Volume 4 — Replies.

THE REVEREND RICHARD FARMER. (Vol. iv., p. 379.)

Assuming that the principal ATROCITIES of the reverend Richard Farmer are his Essay on the learning of Shakespeare, and the substance of a note on Hamlet, Act V. Sc. 2., I shall transcribe, as a hint to the lovers of manly criticism, a general character of that writer, a character of his Essay, and the note in question:—

1. "His knowledge is various, extensive, and recondite. With much seeming negligence, and perhaps in later years some real relaxation, he understands more and remembers more about common and uncommon subjects of literature, than many of those who would be thought to read all the day and meditate half the night. In quickness of apprehension and acuteness of discrimination I have not often seen his equal."—Samuel PARR.

2. "It [the Essay on the learning of Shakespeare] may in truth be pointed out as a master-piece, whether considered with a view to the sprightliness and vivacity with which it is written, the clearness of the arrangement, the force and variety of the evidence, or the compression of scattered materials into a narrow compass; materials which inferior writers would have expanded into a large volume."—Isaac REED.

3. "There's a divinity that shapes our ends, Rough-hew [them how we will.] Dr. Farmer informs me, that these words are merely technical. A wool-man, butcher, and dealer in skewers, lately observed to him, that his nephew (an idle lad), could only assist him in making them;"—'he could rough-hew them, but I was obliged to shape their ends.' [To shape the ends of wool-skewers, i.e. to point them, requires a degree of skill; any one can rough-hew them.] Whoever recollects the profession of Shakespeare's father, will admit that his son might be no stranger to such a term [such terms]. I have [frequently] seen packages of wool pinn'd up with skewers.—STEEVENS.

This note was first printed by Malone in 1780, and was reprinted by him in 1790; the portions within brackets having been added in 1793? It is clear, from this statement, that it received the deliberate revision of its author. Now, I cannot deny that Farmer related the anecdote of the wool-man—suspicious as is the character of the witness, but I contend that the observations on it should be ascribed to Steevens alone; and so I shall leave your critic A. E. B. to his own reflections.

BOLTON CORNEY.

ANGLO-CATHOLIC LIBRARY. (Vol. iv., p. 365.)

A SUBSCRIBER TO THE ANGLO-CATHOLIC LIBRARY has discovered one fault in one volume (published in 1844) of a series which now extends to sixty-three volumes; and on this one fault he builds a representation which implies, in general, incompetency in the editors, and neglect of proper supervision on the part of the committee of the Anglo-Catholic Library. I believe the character of the editions of most of the volumes sent out in this series is sufficiently known to theologians to render such a charge as this of little importance as respects their judgment. But it may not be so with many of the readers of "NOTES AND QUERIES."

The gravamen of the charge rests on the importance of a certain passage of St. Jerome bearing on the Presbyterian controversy,—on the necessity for a familiarity with that controversy in an editor of Overall's Convocation Book,—and the consequent incompetency of a person not thus familiar with it to edit that work without, not the assistance merely, but the immediate supervision of the committee.

Now the subject of episcopacy is not, as the Subscriber alleges, "the principal subject" of this Book; it occupies 30 pages out of 272: nor is a familiarity with that controversy in any special way necessary for an editor of the volume. The subjects of which the Convocation Book treats are wide and varied, and such omnigenous knowledge as a familiar acquaintance with them implies, is not, nor could be, required in any editor, nor be expected by subscribers.

The committee of the Anglo-Catholic Library undertook to publish careful reprints of the works of our old divines; and had they simply reprinted with accuracy the Convocation Book, as published in 1690, they would have fulfilled their covenant with the subscribers. They did, however, much more.

It was known that the original MS. copy of this Book was preserved at Durham. The edition of 1690 had been printed from a transcript made by Archbishop Sancroft. The committee therefore engaged the services of a gentleman whose name is well known as an accurate editor of works existing in MS.

