Capell, not Steevens as Mr Dyce says, restored ‘Salerio’ in the text, supposing Shakespeare to have used it as an abridgement of ‘Salerino,’ which he put in the stage direction. Mr Dyce thinks with Mr Knight that it is altogether unlikely that Shakespeare would, without necessity and in violation of dramatic propriety, introduce a new character, ‘Salerio,’ in addition to Salanio and Salerino. Tried by this standard Shakespeare’s violations of dramatic propriety are frequent indeed, and it is no part of an Editor’s duty to correct them. In the next scene Q2 Q3 Q4 have ‘Salerio,’ altered in the Folios to ‘Solanio;’ for clearly it cannot be the same person as the messenger to Belmont; and in IV. 1. 15 the same Quartos make ‘Salerio’ the speaker, while Q1 and the Folios have merely ‘Sal.’ NOTE X. III. 4. 72. _I could not do withal._ In Florio’s _Giardino di Ricreatione_, p. 9, ed. 1591, the Italian ‘Io non saprei farci altro’ is rendered into English ‘I cannot doo with all;’ and the phrase occurs several times in the same book, meaning always ‘I cannot help it.’ NOTE XI. IV. 1. 50. Mr Knight attributes the reading ‘Mistress of...’ to Steevens from the conjecture of Waldron. It was really first adopted by Capell from the conjecture of ‘the ingenious Dr Thirlby.’ Mr Staunton says that in line 51 F1, omits ‘it;’ but this is not the case in our copy. NOTE XII. IV. 1. 56. We have retained the reading ‘_woollen_’ as it gives a meaning not altogether absurd. In an illuminated copy of an _Office de la Vierge_ in the library of Trinity College there is a representation of a bagpipe which appears to be of sheepskin with the wool on. We incline however to think that Capell’s conjecture ‘wawling’ approaches nearest to the truth. NOTE XIII. IV. 1. 74. In the Duke of Devonshire’s copy of Heyes’s Quarto (our Q2) the passage runs thus: ‘well use question with the Woolfe, the Ewe bleake for the Lambe.’ Lord Ellesmere’s copy agrees with Capell’s _literatim_, and reads, not ‘bleat,’ as Mr Collier says, but ‘bleake.’ Mr Halliwell says that line 74, _Why...lamb_, is omitted in one copy of Heyes’s Quarto which he has seen, but that it is found in three other copies. NOTE XIV. IV. 1. 209. Warburton has claimed this conjecture in a MS. note to our edition of Theobald, but he did not adopt it in his own text. NOTE XV. IV. 1. 303. Mr Knight incorrectly says that this line is first found in the Folio of 1623. It is in all the quartos. AS YOU LIKE IT. DRAMATIS PERSONÆ[1].