is shakespeare dead-第8节

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！


lays；　and　only　in　one　single　instance　in　the　fifty…four　plays　of　Beaumont　and　Fletcher。　　It　has　been　suggested　that　it　was　in　attendance　upon　the　courts　in　London　that　he　picked　up　his　legal　vocabulary。　　But　this　supposition　not　only　fails　to　account　for　Shakespeare's　peculiar　freedom　and　exactness　in　the　use　of　that　phraseology；　it　does　not　even　place　him　in　the　way　of　learning　those　terms　his　use　of　which　is　most　remarkable；　which　are　not　such　as　he　would　have　heard　at　ordinary　proceedings　at　nisi　prius；　but　such　as　refer　to　the　tenure　or　transfer　of　real　property；　'fine　and　recovery；'　'statutes　merchant；'　'purchase；'　'indenture；'　'tenure；'　'double　voucher；'　'fee　simple；'　'fee　farm；'　'remainder；'　'reversion；'　'forfeiture；'　etc。　　This　conveyancer's　jargon　could　not　have　been　picked　up　by　hanging　round　the　courts　of　law　in　London　two　hundred　and　fifty　years　ago；　when　suits　as　to　the　title　of　real　property　were　comparatively　rare。　　And　beside；　Shakespeare　uses　his　law　just　as　freely　in　his　first　plays；　written　in　his　first　London　years；　as　in　those　produced　at　a　later　period。　　Just　as　exactly；　too；　for　the　correctness　and　propriety　with　which　these　terms　are　introduced　have　compelled　the　admiration　of　a　Chief　Justice　and　a　Lord　Chancellor。〃

Senator　Davis　wrote：　　〃We　seem　to　have　something　more　than　a　sciolist's　temerity　of　indulgence　in　the　terms　of　an　unfamiliar　art。　　No　legal　solecisms　will　be　found。　　The　abstrusest　elements　of　the　common　law　are　impressed　into　a　disciplined　service。　　Over　and　over　again；　where　such　knowledge　is　unexampled　in　writers　unlearned　in　the　law；　Shakespeare　appears　in　perfect　possession　of　it。　　In　the　law　of　real　property；　its　rules　of　tenure　and　descents；　its　entails；　its　fines　and　recoveries；　their　vouchers　and　double　vouchers；　in　the　procedure　of　the　Courts；　the　method　of　bringing　writs　and　arrests；　the　nature　of　actions；　the　rules　of　pleading；　the　law　of　escapes　and　of　contempt　of　court；　in　the　principles　of　evidence；　both　technical　and　philosophical；　in　the　distinction　between　the　temporal　and　spiritual　tribunals；　in　the　law　of　attainder　and　forfeiture；　in　the　requisites　of　a　valid　marriage；　in　the　presumption　of　legitimacy；　in　the　learning　of　the　law　of　prerogative；　in　the　inalienable　character　of　the　Crown；　this　mastership　appears　with　surprising　authority。〃

To　all　this　testimony　（and　there　is　much　more　which　I　have　not　cited）　may　now　be　added　that　of　a　great　lawyer　of　our　own　times；　viz。：　　Sir　James　Plaisted　Wilde；　Q。C。　created　a　Baron　of　the　Exchequer　in　1860；　promoted　to　the　post　of　Judge…Ordinary　and　Judge　of　the　Courts　of　Probate　and　Divorce　in　1863；　and　better　known　to　the　world　as　Lord　Penzance；　to　which　dignity　he　was　raised　in　1869。　Lord　Penzance；　as　all　lawyers　know；　and　as　the　late　Mr。　Inderwick；　K。C。；　has　testified；　was　one　of　the　first　legal　authorities　of　his　day；　famous　for　his　〃remarkable　grasp　of　legal　principles；〃　and　〃endowed　by　nature　with　a　remarkable　facility　for　marshalling　facts；　and　for　a　clear　expression　of　his　views。〃

Lord　Penzance　speaks　of　Shakespeare's　〃perfect　familiarity　with　not　only　the　principles；　axioms；　and　maxims；　but　the　technicalities　of　English　law；　a　knowledge　so　perfect　and　intimate　that　he　was　never　incorrect　and　never　at　fault　。　。　。　The　mode　in　which　this　knowledge　was　pressed　into　service　on　all　occasions　to　express　his　meaning　and　illustrate　his　thoughts；　was　quite　unexampled。　　He　seems　to　have　had　a　special　pleasure　in　his　complete　and　ready　mastership　of　it　in　all　its　branches。　　As　manifested　in　the　plays；　this　legal　knowledge　and　learning　had　therefore　a　special　character　which　places　it　on　a　wholly　different　footing　from　the　rest　of　the　multifarious　knowledge　which　is　exhibited　in　page　after　page　of　the　plays。　　At　every　turn　and　point　at　which　the　author　required　a　metaphor；　simile；　or　illustration；　his　mind　ever　turned　FIRST　to　the　law。　　He　seems　almost　to　have　THOUGHT　in　legal　phrases；　the　commonest　of　legal　expressions　were　ever　at　the　end　of　his　pen　in　description　or　illustration。　　That　he　should　have　descanted　in　lawyer　language　when　he　had　a　forensic　subject　in　hand；　such　as　Shylock's　bond；　was　to　be　expected；　but　the　knowledge　of　law　in　'Shakespeare'　was　exhibited　in　a　far　different　manner：　　it　protruded　itself　on　all　occasions；　appropriate　or　inappropriate；　and　mingled　itself　with　strains　of　thought　widely　divergent　from　forensic　subjects。〃　　Again：　　〃To　acquire　a　perfect　familiarity　with　legal　principles；　and　an　accurate　and　ready　use　of　the　technical　terms　and　phrases　not　only　of　the　conveyancer's　office　but　of　the　pleader's　chambers　and　the　Courts　at　Westminster；　nothing　short　of　employment　in　some　career　involving　constant　contact　with　legal　questions　and　general　legal　work　would　be　requisite。　　But　a　continuous　employment　involves　the　element　of　time；　and　time　was　just　what　the　manager　of　two　theatres　had　not　at　his　disposal。　　In　what　portion　of　Shakespeare's　（i。e。　Shakspere's）　career　would　it　be　possible　to　point　out　that　time　could　be　found　for　the　interposition　of　a　legal　employment　in　the　chambers　or　offices　of　practising　lawyers？〃

Stratfordians；　as　is　well　known；　casting　about　for　some　possible　explanation　of　Shakespeare's　extraordinary　knowledge　of　law；　have　made　the　suggestion　that　Shakespeare　might；　conceivably；　have　been　a　clerk　in　an　attorney's　office　before　he　came　to　London。　　Mr。　Collier　wrote　to　Lord　Campbell　to　ask　his　opinion　as　to　the　probability　of　this　being　true。　　His　answer　was　as　follows：　　〃You　require　us　to　believe　implicitly　a　fact；　of　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　Courts　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　comments：　　〃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；　beside　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　in　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　see　Vol。　II；　p。　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　marvellous　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　point　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；