This gentlemen obtained access to all the known MSS. of the Convocation Book; viz. 1. The original copy, and papers of alterations suggested as it passed through the Upper House, preserved at Durham. 2. A cotemporary MS. of part of the first book, also preserved at Durham. 3. Archbishop Sancroft's Transcript, preserved at Emanuel College, Cambridge and 4. A MS. of the first book belonging to Bishop Barlow, preserved at Queen's College, Oxford. These MSS. were carefully collated, and the variations, in many respects curious and interesting, were printed at the bottom of the pages, and, as regards the 4th MS., at the end of the volume. The result is a correct edition of the text of this book, with all that can be learned of its variations—the book so highly extolled by your correspondent. And I hear no objection alleged against the care and faithfulness with which this part of the work has been executed: your correspondent does not appear to be aware of anything of the kind having been done.

But the editor went still further—he not only gave the subscribers so much more than they had bargained for, he added full references to the authorities quoted in the book; and when the passages were important, he printed them in full, and even added references to works in which the arguments were more largely handled. Now these references appear to me to amount to many hundreds. They begin with Josephus, and run through Fathers, councils, schoolmen, Roman Catholic controversialists, ecclesiastical historians, and the chroniclers of the Middle Ages: and, as far as I can judge in looking over the notes, not more than three or four of these passages have been undiscovered by the editor, and he honestly says he has not found them; one of these is the unlucky place of St. Jerome, which your correspondent happens to know something about.

The remarks of your correspondent have led me to examine the book, and I refer any one who has the least regard for candour or fairness, to do the same. I would ask them to judge it as a whole, to see the number and variety of the references, and the care which has been bestowed upon them; and to say whether—because he missed one passage, and knew not its importance—the editor can be fairly charged with incompetency; or the committee of the Anglo-Catholic Library accused of neglect, in leaving the work in his hands without exercising over him such supervision as implies the reading every sheet as it passed through the press; for assistance the editor had, and amply acknowledges that he received, at the hand of the superintending editor.

ANOTHER SUBSCRIBER TO THE ANGLO-CATHOLIC LIBRARY.

GENERAL JAMES WOLFE. (Vol. iv., pp. 271. 322.)

Many letters of Wolfe's will be found published in the Naval and Military Gazette of the latter part of last and early part of this year.

By the statement of your correspondent MR. COLE, Wolfe was promoted as captain in Burrell's regiment (at present the 4th, or king's own) in 1744. Now Burrell's regiment took the left of the first line at Culloden, so that James Wolfe, unless absent on leave, or employed on particular duty, must have been in that action. The left of the second line was occupied by "Colonel Wolfe's" regiment (now the 8th or "king's"). See the "Rebellion of 1745," by Robert Chambers, in Constable's Miscellany, vol. xvi. p. 86. Captains of nineteen were common enough at that period, but Wolfe is the only one whose name has excited attention.

As to Wolfe's having been "the youngest general ever intrusted with such a responsible command" as that at Quebec, your correspondent surely forgets Napoleon in modern, and the Black Prince in more remote times.

I have seen at Mr. Scott's, of Cahircon, in the co. Clare, an engraving of Wolfe: he is designated as the "Hero of Louisburgh," and is represented with his right to the spectator, the right hand and arm raised as if enforcing an order. The features are small, the nose rather "cocked," and the face conveys the idea of spirit and determination; he wears a very small three-cocked hat, with a plain black cockade, a sort of frock coat reaching to the knees, where it is met by long boots; there are no epaulets, a twist belt confines the coat, and supports a cartouche-box in front, and a bayonet at the right side, and he carries a fusil slung from his right shoulder "en bandouillière."

It is said that the father of Wolfe was an Irishman, and I have been shown in the co. Wicklow the farm on which it is said that James Wolfe was born. It lies near Newtown-Mount-Kennedy. Be that as it may, the name has been made celebrated in Ireland within the last half century by three individuals: first, the Lord Kilwarden, who was murdered during Emmett's rising in 1803; secondly, the late Chief Baron, who spelt his name "with a difference;" and last, not least, the author of the celebrated lines on the "Burial of Sir John Moore."

KERRIENSIS.

PUNISHMENT OF EDWARD OF CAERNARVON BY HIS FATHER.—CHARACTER OF EDWARD I. (Vol. iv., p. 338.)

