Upon this the _Reporter's_ remark is, that 'If we take _fearful_ in its common acceptation of _timorous_, the proposed change renders the passage clearer;' but that, if we take the word _fearful_ in its rarer signification of _that which excites terror_, 'no alteration is needed.' Certainly: none _is_ needed; for the mistake (as _I_ regard it) of REP. lies simply in supposing the passive sense of _fearful_--namely, that which _suffers_ fear--to be the ordinary sense; which now, in the nineteenth century, it is; but was _not_ in the age of Shakspere. [MACBETH. _Scene 7._ 'Thus even-handed justice _Commends_ the ingredients of our poison'd chalice To our own lips.' COR. proposes, _Returns_ the ingredients of, &c.; and, after the word _returns_ is placed a comma; which, however, I suppose to be a press oversight, and no element in the correction. Meantime, I see no call for any change whatever. The ordinary use of the word _commend_, in any advantageous introduction of a stranger by letters, seems here to maintain itself--namely, placing him in such a train towards winning favour as may give a favourable bias to his opportunities. The opportunities are not left to their own casual or neutral action, but are armed and pointed towards a special result by the influence of the recommender. So, also, it is here supposed that amongst several chalices, which might else all have an equal power to conciliate notice, one specially--namely, that which contains the poison--is armed by Providence with a power to bias the choice, and commend itself to the poisoner's favour. [_Ibid._ 'His two chamberlains Will I with wine and wassail so _convince_.'