Volume 4 — Notes.

THE CAXTON MEMORIAL.

Few persons having a common object in view, and equally desirous of its attainment, fail in carrying it into effect. The object of "The Caxton Memorial" is obviously to do honour to the first English printer; and if a man's best monument be his own works, it will be necessary to ascertain of what they consist. It is well known that most of the works printed by Caxton were translated from the French, many doubtless by himself. The Prefaces were evidently his own, and the continuation of the Polychronicon was confessedly written by himself. The most valuable contribution to "The Caxton Coffer" would be a list of the works which it is proposed to publish as those of Caxton, with some calculation of their probable extent and cost of production. The originals being in many cases of extreme rarity, it would be necessary to transcribe fairly each work, and to collate it with the original in its progress through the press. The following enumeration of the Translations alone will give some idea of the work to be undertaken:

The Recuyell of the Historyes of Troye. (1471.)

The Game and playe of the Chesse. 1474.

Thymage, or Myrrour of the World. (1481.)

The Historye of Reynart the foxe. 1481.

The laste siege and conqueste of Jherusalem. 1481.

The Golden Legende. 1483.

The Book called Cathon. 1483.

The Book of the techynge of the Knyght of the Toure. (1484.)

The Fables of Esope, Avian, Alfonce, and Poge. 1484.

The Booke of the ordre of Chyvalry or knyghthode. (1484.)

The Lyf of Prince Charles the Grete. 1485.

The Ryal Book, or Book for a kyng. 1485.

Thystorye of the noble knyght Parys. (1485.)

The Doctrinal of Sapience. 1489.

The Book of fayttee of armes and of Chyvalrye. 1489.

A lityl treatise of the arte to knowe well to dye. 1490.

The Boke of Eneydos compyled by Vyrgyle. 1490.

The Curial of Maystre Alain Charretier. n. d.

The Lyf of the holy Vyrgyn Saynt Wenefryde. n. d.; and, lastly,

The Vitas Patrum, which was translated by Caxton in 1486, but printed by Wynkyn de Worde in 1495.

Such are some of the materials for the "Memorial" suggested by MR. BOLTON CORNEY; and if the original subscribers to a Monument should consent to such an appropriation of their funds, it will be necessary to apportion the number of copies to be distributed to each subscriber, according to the amount of the original contribution. It is to be presumed that the work will be strictly limited to subscribers, and that no copies will be printed for sale, the object being, to do honour to Caxton, and produce a lasting Memorial of that industrious printer. The form of the work is of importance, with reference to the cost of its production: and if a new life of the first English printer should perchance be found necessary, "The Caxton Coffer" will require to be considerably replenished before the literary undertaking can be carried into effect.

BERIAH BOTFIELD.

LORD STRAFFORD AND ARCHBISHOP USSHER.

In Lord Campbell's account of the conduct of Archbishop Williams, and the advice which that prelate gave to Charles I. with respect to the attainder of Lord Strafford, is a sentence which seems to require a "Note." Having observed that "Williams's conduct with respect to Strafford cannot be defended," and having referred particularly to his speech in parliament, he proceeds in these words:—

"The Bill of Attainder being passed, although he professed to disapprove of it, he agreed to go with three other prelates to try to induce the king to assent to it, and thus he stated the question:—'Since his Majesty refers his own judgment to his judges, and they are to answer it, if an innocent person suffers,—why may he not satisfy his conscience in the present matter, since competent judges in the law have awarded that they find the Earl guilty of treason, by suffering the judgment to stand, though in his own mind he is satisfied that the party convicted was not criminous?' The other three bishops, trusting to his learning and experience, joined with him in sanctioning this distinction, in laying all the blame on the judges, and in saying that the king, with a good conscience, might agree to Strafford's death. Clarendon mainly imputes Strafford's death to Williams's conduct on this occasion, saying that 'he acted his part with prodigious boldness and impiety.' It is stated as matter of palliation by others, that Ussher, the celebrated Archbishop of Armagh, was one of this deputation, and that Strafford, although aware of the advice he had given, was attended by him on the scaffold, and received from him the last consolations of religion."—Lives of the Chancellors, vol. ii. p. 494., second edition.