I think considerable light is thrown upon this very remarkable incident by a letter of the prince himself to the Earl of Lincoln, dated Midhurst, June 14, which appears upon the Roll of that prince's letters lately discovered at the Chapter House, Westminster. (See Ninth Report of the Deputy Keeper of the Public Records, App. II., No. 5.) This letter has been printed in one of the volumes of the Sussex Archæological Society, having been written from that county. For such of your readers as may not have either of these books at command, I will give the material part of the letter, translated:

"On Sunday, the 13th of June, we came to Midhurst, where we found the lord the king, our father; the Monday following, on account of certain words which, it had been reported to the king, had taken place between us and the Bishop of Chester, he was so enraged with us that he has forbidden us, or any of our retinue, to dare to enter his house; and he has forbidden all the people of his household and of the exchequer to give or lend us anything for the support of our household. We are staying at Midhurst to wait his pleasure and favour, and we shall follow after him as well as we are able, at a distance of ten or twelve miles from his house, until we have been able to recover his good will, which we very much desire."

The roll contains several letters which show how seriously the prince was affected by his father's displeasure, and how the king was appeased.

By the letter above quoted, the "minister" appears to have been the Bishop of Chester, then treasurer of the royal household. But the connexion between the prince's case and that of William de Brewosa does not appear, unless they were on intimate terms, as is not improbable: and the punishment of the prince himself is, in my opinion, referred to as a precedent or justification of the punishment imposed upon Brewes. That the severe punishment so imposed was richly deserved none can doubt who has read the report on the Roll: but an unfortunate error in the press[2] makes it appear that the prince, and not De Brewes, was the culprit, and performed the penance.

To return to the prince's offence and punishment. He appears to have been nearly starved into submission, as the royal prohibition against supplying him with articles or money was obliged to be removed by a Letter Close directed to all the sheriffs, dated Ospring, 22nd July.

The whole transaction is highly characteristic of the firmness of the king. Whether the prince's letters which I have referred to make out a case of harshness, as regards some other circumstances, I will not now trouble you with. But while examining cotemporary documents illustrative of the prince and his correspondents, I met with an entry upon the Close Roll (33 Edw. I.) too strikingly illustrative of the determination and caution of Edward I. to be allowed to remain in its present obscurity.

On the 27th November the prince addressed a letter to Master Gerard de Pecoraria, earnestly begging him to favour and forward the affairs of Ralph de Baldok, then Bishop Elect of London. The "affairs" in question were the removal of certain scruples instilled into the Papal ear against the approval of the bishop elect; a matter generally involving some diplomacy and much money. Master Gerard was employed by the Pope to collect various dues in England; and so his good will was worth obtaining. But the following Letter Close will show how he received his "quietus," as far as the King of England was concerned:

"The King to Ralph de Sandwich.—By reason of the excessive and indecent presumption with which Gerard de Pecoraria is making oppressive levies and collections of money in various places; by whose authority we know not, for he will not show it; and inasmuch as the same is highly derogatory to our crown, and injurious to our people, and many complaints have been made against him on that account; We command you to take the said Gerard before the Mayor and Sheriffs of London, and there warn him to cease from making the said levies, and to quit the kingdom in six days, provided that at such warning no public notary be present, so that the warning be given to the said Gerard alone, no one else hearing. And be you careful that no one but yourself see this letter, or get a copy thereof."

Who can doubt that such a mandate was strictly carried out?

I regret that my memoranda do not preserve the original language.

JOSEPH BURTT.

MR. GIBSON will find that this story, as well as that relative to Sir William Gascoigne, is also told by MR. FOSS (Judges of England, vol. iii. pp. 43. 261.), who suggests that the offence committed by Prince Edward was an insult to Walter de Langton, Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, occasioned probably by the boldness with which that prelate, while treasurer, corrected the insolence of Peter de Gaveston, and restrained the Prince's extravagance. (Ibid. p. 114.)

R. S. V. P.

ELIZABETH JOCELINE'S LEGACY TO AN UNBORNE CHILD. (Vol. iv., p. 367.)

