in the rare semblance that I loved it first."

He

is ready to undergo any penalty for his sin-or, rather, mistake; he is willing to make his deed. undone. Don Pedro, too, manifests an equal contrition for the share which he has had in the wrong of an innocent woman. Repentance is now their condition, which, in its fullest manifestation, is the struggle of the soul to wipe out its wicked action. Both take means for counteracting the slander, during all time to come, by placing an epitaph upon her tomb indicating her character. Still, their act was not intentional, though rash and blameworthy: hence their repentance cannot be prolonged, or their punishment severe. But their sorrow is genuine, and, hence, they are prepared for a restoration.

One of the penalties laid upon Claudio is that he should marry the niece of Leonato, since the daughter is dead. When she has approached him and removed her mask-behold, it is his Hero. The good Friar, anticipating just such an emergency, has concealed her in a religious house. Now he restores her to the first relation. Claudio also must obtain this reward; through repentance he has made his deed undone, as far as lies in his power. Dogberry, too, is recompensed for his faithfulness in office, though intellect and learning are not his possessions. Don John is the person who really deserves punishment, which awaits him in a triple form at the

hand of the Prince. The end is a double marriage, which is performed by the worthy Friar the mediator of peace and union.

Thus the two pairs have traveled through the various obstacles, and are joined in the Family. They show two forms of interference with this institution. The misogamous pair, whose separation comes from within,-and-the-wronged pair, whose separation comes from without both equally must yield to the impulse of the domestic relation. The first are inherently comic; the second are not, though their difficulty is overcome mainly by a comic instrumentality. Disguise does not run through any one thread of the play, but its temporary employment in the form of masks, concealments, delusive shows, occurs in every portion. Fundamentally, therefore, it is not a comedy of Situation, but rather a comedy of Character, belonging to the involuntary phase- that is, the individuals are pursuing a comic end without intending it, even without knowing it. The distinction between the Romanic and Germanic elements is less marked, though observable. The Italian origin of part of the story is well known; Dogberry and his companions are rudely English; the thread of Benedick and Beatrice combines the intrigue of the one with the characterization of the other. The seriousness of the play, in its leading thread, still keeps it in the domain of Tragi-Comedy,

though hovering quite on the boundary line of Pure Comedy.

Thus this disguised world of Messina has come to a little clearness about itself, and, we may hope, will cease to pass its existence in wit and artifice. The play unfolds through four main disguises, each of which undoes the previous one. 1st. There is the mutual inner disguise of Beatrice and Benedick. 2d. This disguise is, however, torn off by the new disguise which Don Pedro and Claudio and the whole court prepare for the eaves-dropping Benedick; in like manner Hero successfully tears away the mask of wit in which Beatrice has concealed herself. 3d. This second set of disguisers are overlapped by the third set, composed of Borachio and Don John. Both Don Pedro and Claudio are tricked by a disguise, pretty much in the same way that they have just tricked Benedick; strange that they do not reflect that others can do what they have done. In like manner, Hero, who victimized Beatrice, is herself victimized in a far worse way. 4th. But this third set of disguisers are thwarted by the undisguised set, the officers, and an end is made to this series of confusions, false shows, and foolish hasty judgments.

The story of Hero, the innocent girl who is made the victim of appearances, which are met and counteracted by other appearances, whereby she is restored to her lover, is taken from Italian

romance.

It is found in a poetic form in Ariosto; but Shakespeare probably derived his materials from Bandello, the Italian novelist, who had been translated into French by Belleforest. Several versions of the story from the poem, and probably a version of it from the novel, or from the French translation, had been made into English before the date of Much Ado. Also a play had been given in English on the same subject. Thus the story was probably familiar to Shakespeare's audience. But the characterization, structure, and ethical world are the poet's work. The composition of the play hovers around the year 1600, in which year it was first printed, and which may be taken as the period when Shakespeare's purely comic genius reaches its culmination, and begins to show strong signs of a counter-tendency.

ALL'S WELL THAT ENDS

WELL.

No certain trace of this play is found before the Folio of 1623, in which it is the twelfth of the comedies, and is divided into Acts, but not into Scenes. Francis Meres, author of the Palladis Tamia, which belongs to the year 1598, mentions among the comedies of Shakespeare, a Love's Labor's Won, alongside of Love's Labor's Lost. No such play is known; consequently, the attempt has often been made to identify it with some known play; in which attempt the most voices, critical and otherwise, have been given for All's Well That Ends Well. In this condition we may let the matter rest; it may be so or not so; but whether so or not, the result can have no bearing whatever upon the comprehension of the present play, which now has the most significant title possible.

Of greater import is the fact-first observed, as far as we are aware, by Coleridge that there are two distinct Shakespearian styles in the play. A number of metrical passages show plainly his early manner, of which a good sample is the