按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
which； if true； positive and irrefragable evidence in his own
handwriting might have been forthcoming to establish it。 Not
having been actually enrolled as an attorney； neither the records
of the local court at Stratford nor of the superior Court at
Westminster would present his name as being concerned in any suit
as an attorney； but it might reasonably have been expected that
there would be deeds or wills witnessed by him still extant； and
after a very diligent search none such can be discovered。〃
Upon this Lord Penzance commends： 〃It cannot be doubted
that Lord Campbell was right in this。 No young man could have
been at work in an attorney's office without being called upon
continually to act as a witness； and in many other ways leaving
traces of his work and name。〃 There is not a single fact or
incident in all that is known of Shakespeare； even by rumor or
tradition； which supports this notion of a clerkship。 And after
much argument and surmise which has been indulged in on this subject；
we may； I think； safely put the notion on one side； for no less
an authority than Mr。 Grant White says finally that the idea of
his having been clerk to an attorney has been 〃blown to pieces。〃
It is altogether characteristic of Mr。 Churton Collins that
he； nevertheless； adopts this exploded myth。 〃That Shakespeare
was in early life employed as a clerk in an attorney's office may
be correct。 At Stratford there was by royal charter a Court of
Record sitting every fortnight； with six attorneys； besides the
town clerk； belonging to it； and it is certainly not straining
probability to suppose that the young Shakespeare may have had
employment in one of them。 There is； it is true； no tradition to
this effect； but such traditions as we have about Shakespeare's
occupation between the time of leaving school and going to London
are so loose and baseless that no confidence can be placed in
them。 It is； to say the least； more probable that he was in an
attorney's office than that he was a butcher killing calves 'in a
high style；' and making speeches over them。〃
This is a charming specimen of Stratfordian argument。 There
is； as we have seen； a very old tradition that Shakespeare was a
butcher's apprentice。 John Dowdall； who made a tour of
Warwickshire in 1693； testifies to it as coming from the old
clerk who showed him over the church； and it is unhesitatingly
accepted as true by Mr。 Halliwell…Phillipps。 （Vol。 I； p。 11； and
Vol。 II； pp。 71； 72。） Mr。 Sidney Lee sees nothing improbable in
it； and it is supported by Aubrey； who must have written his
account some time before 1680； when his manuscript was completed。
Of the attorney's clerk hypothesis； on the other hand； there is
not the faintest vestige of a tradition。 It has been evolved out
of the fertile imaginations of embarrassed Stratfordians； seeking
for some explanation of the Stratford rustic's marvelous
acquaintance with law and legal terms and legal life。 But Mr。
Churton Collins has not the least hesitation in throwing over the
tradition which has the warrant of antiquity and setting up in
its stead this ridiculous invention； for which not only is there
no shred of positive evidence； but which； as Lord Campbell and
Lord Penzance pointed out； is really put out of court by the
negative evidence； since 〃no young man could have been at work in
an attorney's office without being called upon continually to act
as a witness； and in many other ways leaving traces of his work
and name。〃 And as Mr。 Edwards further points out； since the day
when Lord Campbell's book was published （between forty and fifty
years ago）； 〃every old deed or will； to say nothing of other
legal papers； dated during the period of William Shakespeare's
youth； has been scrutinized over half a dozen shires； and not one
signature of the young man has been found。〃
Moreover； if Shakespeare had served as clerk in an attorney's
office it is clear that he must have served for a considerable
period in order to have gained （if； indeed； it is credible that
he could have so gained） his remarkable knowledge of the law。
Can we then for a moment believe that； if this had been so；
tradition would have been absolutely silent on the matter？
That Dowdall's old clerk； over eighty years of age；
should have never heard of it （though he was sure enough
about the butcher's apprentice） and that all the other