Your correspondent J. M. G., whose letter is inserted in your 106th Number, labours under various mistakes relating to this small volume. The first edition was not printed in 1684, but more than sixty years earlier. Moreover, that edition, or at least what the Rev. C. H. Craufurd appended to his Sermons in 1840 as a reprint, is not a genuine or faithful republication of the original work. I have for several years possessed a copy of the third impression, Printed at "London, by Iohn Hauiland, for Hanna Barres, 1625;" and of this third impression a fac-simile reprint has passed through the press of Messrs. Blackwood in Edinburgh, which new edition corresponds literatim et verbatim (line for line and page for page) with the earliest impression known to exist, which differs materially in several passages from the reprint published by Mr. Craufurd. This new edition is accompanied by a long preface or dissertation containing many particulars relating to the authoress and her relatives, and to a number of ladies of high station and polished education, who during the period intervening between the Reformation in England and the Revolution in 1688, distinguished themselves by publishing works characterized by exalted piety and refined taste. With regard to Mrs. Joceline, no printed work appears to have preserved correct information. Genealogists seem to have conspired to change her Christian name from Elizabeth to Mary or Jane. The husband is supposed to have sprung from an old Cambridgeshire family, the Joscelyns of Hogington, now called Oakington, the name of a parish adjoining to Cottenham. The writer of the preface seems rather disposed to trace his parentage to John Joscelyn (Archbishop Parker's chaplain), who, according to Strype, was an Essex man.

But I have probably exceeded the bounds allotted to an answer to a Query.

J. L.

Edinburgh.

The Mother's Legacy to her unborne Child is reprinted for the benefit of the Troubridge National Schools, and can be procured at Hatchard's, Piccadilly.

J. S.

Replies to Minor Queries.

Coleridge's "Christabel" (Vol. iv., p. 316.).

—I am not familiar with the Coleridge Papers, under that title, nor indeed am I quite sure that I know at all to what papers MR. MORTIMER COLLINS refers in his question. On this account I am not qualified, as he will perhaps think, to give an opinion upon the genuineness of the lines quoted as a continuation of "Christabel." If I may be allowed, however, to hazard a judgment, as one to whom most of the great poet-philosopher's works have long and affectionately been known, I would venture to express an opinion against the right of these lines to admission as one of his productions. I do it with diffidence; but with the hope that I may aid in eliciting the truth concerning them.

I presume "brookless plash" is a misprint for "brooklet's plash."

The expressions "the sorrow of human years," "wild despair," "the years of life below," of a person who is not yet dead and in heaven, do not seem to me, as they stand in the lines, to be in Coleridge's manner; but especially I do not think the couplet—

is one which Coleridge would have penned, reading as I do in the Aids to Reflection, vol. i. p. 255. (edit. Pickering, 1843) his protest against the doctrine

"holden by more than one of these divines, that the agonies suffered by Christ were equal in amount to the sum total of the torments of all mankind here and hereafter, or to the infinite debt which in an endless succession of instalments we should have been paying to the divine justice, had it not been paid in full by the Son of God incarnate!"

There are one or two other expressions of which I entertain doubt, but not in sufficient degree to make it worth while to dwell upon them.

Are we ever likely to receive from any member of Coleridge's family, or from his friend Mr. J. H. Green, the fragments, if not the entire work, of his Logosophia? We can ill afford to lose a work the conception of which engrossed much of his thoughts, if I am rightly informed, towards the close of his life.

THEOPHYLACT.

Dryden—Illustrations by T. Holt White (Vol. iv., p. 294.).

—My father's notes on Dryden are in my possession. Sir Walter Scott never saw them. The words ÆGROTUS attributes to Sir Walter were used by another commentator on Dryden some thirty years since.

ALGERNON HOLT WHITE.

Lofcop, Meaning of (Vol. i., p. 319.).

