and in an edition of the 'Plays.' There was much discussion, much
doubt, and the folio of the old corrector (who was presumed to have
marked the book in the theatre during early performances) was
exhibited to the Society of Antiquaries. Then Mr. Collier presented
the treasure to the Duke of Devonshire, who again lent it for
examination to the British Museum. Mr. Hamilton published in the
Times (July, 1859) the results of his examination of the old
corrector. It turned out that the old corrector was a modern myth.
He had first made his corrections in pencil and in a modern hand,
and then he had copied them over in ink, and in a forged ancient
hand. The same word sometimes recurred in both handwritings. The
ink, which looked old, was really no English ink at all, not even
Ireland's mixture. It seemed to be sepia, sometimes mixed with a
little Indian ink. Mr. Hamilton made many other sad discoveries.
He pointed out that Mr. Collier had published, from a Dulwich MS., a
letter of Mrs. Alleyne's (the actor's wife), referring to
Shakespeare as "Mr. Shakespeare of the Globe." Now the Dulwich MS.
was mutilated and blank in the very place where this interesting
reference should have occurred. Such is a skeleton history of the
old corrector, his works and ways. It is probable that--thanks to
his assiduities--new Shakespearian documents will in future be
received with extreme scepticism; and this is all the fruit, except
acres of newspaper correspondence, which the world has derived from
Mr. Collier's greasy and imperfect but unique "corrected folio."

The recency and (to a Shakespearian critic) the importance of these
forgeries obscures the humble merit of Surtees, with his ballads of
the 'Slaying of Antony Featherstonhaugh,' and of 'Bartram's Dirge.'
Surtees left clever lacunae in these songs, 'collected from oral
tradition,' and furnished notes so learned that they took in Sir