Replies.

LEICESTER AS RANGER OF SNOWDON.

(Vol. ix., p. 125.)

In a note to Parry's Royal Visits and Progresses in Wales, p. 317., I find the following allusion to the circumstances mentioned in Elffin ap Gwyddno's Query regarding Leicester's Rangership of Snowdon, and the patriotic opposition offered to his oppressions. I regret I am unable to afford the desired information respecting the imprisonment of the Welsh gentleman in the Tower. Could not this be furnished by some of your readers who have access to public documents and records of the period? This imprisonment is not mentioned either in the account I append, or in a longer one to be found in Appendix XVI. vol. iii. of Pennant's Tour in Wales:

"Among the Welsh nobility who formed a part of her Majesty's household, were Sir Richard Bulkeley, Bart., and Mrs. Blanche Parry, both of whom seem to have been brought up in the court from their infancy, and, consequently, in great esteem with her Majesty; so much so, that the Earl of Leicester, the Queen's favourite, began to be jealous of Sir Richard: and with a view of having him removed from court, he made an attempt to have him accused, upon false evidence, of treason. With this wicked design, the Earl of Leicester informed her Majesty that the council had been examining Sir Richard Bulkeley, and that they found him a dangerous person; that he dwelt in a suspicious corner of the world, and should be committed to the Tower. 'What! Sir Richard Bulkeley!' said the Queen; 'he never intended us any harm. We have brought him up from a boy, and have had special trial of his fidelity; ye shall not commit him.' 'We have the care of your Majesty's person,' said the Earl, 'and see more and hear more of the man than you do: he is of an aspiring mind, and lives in a remote place.' 'Before God!' replied the Queen; 'we will be sworn upon the Holy Evangelists, he never intended any harm.' And then her Majesty ran to the Bible, and kissing it, said: 'You shall not commit him; we have brought him up from a boy.' Sir Richard, however, was too high-minded to suffer such an imputation to be laid to his character. He insisted on an inquiry; during which it appeared, that Lord Dudley, Earl of Leicester, had been appointed a ranger of the Royal Forest of Snowdon, which, in the Queen's time, included some portion of Merioneth and Anglesey. This nobleman's insolence to the inhabitants of the forest was more than could be brooked. He tried to bring many freeholders' estates within the boundary; juries were empannelled, but the commissioners rejected their returns as unfavourable to the Earl. Those honest jurors, however, persisted, and found a verdict for the country. But in the year 1538, he succeeded by a packed jury, who appeared in his livery, blue, with ragged staves on the sleeves; men who, after this nefarious act, were stigmatised with the title of 'The Black Jury who sold their country.' Sir Richard Bulkeley, who, with Sir William Herbert and others, superseded a prior commission, resisted this oppression with great firmness, and laid those odious grievances before the Queen, whose regard for her loyal subjects in Wales was evinced by the recalling of the first commission, by proclamation at Westminster, in 1579. The Earl being worsted, sought the life of Sir Richard by having him charged as above. But this generous and patriotic nobleman, by his excellent and manly conduct, overthrew every malevolent design of his enemy; and came out of this fiery trial as clear as the pellucid crystal of Snowdon."

R. E. G. C.

INMAN FAMILY.

(Vol. ix., p. 198.)

A Subscriber having challenged me by name to assist him in resolving his "historic doubts," I hasten to afford him what information I possess, conscious at the same time that I can add little or nothing that will materially aid him in his investigation.

First, then, as to Owen Gam. This name savours strongly of the leek, both Christian and surname being unequivocally British. Gam, in Welsh, signifies the "one-eyed;" we may conclude, therefore, that this gentleman, or one of his progenitors, had lost an eye in one of the frays common in bygone days, and so acquired the appellation of Gam. A Subscriber has omitted to give dates with his Queries, and thus leaves us in the dark as to the precise period he refers to; still, it may interest him to know that David Gam, a landed proprietor of some importance in Herefordshire, temp. Henry IV. and V., who had married the sister of Owen Glyndwr, was discovered in an attempt to assassinate his brother-in-law, the royal chieftain; and was, in consequence, arrested and confined ten years in Owen's prison at Llansaintffraid. He was afterwards released; and distinguished himself, together with some near relatives, as Pennant relates, at the battle of Agincourt, where he fell, pierced with wounds, while assisting in the rescue of his royal master King Henry. Possibly, Owen Gam may have been a descendant of this half-hero, half-assassin.