—Lofcop, not loscop, is clearly the true reading of the word about which I inquired. Lovecope is the form in which it is written in the Lynn town-books, as well as in the Cinque-port charters, for a reference to which I have to thank your correspondent L. B. L. (Vol. i., p. 371.). I am now satisfied that it is an altered form of the word lahcop, which occurs in the laws of Ethelred, and is explained in Thorpe's Ancient Laws and Institutes of England, vol. i., p. 294., note. The word loveday, which is found in English Middle-Age writers, meaning "a day appointed for settling differences by arbitration," is an instance of a similar change. This must originally have been lah-dæg, though I am not aware that the word is met with in any Anglo-Saxon documents. But in Old-Norse is found Lögdagr, altered in modern Danish into Lavdag or Lovdag.

C. W. G.

Middleton's Epigrams and Satyres, 1608 (Vol. iv., p. 272.).

—These Epigrams, about which QUÆSO inquires, are not the production of Thomas Middleton the dramatist, but of "Richard Middleton of Yorke, gentleman." The only copy known to exist is among the curious collection of books presented by the poet Drummond to the University of Edinburgh. A careful reprint, limited to forty copies, was published at Edinburgh in 1840. It is said to have been done under the superintendance of James Maidment, Esq.

EDWARD F. RIMBAULT.

Lord Edward Fitzgerald (Vol. iv., p. 173.).

—Your correspondent R. H. was misinformed as to the house of Lord Edward Fitzgerald at Harold's Cross, from the fact of his friend confounding that nobleman with another of the United Irishmen leaders; namely, Robert Emmett, who was arrested in the house alluded to. Lord Edward never lived at Harold's Cross, either in avowed residence or concealment.

R. H.'s note above referred to, provoked the communication of L. M. M. at Vol. iv., p. 230., who seems to cast a slur upon the Leinster family for neglecting the decent burial of their chivalric relative. This is not merited. The family was kept in complete ignorance as to how the body was disposed of, it being the wish of the government of the day to conceal the place of its sepulture; as is evident from their not interring it at St. Michan's, where they interred Oliver Bond and all the others whom they put to death at Newgate; and from the notoriety of their having five years later adopted a similar course with regard to the remains of Robert Emmett. (See Madden's Life of Emmett.) But is he buried at St. Werburgh's? Several, and among others his daughter, Lady Campbell, as appears from L. M. M.'s note, think that he is. I doubt it. Some years since I conversed with an old man named Hammet, the superannuated gravedigger of St. Catherine's, Dublin, and he told me that he officiated at Lord Edward's obsequies in St. Catherine's church, and that they were performed at night in silence, secrecy, and mystery.

E. J. W.

Earwig (Vol. iv., p. 274.).

—I do not know what the derivations of this word may be, which are referred to by ΑΞΩΝ as being in vogue. It is a curious fact that Johnson, Richardson, and Webster do not notice the word at all; although I am not aware that it is of limited or provincial use. In Bailey's Scottish Dictionary, and in Skinner's Etymologicon, it is traced to the Anglo-Saxon ear-wicga, i.e. ear-beetle. In Bosworth's Dictionary we find wicga, a kind of insect, a shorn-bug, a beetle.

C. W. G.

Sanderson and Taylor (Vol. iv., p. 293.).

—In No. 103 of "NOTES AND QUERIES," under the head of "Sanderson and Taylor," a question is put by W. W. as to the common source of the sentence, "Conscience is the brightness and splendour of the eternal light, a spotless mirror of the Divine majesty, and the image of the goodness of God." Without at all saying that it is the common source, I would beg to refer W. W. to "The Wisdom of Solomon," c. vii. v. 26., where "wisdom" is described as "the brightness of the everlasting light, the unspotted mirror of the power of God, and the image of His goodness." The coincidence is curious, though the Latin expressions are dissimilar, the verse in "The Wisdom of Solomon" being as follows: "Nam splendor est à luce æterna et speculum efficacitatis Dei expers maculæ, ac imago bonitatis ejus."

R. M. M. (A Subscriber).

Taunton.

Island of Ægina and the Temple of Jupiter Panhellinius (Vol. iv., p. 255.).

—In Lemprière's Classical Dict., by the Rev. J. A. Giles, 1843, is the subjoined:—

"The most remarkable remnant of antiquity at the present day is the temple of 'Jupiter Panhellinius' on a mount of the same name about four hours' distance from the port, supposed to be one of the most ancient temples in Greece, and the oldest specimen of Doric architecture; Dodwell pronounces it to be the most picturesque ruin in Greece."

