Notes and Queries, Number 52, October 26, 1850 | Page 8

as well as of the "Argument" of the introductory canto, differing from both the others. In the instance pointed out by T. N. the substitution was effected by pasting the approved stanza over the disapproved stanza; but the third version was given by reprinting the whole leaf, which contains other variations of typography, besides such as it was thought necessary to make in the first stanza.
I formerly had copies of the book, dated 1600, including all three variations; but the late Mr. Wordsworth having one day looked particularly at that with the reprinted leaf, and expressing a {360} strong wish to possess it, I gave it to him, and I presume that it remained in his library at his death. What I speak of happened full twenty years ago.
The Critical Review of the date I refer to (I am pretty confident that it was of the early part of 1817) contained a good deal of information regarding Fairfax and his productions; but it did not mention one fact of importance to show the early estimation and popularity of his translation of the Gerusalemme Liberata, viz., that although it was published in 1600, it is repeatedly quoted in England's Parnassus, printed in the same year, and containing extracts, as most people are aware, from all the distinguished poets of that day, and somewhat earlier. This circumstance ascertains also that Fairfax's Tasso came out before England's Parnassus, although both bear the date of 1600 on the title-pages.
THE HERMIT OF HOLYPORT.
Fairfax's Tasso.--In my copy of the second edition, 1624, the first stanza of the first book is given precisely as in Mr. Knight's reprint. But in the very beautiful edition published by Bensley, 1817, and edited by Mr. Singer, that stanza which T. N. terms an "elegant variation," introduces the canto. The editor's preface states that the first edition, 1600, had been followed in that re-impression, "admitting some few corrections of errors, and emendations of orthography, from the second, I printed in 1624." Of this second edition it is remarked that "it appears to have been revised by some careful corrector of the press; yet nothing material is changed but the orthography of particular words." No notice is taken of the difference between the first stanza of the second edition, and that of the first edition, identical with the cancel in T. N.'s copy. Possibly, both the copies of these two editions, which happened to come under the editor's notice, had this cancel, and so presented no variation from each other. If, however, all the copies of the second edition contained the stanza as given by Mr. Knight, and Mr. Singer's opinion (drawn from the dedicatory verses to Prince Charles, prefixed to some copies of the second edition) that this edition was seen, and probably corrected, by the author, be well-founded, it would seem to follow that Fairfax finally preferred the stanza in this its first and later state, and as it appears in Mr. Knight's edition. If the "cancel-slip" be an "elegant" variation, may not the original stanza be regarded as more vigorous?
G. A. S.
Fairfax's Tasso.--In the elegant edition published by Mr. Singer in 1817, the first stanza is printed according to the variation noticed by your correspondent T. N. (Vol. ii., p. 325.), "I sing the warre," &c., and the original stanza is printed at the end of the first book, with a note stating that the pasted slip is found "in most copies" of the first edition. My copy contains no such peculiarity, but it is of course possible that the pasted slip may have been removed. The second edition (folio, London, 1624) has the stanza in the form in which it originally stood in the first, beginning "The sacred armies," &c.
J. F. M
* * * * *
ALE-DRAPER.--EUGENE ARAM.
(Vol. ii., p. 310.)
Your correspondent D. asks whether the word ale-draper was ever in "good use." The only place in which I can find it is Bailey's Dictionary, where it occurs thus:
"Ale-draper (a humorous name), a seller of malt liquors; an alehouse-keeper or victualler."
The humour, I suppose, consists in applying to one kind of occupation that which was commonly given to another; in taking draper from the service of cloth, and pressing it by force into that of ale. That it was ever considered as a word of respectable standing, can hardly be imagined. In such writers as Tom Brown it is most likely to occur.
1. With reference to Eugene Aram, D.'s remark about the over-ingeniousness of his defence has been anticipated by Paley, who was present at the trial, and said that Aram would not have been hanged had he less studiously defended himself. That laboured address to the jury must have employed his thoughts for years. I should like very much to know whether anyone has ever attempted to verify