS SECUNDUS,
OR
SHAKSPEARE AS HE SHOULD BE.

NO. IV.

_Hamlet Prince of Denmark, continued._

Latin and Greek are the only tongues in which departed spirits can be
addressed, for this reason they are denominated the _dead_ languages.
The nonappearance of these supernatural beings in the present day, may
be fairly ascribed to the decay of the learned languages. COBBET, with
all his volubility, has not a word to throw at a ghost. Johnson says:

When Learning's triumph o'er her barbarous foes,
First