And in Arrowsmith's Compendium of Ancient and Modern Geography, 1839, p. 414.:

"In the southern part of the island is Panhellinius Mons, so called from a temple of Jupiter Panhellinius, erected on its summit by Æacus."

C. W. MARKHAM.

The Broad Arrow (Vol. iv., p. 315.).

—I forget where it is, but remember something about a place held by the tenure of presenting the king with

I would however suggest, that the use of an arrow-head as a government mark may have a Celtic origin; and that the so-called arrow may be the ↑ or â, the broad a of the Druids. This letter was typical of superiority either in rank and authority, intellect or holiness; and I believe stood also for king or prince.

A. C. M.

Exeter, Nov. 4. 1851.

Consecration of Bishops in Sweden (Vol. iv., p. 345.).

—E. H. A. asks whether any record exists of the consecration of Bethvid, Bishop of Strengnäs in the time of Gustavus I., King of Sweden? I cannot reply from this place with the certainty I might be able to do, if I had access to my books and papers. But I may venture to state, that the "consecration" (if by that term be meant the canonical and apostolical ordination) of Bethvidus Sermonis, in common with that of all the Lutheran Bishops of Sweden, is involved in much doubt and obscurity; the fact being, that they all derive their orders from Petrus Magni, Bishop of Westeras, who is said to have been "consecrated" bishop of that see at Rome by a cardinal in A.D. 1524, the then Pontiff having acceded to the request of Gustavus Vasa to this effect. It is, however, uncertain whether Petrus Magni ever received proper episcopal consecration, although it appears probable he did. I endeavoured at one time to ascertain the fact by reference to Rome; but though promised by my correspondent (a British Romanist resident there) that he would procure the examination of the Roll of Bishops in communion with the Holy See, and consecrated by Papal license, for the purpose of discovering whether Bishop Petrus Magni's name occurred therein or not, I never heard more of the subject. I could not help judging, that this silence on the part of my correspondent (to whom I was personally unknown), after his having replied immediately and most civilly to my first communication, was very eloquent and significant. But still the doubt remains uncleared, as to whether the Swedish episcopacy possess or not, as they maintain they do, the blessing of an apostolical and canonical succession.

G. J. R. G.

Pen-y-lau, Ruabon.

Meaning of Spon (Vol. iv., p. 39.).

—Is the word spooney derived from the Anglo-Saxon spanan, spón, asponen, to allure, entice, and therefore equivalent to one allured, trapped, &c., a gowk or simpleton? If C. H. B. could discover whether those specified places were ever at any time tenanted by objectionable characters, this verb and its derivatives might assist his inquiries. He will, however, see that Spondon (pronounced spoondon) in Derbyshire is another instance of the word he inquires after.

THOS. LAWRENCE.

Ashby-de-la-Zouch.

Quaker Expurgated Bible (Vol. iv., p. 87.).

—I can inform the correspondent who inquires whether such a publication of a Bible, which a committee of Friends were intending to publish, ever took place, that no committee was ever appointed by the Society of Friends, who adopt the English authorised version only, as may be seen by their yearly epistle and other authorised publications. I have inquired of many Friends who were likely to know, and not one ever heard of what the authoress of Quakerism states.

A MEMBER OF THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS.

Cozens the Painter (Vol. iv., p. 368.).

—In Rose's Biographical Dictionary it is stated that Alexander Cozens was a landscape painter, born in Russia, but attaining his celebrity in London, where he taught drawing. In 1778 he published a theoretical work called The Principle of Beauty relative to the Human Face, with illustrations, engraved by Bartolozzi. He died in 1786.

J. O'G.

Authors of the Homilies (Vol. iv., p. 346.).

—Allow me to say that in the reply to the inquiry of G. R. C. one work is omitted which will afford at once all that is wanted: for the Preface to Professor Corrie's recent edition of the Homilies, printed at the Pitt Press, contains the most circumstantial account of their authors.

W. K. C.

College, Ely.