has been thrown upon the question of authorship, because, at the end of
the piece, in both impressions, we read "Finis. Paul Bucke." The fact,
however, no doubt is that Paul Bucke who, it has been recently
ascertained, was an actor,[11] subscribed the transcript, which about
1584 he had procured for Roger Ward the printer, in order to
authenticate it: hence the connection of his name with the production,
in the performance of which he may also have had a share, and he may
thus have had access to the prompter's book. The Paul Bucke, who in 1578
was the author of a "prayer for Sir Humphrey Gilbert," was in all
probability the same individual.[12]

The second edition of 1592 would seem, from the many variations, to have
been printed from a different manuscript to that used for the edition of
1584, and in some respects it was an improvement. Still, as we have
stated, the name of Paul Bucke is at the termination of both; and it is
a somewhat remarkable indication of the care displayed in bringing out
the second edition, that whereas in the first edition an event is spoken
of as having occurred in the reign of Queen Mary, "not much more than
twenty-six years" before, in the second edition printed seven or eight
years afterwards, the figures 26 are altered to 33. Such proofs of
attention to comparative trifles were unusual in the reprints of old
plays; and it may be doubted whether in this instance it would have been
afforded, had not "The three Ladies of London" continued such a
favourite with the town as to occasion its frequent repetition at the
public theatre. A piece of evidence to show the popularity of the drama
long after its original publication is to be found in Edward Guilpin's
"Skialetheia, or a Shadowe of Truth," 8vo, 1598, where it is thus
distinctly alluded to--

"The world's so bad that vertue's over-awde,