ancient witnesses should be in similar ignorance！
But such are the methods of Stratfordian controversy。
Tradition is to be scouted when it is found inconvenient； but
cited as irrefragable truth when it suits the case。 Shakespeare
of Stratford was the author of the Plays and Poems； but the
author of the Plays and Poems could not have been a butcher's
apprentice。 Anyway； therefore； with tradition。 But the author
of the Plays and Poems MUST have had a very large and a very
accurate knowledge of the law。 Therefore； Shakespeare of
Stratford must have been an attorney's clerk！ The method is
simplicity itself。 By similar reasoning Shakespeare has been
made a country schoolmaster； a soldier； a physician； a printer；
and a good many other things besides； according to the
inclination and the exigencies of the commentator。 It would not
be in the least surprising to find that he was studying Latin as
a schoolmaster and law in an attorney's office at the same time。
However； we must do Mr。 Collins the justice of saying that
he has fully recognized； what is indeed tolerable obvious； that
Shakespeare must have had a sound legal training。 〃It may； of
course； be urged；〃 he writes； 〃that Shakespeare's knowledge of
medicine； and particularly that branch of it which related to
morbid psychology； is equally remarkable； and that no one has
ever contended that he was a physician。 （Here Mr。 Collins is
wrong； that contention also has been put forward。） It may be
urged that his acquaintance with the technicalities of other
crafts and callings； notably of marine and military affairs； was
also extraordinary； and yet no one has suspected him of being a
sailor or a soldier。 （Wrong again。 Why； even Messrs。 Garnett
and Gosse 〃suspect〃 that he was a soldier！） This may be
conceded； but the concession hardly furnishes an analogy。 To
these and all other subjects he recurs occasionally； and in
season； but with reminiscences of the law his memory； as is
abundantly clear； was simply saturated。 In season and out of
season now in manifest； now in recondite application； he presses
it into the service of expression and illustration。 At least a
third of his myriad metaphors are derived from it。 It would
indeed be difficult to find a single act in any of his dramas；
nay； in some of them； a single scene； the diction and imagery of
which are not colored by it。 Much of his law may have been
acquired from three books easily accessible to himnamely；
Tottell's PRECEDENTS （1572）； Pulton's STATUTES （1578）； and
Fraunce's LAWIER'S LOGIKE （1588）； works with which he certainly
seems to have been familiar； but much of it could only have come
from one who had an intimate acquaintance with legal proceedings。
We quite agree with Mr。 Castle that Shakespeare's legal knowledge
is not what could have been picked up in an attorney's office；
but could only have been learned by an actual attendance at the
Courts； at a Pleader's Chambers； and on circuit； or by
associating intimately with members of the Bench and Bar。〃
This is excellent。 But what is Mr。 Collins's explanation？
〃Perhaps the simplest solution of the problem is to accept the
hypothesis that in early life he was in an attorney's office （！）；
that he there contracted a love for the law which never left him；
that as a young man in London he continued to study or dabble in
it for his amusement； to stroll in leisure hours into the Courts；
and to frequent the society of lawyers。 On no other supposition
is it possible to explain the attraction which the law evidently
had for him； and his minute and undeviating accuracy in a subject
where no layman who has indulged in such copious and ostentatious
display of legal technicalities has ever yet succeeded in keeping
himself from tripping。〃
A lame conclusion。 〃No other supposition〃 indeed！ Yes；
there is another； and a very obvious suppositionnamely； that
Shakespeare was himself a lawyer； well versed in his trade；
versed in all the ways of the courts； and living in close
intimacy with judges and members of the Inns of Court。
One is； of course； thankful that Mr。 Collins has appreciated
the fact that Shakespeare must have had a sound legal training；
but I may be forgiven if I do not attach quite so much importance
to his pronouncements on this branch of the subject as to those
of Malone； Lord Campbell； Judge Holmes； Mr。 Castle； K。C。； Lord
Penzance； Mr。 Grant White； and other lawyers； who have expressed
their opinion on the matter of Shakespeare's le