The account which Lord Campbell has here given is the same in substance as that given by Bishop Hackett in his Life of Williams (Part II. p. 161.), and in several particulars is calculated to mislead the reader. The whole story has been very carefully examined by the late Dr. Elrington in his Life of Archbishop Ussher. Hackett's account is very incorrect. There were five prelates consulted by the king, Ussher, Williams, Juxon, Morton (Durham) and Potter (Carlisle). The bishops had two interviews with the king, one in the morning, and the other in the evening of the same day. At the morning meeting Ussher was not present. It was Sunday, and he was engaged at the time preaching at Covent Garden. In the evening, he was in attendance, but so far from giving the advice suggested by Williams, much less approving his pernicious distinction between a public and private conscience, Ussher plainly advised the king, that if he was not satisfied of Strafford being guilty of treason, he "ought not in conscience to assent to his condemnation." Such is the account given by Dr. Parr, Ussher's chaplain, who declares, that, when the primate was supposed to be dying, he asked his Grace—

"Whether he had advised the king to pass the bill against the Earl of Strafford? To which the Primate answered: 'I know there is such a thing most wrongfully laid to my charge; for I neither gave nor approved of any such advice as that the king should assent to the bill against the Earl; but, on the contrary, told his Majesty, that if he was satisfied by what he heard at his trial, that the Earl was not guilty of treason, his Majesty ought not in conscience to consent to his condemnation. And this the king knows well enough, and can clear me if he pleases.' The hope of the Primate was fulfilled, for, when a report reached Oxford that the Primate was dead, the king expressed in very strong terms, to Colonel William Legg and Mr. Kirk, who were then in waiting, his regret at the event, speaking in high terms of his piety and learning. Some one present said, 'he believed he might be so, were it not for his persuading your Majesty to consent to the Earl of Strafford's execution;' to which the king in a great passion replied, 'that it was false, for after the bill was passed, the Archbishop came to me, saying with tears in his eyes, Oh Sir, what have you done? I fear that this act may prove a great trouble to your conscience, and pray God that your Majesty may never suffer by the signing of this bill.'"—Elrington's Life of Ussher, p. 214.

This account Dr. Elrington has taken from the narrative given by Dr. Parr, who adds, that he had received this account of the testimony borne by the king from Colonel Legg and Mr. Kirk themselves:—

"This is the substance of two certificates, taken divers times under the hands of these two gentlemen of unquestionable credit; both which, since they agree in substance, I thought fit to contract into one testimony, which I have inserted here, having the originals by me, to produce if occasion be."—Parr's Life of Ussher, p. 61.

Indeed, considering the great and uninterrupted friendship which subsisted between Ussher and Strafford, considering that the primate was his chosen friend during his trial and imprisonment, and attended him to the scaffold, nothing could be more improbable than that he should have advised the king to consent to his death. At all events, the story is contradicted by those most competent to speak to its truth, by the archbishop and by the king; and therefore, in a work so deservedly popular as Lord Campbell's, one cannot but regret that any currency should be given to a calumny so injurious to a prelate whose character is as deserving of our esteem, as his learning is of our veneration.

PEREGRINUS.

POETICAL COINCIDENCES. Sheridan.

In the account which Moore has given, in his Life of Sheridan, of the writings left unfinished by that celebrated orator and dramatist, he states:

"There also remain among his papers three acts of a drama without a name, written evidently in haste, and with scarcely any correction."

From this production he gives the following verses, to which he has appended the note I have placed immediately after them:—

"I have taken the liberty here of supplying a few rhymes and words that are wanting in the original copy of the song. The last line of all runs thus in the manuscript:—

which not rhyming as it ought, I have ventured to alter as above."

Now the following sonnet, which occurs in the third book of Sir Philip Sidney's Arcadia, is evidently the source from whence Sheridan drew his inspiration, the concluding line in both poems being the same. Had Moore given Sheridan's without alteration, the resemblance would in all probability be found much closer:—

The edition I quote from is that "Printed by W. S. for Simon Waterson, London, 1627." I may add, that I wrote to Moore as far back as 1824 to point out this singular coincidence; but although the communication was courteously acknowledged, I do not believe the circumstance has been noticed in any subsequent edition of Sheridan's memoirs.

T. C. SMITH.

FOLK LORE.

Medical Use of Pigeons (Vol. iv., p. 228.).

—In my copy of Mr. Alford's very unsatisfactory edition of Donne, I find noted (in addition to R. T.'s quotation from The Life of Mrs. Godolphin) references to Pepys's Diary, October 19, 1663, and January 21, 1667-8, and the following from Jer. Taylor, ed. Heber, vol. xii. p. 290.: "We cut living pigeons in halves, and apply them to the feet of men in fevers."

J. C. R.

Michaelmas Goose—St. Martin's Cock.

