I.iii.19 (341,2) Old fools are babes again; and must be us’d/ With checks, as flatteries when they are seen abus’d] These lines hardly deserve a note, though Mr. Theobald thinks them very fine.  Whether fools or folks should be read is not worth enquiry.  The controverted line is yet in the old quarto, not as the editors represent it, but thus: 

  With checks as flatteries when they are seen abus’d.

I am in doubt whether there is any error of transcription.  The sense seems to be this:  Old men must be treated with checks, when as they are seen to be deceived with flatteries:  or, when they are weak enough to be seen abused by flatteries, they are then weak enough to be used with checks.  There is a play of the words used and abused.  To abuse is, in our author, very frequently the same as to deceive.  This construction is harsh and ungrammatical; Shakespeare perhaps thought it vicious, and chose to throw away the lines rather than correct them, nor would now thank the officiousness of his editors, who restore what they do not understand.

I.iv.118 (347,5) Would I had two coxcombs, and two daughters] Two fools caps, intended, as it seems, to mark double folly in the man that gives all to his daughters.

I.iv.133 (347,7) Lend less than thou owest] That is, do not lend all that thou hast.  To owe, in old English, is to possess.  If owe be taken for to be in debt, the more prudent precept would be, Lend more than thou owest.

I.iv.153-170 (348,9) This dialogue, from No, lad; teach me, down to, Give me an egg, was restored from the first edition by Mr. Theobald.  It is omitted in the folio, perhaps for political reasons, as it seemed to censure monopolies.

I.iv.181 (349,2) Fools ne’er had less grace in a year] There never was a time when fools were less in favour; and the reason is, that they were never so little wanted, for wise men now supply their place.  Such I think is the meaning.  The old edition has wit for grace.

I.iv.219 (350,5) That’s a sheal’d peascod] i.e.  Now a mere husk, which contains nothing.  The outside of a king remains, but all the intrinsic parts of royalty are gone:  he has nothing to give. (1773)

I.iv.245 (351,3) Whoop, Jug] There are in the fool’s speeches several passages which seem to be proverbial allusions, perhaps not now to be understood.

I.iv.256 (352,1) Fool.  Which they will make an obedient father] [This line I have restored from the quarto.  STEEVENS] This note [Tyrwhitt’s, quoted by Steevens] is written with confidence disproportionate to the conviction which it can bring.  Lear might as well know by the marks and tokens arising from sovereignty, knowledge, and reason, that he had or had not daughters, as he could know by any thing else.  But, says he, if I judge by these tokens, I find the persuasion false by which I long thought myself the father of daughters. (1773)