Llewellyn Clifford, again, is a name strongly suggestive of its owner's connexion with Cambria. If A Subscriber has exhausted the resources of the Clifford pedigrees, it were, I suppose, useless to refer him to the ancestry of the defunct Earls of Cumberland; and especially to that part of it represented by Sir Roger de Clifford, of Clifford, co. Hereford, a famous soldier in the days of Henry III. and Edward I. He accompanied the latter monarch in his inroads into Wales, and fell in battle there, not far from Bangor, circa 1282-3, leaving several children; one of the younger of whom I conjecture to have been the father of the before-named Llewellyn Clifford. After having subjugated the country, we can easily fancy the conquerors perpetuating the event by naming certain of their posterity after the fallen prince Llewellyn.

As for Sir William de Roas (or Ros), A Subscriber is wrong in supposing his name to have been Ingman; for although he resided at Ingmanthorpe, co. York, his surname, in common with that of a long line of ancestry and descendants, was De Ros only. He was the grandson of Robert de Ros, the founder of the two castles, Werke and Hamlake, and one of the leaders of the baronial forces in their armed opposition to the tyrant King John.

Before closing this communication, I would suggest to A Subscriber, and to all others propounding genealogical Queries, the absolute necessity of affixing dates to their inquiries in every possible instance; as nothing is easier than to go astray, sometimes for half-a-dozen generations, in fixing the identity of a solitary individual.

T. Hughes.

Chester.

ROBERT DUDLEY, EARL OF LEICESTER.

(Vol. ix., pp. 105. 160.)

That this infamous man did die of poison, is, I believe, the general opinion. The late Dr. Cooke Taylor has the following passage upon the subject, in his Romantic Biography of the Age of Elizabeth, vol. i. p. 115.:

"Nearly all the cotemporary writers assert that Leicester fell a victim to poison; Naunton declares that he, by mistake, swallowed the potion he had prepared for another person; and, as there can be no doubt that the Earl was a poisoner of great eminence and success, the story is far from being improbable. The Privy Council must have believed that his death was not natural, for they minutely investigated a report that he had been poisoned by the son of Sir James Crofts, in revenge for the imprisonment of his father. Some suspicious circumstances were elicited during the examination; but the matter was suddenly dropped, probably because an inquiry into any one of the complicated intrigues of Elizabeth's court would have involved too many persons of honour and consequence."

Drummond of Hawthornden, in his Notes of Conversations with Ben Jonson, has the following curious note:

"The Earl of Leicester gave a bottle of liquor to his lady, which he willed her to use in any faintness; which she, after his returne from Court, not knowing it was poison, gave him, and so he died."

This is a strong confirmation of the statement given by Sir Robert Naunton.

In one of the many valuable notes appended by Dr. Bliss to the Athenæ Oxonienses, is the following cotemporary narrative, copied from a MS. memoranda on a copy of Leicester's Ghost:

"The author (of the poem) hath omitted the end of the Earle, the which may thus and truely be supplied. The Countesse Lettice fell in love with Christopher Blunt, gent., of the Earle's horse; and they had many secret meetings, and much wanton familiarity; the which being discovered by the Earle, to prevent the pursuit thereof, when Generall of the Low Countreys, hee tooke Blunt with him, and theire purposed to have him made away: and for this plot there was a ruffian of Burgundy suborned, who, watching him in one night going to his lodging at the Hage, followed him and struck at his head with a halbert or battle-axe, intending to cleave his head. But the axe glaunced, and withall pared off a great piece of Blunt's skull, which was very dangerous and longe in healinge: but he recovered, and after married the Countesse; who took this soe ill, as that she, with Blunt, deliberated and resolved to dispatch the Earle. The Earle, not patient of this soe greate wrong of his wife, purposed to carry her to Kenilworth; and to leave here there untill her death by naturall or by violent means, but rather by the last. The Countesse also having a suspicion, or some secret intelligence of this treachery against her, provided artificial meanes to prevent the Earle; which was by a cordiall, the which she had no fit opportunity to offer him till he came to Cornebury Hall, in Oxfordshire; where the Earle, after his gluttonous manner, surfeiting with excessive eating and drinking, fell soe ill that he was forced to stay there. Then the deadly cordiall was propounded unto him by the Countesse; as Mr. William Haynes, sometimes the Earle's page, and then gentleman of his bed-chamber, told me, who protested hee saw her give that fatall cup to the Earle, which was his last draught, and an end of his plott against the Countesse, and of his journey, and of himselfe; and soe—Fraudis fraude sua prenditur artifex."—Athenæ Oxon., vol. ii. col. 74, 75. note.