—In the county of Kilkenny, and indeed all through the S.E. counties of Ireland, the "Michaelmas Goose" is still had in honour. "St. Martin's Bird" (see p. 230. antè) is, however, the cock, whose blood is shed in honour of that saint at Martinmas, Nov. 11. The same superstition does not apply, that I am aware of, to the Michaelmas Goose, which is merely looked on as a dish customary on that day, with such as can afford it, and always accompanied by a mélange of vegetables (potatos, parsnips, cabbage, and onions) mashed together, with butter, and forming a dish termed Kailcannon. The idea is far different as to St. Martin's Cock, the blood of which is always shed sacrificially in honour of the Saint. Query, 1. The territorial extent of the latter custom? And, 2. What pagan deity has transferred his honours to St. Martin of Tours.

JAMES GRAVES.

Kilkenny.

Surrey Folk Lore.

—A "wise woman" has lately made her appearance not far from Reigate in Surrey. One of the farmers' wives there, on being scalded the other day, sent to the old dame, who sent back a curious doggrel, which the good woman was to repeat at stated times. At the end of a week the scald got well, and the good woman told us that she knew there was no harm in the charm, for "she had heard say as how it was some verse from the Bible."

When in a little shop the other day, in the same part of the country, one village dame was speaking of the death of some neighbour, when another said, that she hoped "they had been and told the bees."

In the same neighbourhood I was told a sovereign cure for the goitre was to form the sign of the cross on the neck with the hand of a corpse.

M. M. P.

THE CAXTON COFFER.

The devices of our early English printers are often void of significancy early, or else mere quibbles. In that particular, Caxton set a commendable example.

His device is "W.4.7C." The two figures, however, are interlaced, and seem to admit of two interpretations. I must cite, on this question, the famous triumvirate—Ames, Herbert, and Dibdin:

"The following mark [above described] I find put at the end of many of his books, perhaps for the date 1474, when he began printing in England, or his sign."—Joseph AMES, 1749.

"The following mark [above described] I find put at the end of many of his books, perhaps for the date 1474, when he began printing in England, or his sign."—William HERBERT, 1785.

"The figures in the large device [above described] form the reverse impression of 74; meaning, as it has been stated, that our printer commenced business in England, in the year 1474: but not much weight can be attached to this remark, as no copy of the Chess book, printed in 1474, has yet been discovered which presents us with this device."—T. F. DIBDIN, 1810.

In lieu of baseless conjectures, I have here to complain of timidity. There is scarcely room for a doubt on the date. As dom de Vaines observes, with regard to dates, "dans le bas âge on supprimoit le millième et les centaines, commençant aux dixaines." There can be no objection to the interpretation on that score. The main question therefore is, in what order should we read the interlaced figures? Now, the position of the point proves that we should read 74—which is the date of The game and playe of the chesse. The figures indicate 1474 as clearly as the letters W. C. indicate William Caxton. What is the just inference, must ever remain a matter of opinion.

In the woodcut of Arsmetrique, published in the Myrrour of the worlde, A.D. 1481, I observe the figures 74 rather conspicuously placed, and perhaps the device was then first adopted.

BOLTON CORNEY.

Minor Notes.

"They that touch pitch," &c.

—A few Sundays since the clergyman that I "sit under," quoting in his discourse the words "they that touch pitch will be defiled," ascribed them to "the wisest of men." A lady of his congregation (who was, I fear, more critical than devout) pounced upon her pastor's mistake, and asked me on the following Monday if I also had noticed it. I denied that it was one; but she laughed at my ignorance, produced a Shakspeare, and showed me the words in the mouth of Dogberry (Much Ado about Nothing, Act III. Sc. 3.). However, by the help of a "Cruden," I was able to find the same expression, not indeed in Solomon, but in the son of Sirach (ch. xiii. v. 1.).

If Shakspeare's appropriation of this passage has not been noticed before, may I request the insertion of this note? It may possibly prevent other learned divines from falling into the common (?) mistake of thus quoting Dogberry as "the wisest of men."

E. J. G.

Preston.

Pasquinade.

—In May last was placed on Pasquin's statue in Rome the following triglot epigram, of which the original Latin was borrowed from "NOTES AND QUERIES." As it is not probable that the Papal police allowed it to remain long before the eyes of the lieges of his Holiness, allow me to lay up in your pages this memorial of a visit to Rome during the "Aggression" summer.

The Italian version will of course be put down as English-Italian, and therefore worse than mediocre; but I wished to perpetuate, along with the sense of the Latin couplet, a little jeu d'esprit which I saw half obliterated on a wall at Rovigo, in the Lombardo-Venetian territory; being a play on the family name and character of Pius IX.:

which may be read,

A. B. R.

Two Attempts to show the Sound of "ough" final.—

W. J. T.