TWO GENTLEMEN OF VERONA.

THERE are several religious expressions in the Two Gentlemen of Verona, introduced in the service of love or on trivial occasions. Irreverence is rather to be inferred from such passages. Shakspere's indecency in female conversation, goes along with it. We may say with Johnson, of these and other extracts—When I read this play, I cannot but think that I discover, both in the serious and ludicrous scenes, the language and sentiments of Shakspeare.' Proteus says

Commend thy grievance to my holy prayers,

For I will be thy bead's-man, Valentine.

Valentine. And on a love-book pray for my success.

Pro. Upon some book I love, I'll pray for thee.

Pope says, the second scene is composed of the lowest and most trifling conceits.' Johnson allows that it 'is mean and vulgar.' Dr. Henley accuses Shakspere, in his wit upon strayed sheep, of having derived the dialogue from sacred sources.

Launce. I have received my proportion, like the prodigious son, and am going with Sir Proteus to the Imperial's court.

This witticism of Launce on the prodigal son, the reader will hereafter see, is a favourite one with Shakspere. The humour, also, is peculiarly the author's; and is described by himself in this play and in Measure for Measure.

As Speed says to Launce, on one occasion 'he mistakes him,' and on another, 'Well, your old vice still; mistake the word.' Escalus characterises it still better, when he says to Angelo of Elbow, 'Do you hear how he misplaces?' Shakspere will make these mistakes a frequent vehicle of

profanation. We are to suppose that the dog, Crab, was Launce's proportion.'

Launce. Thou shalt never get such a secret from me, but by a parable.

Launce having used a parable, and shown his knowledge of the Scriptures, says he unravels his meaning by that figure of speech.

Launce. Why, I tell thee, I care not though he burn himself in love. If thou wilt go with me to the ale-house, so; if not, thou art an Hebrew, a Jew, and not worth the name of a Christian.

Speed. Why?

Laun. Because thou hast not so much charity in thee as to go to the ale-house with a Christian. Wilt thou go?

Speed. At thy service.

Having put the Gospel under contribution, does not Shakspere draw from the epistle of Paul for these two illustrations he gives to Launce, of burning in love and Christian charity? No doubt the common people speak of a Christian as a human creature. But Shakspere knew better, and employs here the name and nature of a Christian to no good purpose, and will often do it to produce ridicule. Launce, in love, says of the object of his affection

She hath more qualities than a water spaniel-which is much in a bare Christian.

Proteus and Valentine hold a notable dialogue.

Laun. Can nothing speak? Master, shall I strike?

Pro. Whom would'st thou strike?

Laun. Nothing.

Pro. Villain, forbear.

Laun. Why, sir, I'll strike nothing. I pray you

We should not have given the above extract, had it not appeared to us from its frequent repetition, and more serious

application in other places to denote the materialism of Shakspere. Besides, we think it a parody of some of the scene with the Ghost in Hamlet.

Valentine. And as we walk along, I dare be bold
With our discourse to make your grace to smile.
What think you of this page, my lord?

Duke. I think the boy hath grace in him : he blushes.
Val. I warrant you, my lord, more grace than boy.
Duke. What mean you by that saying?

In subsequent plays the reader will find frequent recurrence to the word 'grace,' as a subject of witticism.

There cannot be well a worse character than Proteus, who betrays Valentine in order to make love to Silvia, his friend's betrothed; rejects his own Julia, and finding only hatred from Silvia, would force her to his will in the presence of Valentine. In his soliloquy on motives, Proteus gives the necessitarian plea as sufficient excuse to leave the paths of virtue, and walk in the ways of vice. When discovered by Valentine, he says

Proteus. My shame and guilt confounds me.
Forgive me, Valentine; if hearty sorrow

Be a sufficient ransom for offence,

I tender't here; I do as truly suffer,
As e'er I did commit.

Valentine. Then I am paid:

And once again I do receive thee honest.
Who by repentance is not satisfy'd,

Is nor of heav'n, nor earth; for these are pleas'd;
By penitence th' Eternal's wrath's appeas'd.
And that my love may appear plain and free,
All that was mine in Silvia, I give thee.

Proteus had joined himself to outlaws, who were bandits. According to their own account, they had been guilty of the crimes of robbery and murder, and such like 'petty offences.' Valentine, reconciled to the Duke, obtains their pardon, as men 'endued with worthy qualities; and forgiven, fit for great employments.'

Mr. Knight, on this occasion, cannot let pass unobserved the charge against Shakspere of giving encouragement to

evil doers. He gives the other instances, of which the moral of this play is but one, and defends Shakspere by remarks, with the tenor of which we can readily coincide as respects the universal love with which our poet regarded his fellows, and his charity and pity towards their offences. But it is observable, that whilst Shakspere's sympathies seem to go along with characters moved by violent feelings, either of virtue or vice, he shows an unaccountable antipathy to persons of more even temperament, which seems to us to determine the tendency of his own inclinations. Thus there was nothing positively to abhor in the character of Thurio; there was comparatively no moral wrong in him, if there was no virtue shown; he was as most men are in the same situations-yet the only severity of judgment is shown to him.

Not only are the sentiments of the play made expressive of the forgiveness of injuries between man and man, pointing to what ought to be in heaven as well as earth, but in the sequel it is managed that the highest judge should pardon all offenders alike, and to all sinners there should be one mutual happiness.

It is the moral of this play which marks it as Shakspere's. He assigns forgiveness of all injuries done to man, and of all sins against heaven. On repentance there are no punishments, only rewards; and friendship is all self-sacrifice in the fulfilment of the duties of charity.

PERICLES.

THE hypothesis that Pericles was derived from a poem by Gower, and an old court play, and patched up by Shakspere, may account for some incongruities in it. The politics, the obscenity and profanity, seem to have come from the hand of Shakspere. There is as strong political satire in Pericles as in any of Shakspere's plays, which is an answer to Johnson's dictum--that Shakspere could not supply 'faction with invective.' But it will be easy to particularise other sentiments which are common to all his plays.

In the following sentiments of Pericles, there is a touch of Shakspere's universal charity, as practically inefficient towards man, as it is indignant towards the gods.

The blind mole casts

Copp'd hills towards heaven, to tell, the earth is throng'd
By man's oppression; and the poor worm doth die for't.
Kings are earth's gods: in vice, their law 's their will;
And if Jove stray, who dares say, Jove doth ill?

The circumstance here complained of being in the nature of things, seems to imply that the author did think the world in a desperate and unredeemable condition. If he condemned the system, because of the existence of evil, he must have condemned the disposer of events, or he did not think that there was one. It involves the dilemma of Epicurus-' He either desires to remove evil but cannot, or he can but will not. Marina is given a delicate sensibility; not only averse to do any wrong to the animal creation, but weeping over the wrongs she commits from inevitable necessity. As with Miranda, in the Tempest, this sentiment is made to reflect on the heavenly powers, who do not exert their puissance to prevent this misery. Pericles is represented as a good character. The misanthrope, Jaques, against whom something may be said, turns the same sentiment much to the same account as the Prince of Tyre. Shakspere is said to em