Edward F. Rimbault.

HARDMAN'S ACCOUNT OF WATERLOO.

(Vol. viii., p. 199.; Vol. ix., p. 176.)

I perfectly recollect reading, when a boy, a critique on this poem, and being much amused thereby. The critique appeared in the Literary Gazette or Athenæum, as well as I remember. I never saw the poem, but I recollect some of the lines quoted, which went nearly as follows:—

I merely quote from memory and hope, therefore, that any deviations from the original may be pardoned.

Lieutenant (Brevet Captain) Hardman, if not a first-rate poet, is a gallant soldier, and I rejoice to see his name in the Army List for March, 1854. I cannot ascertain at what period he joined the army, but he was present at the cavalry engagements of Sahagun and Benevente, on December 20th and 27th, 1808, on the retreat of Sir John Moore's army to Coruña, for which he is decorated with a Peninsula medal. For his bravery as a non-commissioned officer he was promoted, May 19, 1813, to a cornetcy in the royal wagon train; and was transferred, August 12 following, to the 23rd Light Dragoons, and was same day appointed Regimental Adjutant of that corps. On the almost total change of officers that took place in the 10th Hussars, owing to the quarrels of Colonels Quentin and Palmer, Lieutenant Hardman succeeded Captain Bromley, on December 15, 1814, as Lieutenant and Adjutant in the corps in which he had commenced his military career; a sufficient proof of his having been a zealous, active, and efficient non-commissioned officer, when serving as such in the regiment. He embarked at Ramsgate with the service squadrons of his regiment in April, 1815, and landed at Ostend, whence the 10th regiment proceeded to Brussels: it was present at Quatre Bras, although not engaged with the enemy: and at Waterloo it behaved with the greatest gallantry, and lost two officers, nineteen soldiers, and fifty-one horses killed, in addition to six officers and twenty-six men wounded. Lieutenant Hardman's position as adjutant necessarily kept him in the vicinity of his commanding officers, Col. Quentin and Major Howard; therefore he was an eye-witness of poor Howard's death. Lieutenant Hardman received the Waterloo medal. The 10th Hussars landed at Ramsgate, from Boulogne, in January, 1816, and marched to Brighton, where Lieutenant Hardman resigned the adjutantcy, February 8, 1816, and exchanged to half-pay of the regiment, June 6, same year, since which period he has not served upon full pay.

G. L. S.

CHURCHES IN "DOMESDAY BOOK."

(Vol. viii., p. 151.)

A. W. H. says, "In the case of many parishes it is stated [in Domesday Book], that there was a church there: is it considered conclusive authority that there was not one, if it is not mentioned in Domesday Book?" This question has, I doubt not, often engaged the attention of antiquaries; and I am somewhat surprised that the Query has elicited no reply. The conclusion has often been drawn that, no church being mentioned, none existed before the survey. It would appear this conclusion has been an erroneous one. In the last volume issued by the Chetham Society (Documents relating to the Priory of Penwortham, and other Possessions in Lancashire of the Abbey of Evesham, edited by W. A. Hulton, Esq.) that point is ably discussed; and as Mr. Hulton's views on a subject of so much interest cannot but be valuable, I venture to extract them, as worthy of a place in "N. & Q." He says:

"Donations of churches with tithes are made directly after the survey of Domesday was taken. And yet that survey is entirely silent as to their existence. Similar omissions have given rise to doubts, whether the institution of our parochial economy had been carried out to its full extent previous to the Conquest, and whether we are not indebted to the Normans for its full perfection. Such doubts are unfounded.... There is nothing in Domesday to justify the doubts alluded to. A consideration of the objects of that survey will dissipate them: the purpose was principally financial. It was directed so as to obtain a correct account of the taxable property within the kingdom. And it was immaterial whether the proceeds were paid altogether to the owner, or a definite portion was diverted into other channels. Therefore those churches which were endowed only with tithes of the surrounding districts, as Eccleston and Croston, Penwortham and Leyland, in Leyland Hundred, and Rochdale and Eccles, in Salford Hundred, were unnoticed, although the two first-named churches were granted by Roger de Poictou, with their tithes and other appurtenances, to the Priory of Lancaster; and the pages of the Coucher Book of Whalley prove the two latter churches to have existed at a date perhaps anterior to the Conquest. But the case was different when a church was endowed with glebe-land. Such a church appeared in the light of a landowner, and in that character is its existence notified. Thus, in modern Lancashire, south of the Ribble, the churches of Wigan and Winwick, Childwall, Walton, Warrington, Manchester, Blackburn, and Whalley are expressly named in Domesday, but invariably in connexion with the ownership of land. It seems clear, therefore, that the silence of Domesday cannot be urged as a proof of the non-existence of a church, or of the subsequent grant of those rights and privileges by which its due efficiency is maintained."—Introd., p. xxiii.

