_The Passage in King Henry VIII., Act III. Sc._ 1. (Vol. vii., pp. 5. 111.
183. 494.).--MR. INGLEBY has done perfectly right to "call me to account"
for a rash and unadvised assertion, in saying that we must interpolate
_been_ in the passage in _King Henry VIII._, Act III. Sc. 2., after _have_;
for even that would not make it intelligible. So far I stand corrected. The
passages, however that are cited, are not parallel cases. In the first we
have the word _loyalty_ to complete the sense:
" . . . . . My loyalty,
Which ever has [been] and ever shall be growing."
In the second, the word _deserved_ is clearly pointed out as being
understood, from the occurrence of _deserve_ after _will_:
"I have spoken better of you than you have [deserved] or will deserve at my
hands."
I will assist MR. INGLEBY'S position with another example from _Rich. II._,
Act V. Sc. 5.:
" . . . . . like silly beggars,
Who sitting in the stocks, refuge their shame,
That many have [sat] and others must sit there."
And even from a much later writer, Bolingbroke:
"This dedication may serve for almost any book that has, is, or shall
be published."
Where we must supply _been_ after _has_. But in the passage I attempted,
and I think successfully, to set right, admitting that custom would allow
of the ellipsis of the participle _been_, after the auxiliary _have_, to
what can "am, have, and will be" possibly refer?
" . . . . . I do professe
That for your highness' good, I euer labour'd
More then mine owne, that am, haue, and will be."
What? Add _true_ at the end of the line, and it mars the verse, but make
the probable correction of _true_ for _haue_, and you get excellent sense
without any ellipsis. I am as averse to interpolation or alteration of the
text, when sense can by any rational supposition be made of it, as my
opponent, or any true lover of the poet and the integrity of his language,
can possibly be; but I see nothing rational in refusing to correct an
almost self-evident misprint, which would redeem a fine passage that
otherwise must always remain a stumbling-block to the most intelligent
reader. We have all I trust but one object, _i. e._ to free the text of our
great poet from obvious errors occasioned by extremely incorrect printing
in the folios, and at the same time to strictly watch over all attempts at
its corruption by unnecessary meddling. This, and not the displaying of our
own ingenuity in conjectures, ought to be our almost sacred duty; at least,
I feel conscious that it is mine.