unwise; for silence, on many occasions, would be a dereliction of
those duties which we owe to ourselves and the public.

The halcyon days, so much desired, may be far distant! I have
to comment, elsewhere, on certain parts of the _Report_ of the
commissioners on the British Museum--which I hope to do firmly, yet
respectfully; and on the evidence of Mr. Panizzi--in which task I must
not disappoint his just expectations. I have also to propose a query
on the _blunder of Malone_--to which I give precedence, as it relates
to Shakspeare.

The query is--have I "mistaken the whole affair"? A few short
paragraphs may enable others to decide.

1. The question at issue arose, I presume to say, out of the
_statement of Mr. Jebb_. I never quoted the Irish edition. If _C._
can prove that Malone superintended it, he may fairly tax me with a
violation of my new canon of criticism--not otherwise. What says Mr.
James Boswell on that point? I must borrow his precise words: "The
only edition for which Mr. Malone can be considered as responsible
[is] his own in 1790." [_Plays and poems of W.S._ 1821, i. xxxiii.]

2. I am said to have "repeated what _C._ had already stated."--I
consulted the _Shakspere_ of Malone, and verified my recollections,
when the query of "Mr. JEBB" appeared--but forbore to notice its
misconceptions. Besides, one _C._, after an interval of two months,
merely _asserted_ that it was not a blunder of Malone; the other _C._
furnished, off-hand, his proofs and references.

3. To argue fairly, we must use the same words in the same sense.