Wm. Dobson.

Preston.

MEMOIRS OF GRAMMONT.

(Vol. viii., pp. 461. 549.; Vol. ix., pp. 3. 204.)

"Ceste noble race de Grantmont."—Brantôme.

The following are some of the principal events in the life of the Chevalier de Grammont.

He was born in the year 1621, probably at the family seat of Bidache, in Gascony.

He was sent to the college at Pau in Béarn, the nearest university to the family residence. His studies here did not much benefit him; and although intended for the church, we find him at a later period actually highly commending the Lord's Prayer, and seriously inquiring by whom it was written. On his declining a clerical life, he was sent to the French army in Piedmont in 1643. He served under his brother, the Marshal, and the Prince de Condé; and was present at the three battles of Fribourg on the 3rd, 5th, and 9th Aug. 1644; and at that of Nordlinguen on the 3rd Aug. 1645. It was at the battle of Fribourg that the Prince de Condé, having failed in his first attack on the enemy, got off horseback, and placed himself at the head of the regiment of Conti, whilst all the officers and volunteers alighted also, amongst whom is mentioned the Chevalier de Grammont; and this reassuring the soldiers, they charged the enemy, who fled into a wood under favour of the approaching night. At Nordlinguen, the Marshal de Grammont was taken prisoner, and nearly murdered by the Germans, to revenge the death of their General, the great Mercy, who was slain in the battle. The Marshal was subsequently exchanged against Gen. Gleen.

In 1647 Grammont served again under his brother and the Prince de Condé in Spain: and in 1648 he was present with them at the battle of Lens on the 20th Aug., where the Archduke Leopold and General Beck were totally defeated in Flanders.

The troubles of the Fronde now commenced; and in the first instance Grammont zealously attached himself to the prince. In Dec. 1649, he tested the accuracy of the report that it was intended to assassinate the prince by sending his own coach with the prince's liveries over the Pont Neuf, to see what would occur. The result was, the coach was fired at; but, as no one was in it, the would-be assassins did no harm. During the imprisonment of the princes, Grammont, with others, joined the Spanish army which had advanced into Picardy, in consequence of the treaty the Duchesse de Longueville and Turenne had made with the King of Spain.

We do not find when Grammont left the prince's party; the prince himself admitted it was with honour. He seems to have connected himself with Gaston, Duke of Orleans; and is styled about this time by "la Grande Mademoiselle" as one of her father's gentlemen. She also relates that when the royal forces threatened Orleans, the inhabitants sent to the duke for succour, and he sent the Count de Fiesque and Mons. de Grammont, who appeased their fears. The duke also advised his daughter to take the opinion of Fiesque and Grammont in all matters, as they had been in Orleans long enough to know what ought to be done. When Mademoiselle was trying to effect an entrance into the city, Grammont incited the inhabitants to assist in breaking open a gate, which the authorities, under fear of the royal displeasure, were afraid to direct. The gate was broken open, and she was borne in triumph along the streets.

It was probably at this period that Grammont sighed for the Countess de Fiesque (about whom he, and his nephew the Count de Guiche, quarrelled); as Mademoiselle, in her Memoirs, relates that, in the year 1656, on her interview with Christina, Queen of Sweden, she presented to her, amongst others, the Countess de Fiesque, one of her ladies of honour. The Queen observed: "The Countess de Fiesque is not so beautiful as to have made so much noise; is the Chevalier de Grammont still in love with her?"

In 1654 Grammont accompanied the Court to Peronne; where they anxiously awaited Turenne's attempt to force the Prince de Condé's lines at Arras, as related in the Memoirs.

On the 25th Nov. 1655, Madame de Sevigné writes to Bussi-Rabutin, relating an anecdote in which Grammont was a party.

Madame de Motteville relates that Queen Christina rallied the Chevalier de Grammont on the passion he had then for the Duchesse de Mercœur, one of Cardinal Mazarin's nieces; and spared him only on account of the utter hopelessness of it.

It is about this period we are inclined to place Grammont's first visit to England; where curiosity, Hamilton informs us, drew him to see so remarkable a character as Cromwell; but this visit will be a good starting-place for the next Number.

