Michael Drayton had been chosen, he, Daniel, would not have murmured because he, Drayton, would have filled the position most excellently; but yet it seemed to him, Daniel, that one who was the author of plays then daily exhibited on the stage ought not to be a judge when his own plays had to be approved or rejected, since he might be biased, and besides his good friend Drayton was an actor in the King's company of comedians.

The letter clearly refers to Drayton and not to Shaksper. Was Drayton the author of plays then daily acted on the London stage? Let him answer for himself. I quote from Drayton's "Idea," Sonnet 47:

"In pride of wit, when high desire of fame
Gave life and courage to my labouring pen,
And first the sound and virtue of my name
Won grace and credit in the ears of men;
With those the thronged theatres that press,
I in the circuit for the laurel strove;

Where the full praise, I freely must confess,
In heat of blood a modest mind might move,
With shouts and claps at every little pause
When the proud round on every side hath rung,
Sadly I sit unmoved with the applause,
As though to me it nothing did belong:
No public glory vainly I pursue,

All that I seek is to eternize you."

As confirmatory of Drayton's ability as a poet and writer of plays, I quote here from Richard Barnfield's "Remembrances of some English Poets," published in 1598:

"And Drayton, whose well-written tragedies
And sweet epistles soar thy fame to skies,
Thy learned name is equal with the rest
Whose stately numbers are so well addresst."

In this poem, Barnfield puts Drayton in his eulogy next to Spenser. Here is a distinct reference to tragedies written by Michael Drayton, which had made him famous; and in confirmation thereof, Henslowe's Diary shows conclusively that he had written plays for the theatre before 1598. Who now of the nobility would have recommended Drayton?

The earliest helper of Drayton to an education was Sir Henry Goodere of Polesworth. He was a staunch friend of Drayton all his life. In his poetical epistle to Henry Reynolds, Drayton says that he had been a page attached to the household of Sir Henry, and in another dedicatory address he acknowledged his indebtedness to him for his education. Sir Walter Aston was also an earnest patron and energetic helper of Drayton. In 1603, Drayton was made an Esquire by Sir Walter at his investiture as a Knight of the Bath. Lucy, Countess of Bedford, Sir John Harrington, Drummond, and Sir William Alexander were admirers and devoted friends. On page 181 of Drummond's "Life," it appears that on July 14, 1631, Drayton wrote to Drummond that he visited a knight's house in Gloucestershire yearly for two or three months. As the letter was addressed from Clifford in Gloucestershire, it was probably there that he made these annual visits. There is a tradition that Drayton was employed by Queen Elizabeth on a diplomatic mission to Scotland. In an obscure passage in the Owl, 1604, he states that he went in preferment "unto the happy North; and there arrived, disgrace was all my gain."

If search were made for those applications for the position referred to by Daniel, and if they could be unearthed, I think that it would be found that no such

person as William Shaksper ever applied for the position of Master of the Queen's Revels.

Let us suppose that in aid of the truth some person having the leisure and the means to do so should undertake to find the list of names of the playwriters to whom Daniel refers in his letter to the Lord-Keeper, and the names also of those of the nobility who sued to her majesty for this boon. What a contribution that would be to the cause of truth and in settlement of the question of the ability of Shaksper to write a play or to write at all! Who, besides Daniel, were the several applicants for the post of Master of the Queen's Revels, and what did they urge in behalf of their respective claims? What did these noblemen, to whom Daniel refers, write about the applicants to her majesty? If the record or the papers, or either of them, could be found, and published exactly as they appear, it would go far to bring the truth to light.

I might suggest the same as to William Shaksper's estate. It should have been settled according to the laws of England, and an inventory of his goods and chattels and of all his personal estate should be preserved in the proper probate archives, or an official record thereof should have been kept. If that could be found, it would be a welcome addition to the meagre life-history of the man. If he had died the owner of books and manuscripts prepared by him, it would have conclusively settled the question of Shaksper's ability to write plays.

Before passing from the consideration of the letter of thanks from Daniel to Lord-Keeper Egerton I must ask the reader, whether a believer in the Shaksper claim or not, to analyze it carefully for the purpose of determining whether I am right or wrong in my construction of it.

I repeat that I interpret it thus-that Daniel, the writer of the letter, concedes that if his good friend, Drayton, had been chosen as Master of the Queen's Revels, he, Drayton, would have graced the position; but that as he, Drayton, was the author of plays then daily presented on the stage, he would not be a competent and impartial judge as to his own productions. The special reference is to Michael Drayton. And then Daniel alludes in a general way to other applicants for the position.

While Collier is mistaken in attributing Daniel's reference to the authorship of plays now daily presented on the public stages of London to Shaksper, he has enabled me to again direct the attention, especially of the English reader of the letter, to the opportunity afforded, and which may exist, of finding some clue to the names of those besides Drayton who did apply to Egerton for the position which Daniel thanked him for so heartily.

The reader, of course, will understand that the poem. to which Daniel alludes in his letter to the Lord-Keeper had no reference whatever to the applications or the applicants for the place which Daniel secured. It was merely a complimentary effusion in praise of Daniel's benefactor.

CHAPTER XII.

SHAKSPER NOT THE SHAKESCENE OF ROBERT GREENE.

"He will give the devil his due."

-First Henry IV, i, 2.

I approach the discussion of the proposition which heads this chapter with the hope that the unprejudiced reader will carefully and dispassionately consider the statements of fact made and the arguments adduced with the view solely of eliciting the truth. I will try to show, if I can, the falsity of the dictum of Malone, implicitly followed, without examination, by the whole army of commentators except Fleay, that one of the persons chiefly referred to in Greene's pamphlet and Chettle's apology was William Shaksper of Stratford-on-Avon. In order to be fair and candid and to give the reader an opportunity to use his own full and free judgment, I will first state the precedent uncóntradicted facts and then set out the text on which Malone's guess is based.

Robert Greene, a dissolute but gifted poet and dramatist of England, died in great poverty and distress both of mind and body on the third day of September, 1592. Shortly before his death he wrote a book, or rather a pamphlet, called "Greene's Groat's-worth of Wit, bought with a Million of Repentance." It was originally published in 1592, having been entered at Stationer's Hall on the 20th day of September, 1592, but the earliest edition known was printed in 1596. This little work contains a reference to two persons, whose names are not mentioned,