dialogue may not be uninteresting to the reader, especially as it is
only to be met with in one or two scarce books:

(_Shakspeare._) "I have heard, my lord, that a certain arch in Trinity
College, Cambridge, would stand until a greater man than your lordship
should pass through it."

(_Bacon._) "Did you ever pass through it, Mr. Shakspeare?"

(_Shakspeare._) "No, my lord, I never was at Cambridge."

(_Bacon._) "Then we cannot decide which of us two is the greater man. I
am told that most of the professors there pass under the arch without
tear; which indeed shows a wise contempt of the superstition."

(_Shakspeare._) "I rejoice to think that the world is yet to have a
greater man than your lordship, since the arch must fall at last."

Several of Shakspeare's least amusing plays are supposed to be not of
his composition, such as _Henry VI._, and _Troilus and Cressida_, with
the exception of the master-touches and some of the finer speeches,
which probably were introduced by him. This, however, is a trick of
trade in every department of science; and when we see, for instance, the
collected works of some great artist, it would be ridiculous to suppose
that his whole lifetime could have sufficed for so much handicraft, and
perhaps in reality, only the faces and more delicate parts were the work
of his pencil.

To return to Shakspeare. The objections to his style, which are many,
especially to a more modern reader, are excusable from several causes.