W. H. Lammin.

Fulham.

CELTIC AND LATIN LANGUAGES.

(Vol. viii., pp. 174. 280. 353.; Vol. ix., p. 14.)

"Professor F. W. Newman, in his little work entitled Regal Rome, maintains that the old languages of Italy, especially the Umbrian and Sabine, contained a striking predominance of Celtic ingredients, and he wishes to show that this is still evident even in the Latin of Cicero. His proof rests on vocabularies (pp. 19—26.), especially in regard to the military, political, and religious words which he supposes the Romans derived from the Sabines (p. 61.). With regard to these lists, I have to observe, that while all that is valid in the comparison merely gives the Indo-Germanic of the Celtic languages—a fact beyond dispute—Mr. Newman takes no pains to discriminate between the marks of an original identity of root, and those words which the Celts of Britain derived from their Roman conquerors."—Donaldson's Varronianus, p. 64.

This eminent scholar supplies sixty-two, with explanatory notes, and subjoins a list of sixty-three. Under the example "Occo, occare, to harrow," he observes:

"Persons who wish to draw subtle inferences say that all the terms of the Romans connected with agriculture may be referred to a Greek source, while the terms expressive of war and hunting are non-Hellenic. The induction fails completely in both parts, as might easily be shown. When Cæsar landed in Britain, the natives were agriculturists, densely planted. And Halley proved, that the harvest which Cæsar's soldiers reaped had ripened at the average period of a Kentish harvest in his days. Assuredly then the Britons had not the agricultural names to learn from the Romans of an after age."

"I begin," says Newman, "with the country and domestic animals, which will show how very far from the truth Niebuhr was, when he imagined that in words connected with 'the gentler pursuits of life' the Roman language has peculiarly extensive agreement with the Hellenic."

When your correspondent T. H. T. says—

"Professor Newman, in his Regal Rome, has drawn attention to the subject; but his induction does not appear sufficiently extensive to warrant any decisive conclusion respecting the position the Celtic holds as an element of the Latin,"—

he could not have known that the same writer has, in the sixth volume of the Classical Museum, continued the comparison at great length; and as that work falls into the hands of but few, I shall transcribe some passages which may throw light on the subject:

"It has for some years been recognised, at least by several English scholars, that there is a remarkable similarity between the Celtic languages and Latin. In the case of Welsh it was, I believe, at first supposed that the words must have been introduced by the Roman dominion in Britain; but when the likeness was found to exist in the Erse, and that the Erse was even more like to Latin (as regards the consonants) than the Welsh is, this idea of course fell to the ground. The scholar and physiologist, who pressed into notice the strong similarities of the Celtic to the European languages, and claimed a place for Celtic within that group, Dr. Prichard, has naturally fixed his attention with so much strength on the primitive relations of all these tongues, as to be jealous and suspicious of an argument, which alleges that the one has borrowed from the other. Some ten years ago, by his favour, I read a MS. of a vocabulary (the composition of Dr. Stratton, formerly of Aberdeen), which compared the Gaelic with the Latin tongue in alphabetical order without comment or development. From this vocabulary Prichard gives an extract in his chapter on the Italian nations, and finds it entirely to confirm his views that the Roman language has not suffered any larger admixture by a foreign action. What is or was Dr. Stratton's opinion, I never heard. His vocabulary first suggested to me the value of this inquiry, and that is all. Having now been led to a fuller examination of the Welsh and Gaelic dictionaries, I find not only a far greater abundance of material (especially in the Welsh) than I could have imagined; but also, that by grouping words aright, conclusions result such as I had not expected, and adverse to those of Dr. Prichard."

Professor Newman, as T. H. T. has observed, confined himself to a tabular view of Celtic and Latin words; but the grammatical structure and formal development of the two languages have not been overlooked in the philological literature of England. These interesting inquiries have been pursued by Dr. Prichard, in his elaborate treatise on the Eastern Origin of the Celtic Nations, and the Rev. W. D. Conybeare, (in his Theological Lectures delivered in Bristol College in 1831-33) has shown that it is by thus analysing the grammatical structure, which forms the very skeleton of languages, rather than by confining our attention to mere vocabularies, that we may best detect their true affinities, and has illustrated this doctrine by a few Welsh examples. In the West of England Archæological Journal is exhibited (I believe by the same author) the identity of verbal forms in the Welsh and Latin languages.

