TUMERARIS," Mr. J. Crossley, of Manchester, would read (rejecting Agramithist."] at dinner."] [Page 81, second column, last line: [Footnote 46: speak, would-- So the later 4tos.--2to 1604 "speake, IT would."] [Footnote 53: dicatus-- So two of the later 4tos.--2to 1604 "dicatis."] is perhaps an error of the original compositor.] "VALDES. Then haste thee to some solitary grove,"--] see p. 81, last line of sec. col. the word "Dragon") "quod TU MANDARES" (the construction being [Footnote 45: upon-- So the later 4tos.--2to 1604 "vpon't."] [Footnote 47: my dear brethren-- This repetition (not found in the later 4tos) [Footnote 48: Enter FAUSTUS to conjure-- The scene is supposed to be a grove; "surgat Mephistophilis DRAGON, quod tumeraris."--There is a EST AERIS."] [Footnote 50: Th' abbreviated-- So the later 4tos.--2to 1604 "The breuiated."] proposes "surgat Mephistophilis, per Dragon (or Dagon) quod NUMEN "quod tu mandares ut Mephistophilis appareat et surgat"): but the DR. FAUSTUS, on which this play is founded, Faustus raises [Footnote 49: anagrammatiz'd-- So the later 4tos.--2to 1604 "and "tu" does not agree with the preceding "vos."--The Revd. J. Mitford in the German tongue Spisser Wolt..... Presently, not three Mephistophilis in "a thicke wood neere to Wittenberg, called corruption here, which seems to defy emendation. For "quod [Footnote 52: surgat Mephistophilis, quod tumeraris-- The later 4tos have [Footnote 54: Re-enter Mephistophilis, &c.-- According to THE HISTORY OF [Footnote 51: erring-- i.e. wandering.]