"The Latin language, whether from Pelasgic or Achæan influence, adopted at an early period the Hellenic grammar; and, under the skilful hands of the bilingual Ennius, became that polished interpreter of thought, which yields in regularity and majesty to the Greek alone. The Cumri either retained, which is more probable, a still more ancient, or invented a grammar, now peculiar to themselves. This, although it be simple and scientific in the highest degree, is so completely at variance with all the other grammars of the civilised world, that scholars who have to acquire it late in life feel the strongest repugnance to its forms and principles, and are tempted to regard a language more fixed and unchangeable in its principles than any other existing, as more slippery and grasp-escaping than the Proteus of the Grecian mythology."

Since I wrote these extracts, I have been much gratified by the perusal of Archdeacon Williams's Gomer, which I recommend to all interested in this inquiry.

PHOTOGRAPHIC CORRESPONDENCE.

Box Sawdust for Collodion.—The following will be of some use to your photographic readers:

I find that, by treating box sawdust with nitric and sulphuric acid (in the same manner as cotton), and then dissolving it in ether, it gives a far more sensitive collodion than either cotton or paper, and the pictures produced by it are of unequalled brilliancy.

Can you inform me whether portraits can be taken for sale, by the collodion process, without infringing upon the patents?

Chas. Whitworth.

Henrietta St., Birmingham.

Proportions of Chlorides and Silver.—I trust you will allow me space in your valuable work for some remarks in reference to an important photographic query, viz. What are the proportions of chlorides and silver uniformly suited to give the best positive pictures?

I am led to propose this subject for the consideration of practical photographists, and, if possible, that amateurs may arrive at something like a rule to guide them in printing positives that will please.

The necessity of these remarks, to me at least, appear very evident from the wide space which stands between the proportions proposed by various operators. Mr. Lyte, "N. & Q.," Vol. ix., p. 158., says 42 grains of chloride and 100 grains of silver to 1 oz. of water. Mr. Pollock, "N. &Q.," Vol. vii., p. 588., says 20 grains chloride, and 90 grains of silver to the ounce. Mr. Hockin has 10 grains chloride, silver 60. Mr. Delamotte, for albumenized paper, chloride 60 grains, silver 120. Mr. Thornthwaite begins as low as chloride ½ grain, and silver 30 grains; and lastly, amidst a long range of proportions, from 1 grain of chloride to the ounce, and silver 20 grains to the ounce, Dr. Diamond, a great authority in photography, assures all that the best results can be obtained by using of chloride 5 grains to the ounce, and of silver 40 grains to the ounce. If so, let the photographic world know that the latter proportions are sufficient, and the others needless, wasteful, and expensive without cause. I trust you agree with me in thinking that it would be of use to a large number of beginners to have the proportions best suited for printing positives defined as near as possible, and not be left to guess at proportions varying from ½ grain to 60 grains, and from 20 to 120. I have written hurriedly, and hope you will see the object I aim at.

Amateur.

Photographic Copies of Rembrandt.—The extreme rarity and great pecuniary value of many of Rembrandt's finest etchings are doubtless well known to many of our readers, as being such as to put these master-pieces of art beyond the reach of ordinary purchasers. This series of works, calculated beyond all others of their kind to delight the possessor, will however, thanks to photography, soon be obtainable by all admirers of the great master. Two distinguished French photographers, the brothers MM. Bisson, have succeeded in obtaining, by means of this wonderful art, copies of a fidelity attainable by no other process: so that the wondrous lights, shades, half-tones, and chiaro-obscuro, for which Rembrandt is so remarkable, are preserved in all their original beauty. The plates will be accompanied by descriptive letter-press, and by a Biography of Rembrandt from the pen of M. Charles Blanc. As the works are so numerous, the first series will consist of forty plates, to be issued in ten livraisons, each containing four plates, price twenty francs; a very moderate sum, if we remember that among the works thus to be issued, at a cost of five francs each, will be found copies of such gems as the Avocat Tolling and the Pièce de Cent Florins.

Coloured Photographs.—I have lately seen, and very much admired, some specimens of photographic coloured portraits. They have all the broad effect of the great masters perfectly in detail, and none of the niggling effect of many coloured photographs, which are in fact specimens of miniature painting rather than photography—the outline alone being given by the photographic art. The specimens I refer to appear to have been soaked in oil, or some transparent varnish, and then coloured in separate tints, probably from the back; the shadows being entirely photographic. It is evident they are quickly and easily executed; but I am desirous of knowing the exact process, and shall be much obliged for information on the subject.

An Amateur.