« EelmineJätka »
to the name of Jarndyce. It is currently believed that Charles Dickens took his idea of ‘Bleak House’ from a deserted mansion at Acton, in Suffolk, the former residence of an eccentric miser
named Jennens, who died intestate in 1798, when
his vast estate “fell into Chancery,” and has originated several law suits. This gentleman, William Jennens, however, did make an inadequate testament, constituting his wife (who, however, predeceased him) life tenant of all his estates; but he appointed no executors, no reversionary heir to his wife's life interest, nor did he dispose of one farthing of his vast personalty. This virtual intestacy was solved by two of his oldest surviving relatives, called “cousins german once removed,” and next of kin, who administered; he had no child, nephew, niece, brother, sister, uncle, or aunt surviving, having, at the great age of ninety-seven, outlived all immediate relatives. His property was thus divided or appropriated strictly according to statute; the heir-at-law was found to be the first Earl Howe, great-great-grandson of Charles Jennens, of Gopsal, eldest uncle of the deceased, who thus took the real estate. The personalty was divided among the descendants of Lady Fisher and Mrs. Hanmer, two aunts of the deceased. It is said that this cause, last disposed of on March 5, 1878, is about to be revived ; hence this note. A. HALL.
Mr. Parker's ‘History of Wycombe’ that this weighing business was continued up to the passing of the Municipal Corporations Act:—
“After partaking of luncheon, the Mayor and Council attended at the Bar Iron Warehouse in White Hart Street, when each member of the Council was weighed, and his weight was duly recorded. Such was the order of proceedings, during the past generations, but how far back the practice thus described originated it would be difficult to determine; however we may assume that it was of remote antiquity.”
R. J. FYNMoRE.
THE AGE of ALExANDER THE GREAT.-If Alexander's dates are 356–323 B.C., as stated by his biographers, then he was only thirty-three at his death. In “Tristram and Iseult, part iii., Matthew Arnold, with a poet's freedom of touch, gives the age as thirty-five :— Prince Alexander, Philip's peerless son, Who carried the great war from Macedon Into the Soudan's realm, and thundered on To die at thirty-five in Babylon. THoMAs BAYNE, Helensburgh, N.B.
‘SIMPLE SIMon.”—In my childhood I learnt the nursery rhyme of ‘Simple Simon,’ but it had been long out of my mind until a few days ago, when I was reading one of Francesco Sansovino's ‘Novelle’ (ix. 8), written about the middle of the sixteenth century. A gentleman, Messer Simon della Pigna, loving neither wisely nor well, is beguiled by the object of his unwelcome attentions into a sack, and there treated by the lady's husband, who has planned the affair with her, as Scapin treats Géronte in the ‘Fourberies,’ but far more vigorously as well as for a different end. Previously to this, Simon questions the lady about something which awakens suspicion in his mind, and is answered with a gross falsehood ; whereupon the novelist observes: “Messer Simon, who might well be called Simpleton (Scempione), believing what the lady told him to be true, made himself easy.” Simon, then, has been a simpleton (scempione means a gross simpleton) for nearly 350 years, on the evidence of the above story. Why? F. ADAMs.
105, Albany Road, Camberwell, S.E.
GELERT IN INDIA.—A writer in the Pioneer Mail of Allahabad (Aug. 3, 1892) gives the following analogue of the folk-story best known to us in its Welsh form of “Beddgelert” (“Gellert's Grave'):
“The Banjaras occasionally keep dogs, and it was, we believe, a Banjara dog which gave rise to the Bethgelert legend of India. The story comes from at least half a dozen different parts of India, the substance being identical though the localities differ. This is how it runs :
“Once upon a time a poor man owed a large sum of money to a Baniya; and as he could pay nothing the Baniya came to seize his property, but found all that he had was a dog. “Well,” said the Baniya, ‘since you have
nothing else, I will take the dog; he will help to watch my house.' 'So the poor man took a tender farewell of his four-footed friend, with many injunctions to serve his new master faithfully, and never to attempt to run home. Some time after the dog got to his new home, thieves broke into the house and took all they could find. Though the dog barked as loudly as he could, yet the Baniya snored on peacefully, and so, seeing the thieves dis. appearing with their booty, he followed them, and saw them hiding their treasure in holes dug in the dry bed of a mala. He then ran home and never stopped barking until his master woke up. The Baniya was frantic with grief on discovering his loss, and was about to wreak his vengeance on the dog, but, attracted by his strange behaviour, he determined to watch him instead. The dog at once led the way to the nala, and began scratching at the hole, and very soon the stolen wealth was again in possession of its lawful owner. The Baniya's delight on recovering his property was so great that he wrote on a paper, “Your dog has paid your debt,' and fastening this to the dog's collar he bade him return to his old master, and the faithful dog, full of joy, trotted off as hard as he could go. His old master, as it happened, just about this time began to long for a sight of his dog, and determined to go and see how he was getting on. When half way on his journey, he saw the dog running towards him. He drew his sword and awaited his approach, and as the dog, with a little whimper of joy, sprang forward to caress him, he cut off his head with the sword, crying out, “Thou disobedient dog 1 Pay the penalty of deserting thy post.” Then too late he saw the note attached to his dead friend's neck, and was seized with such remorse that he fell upon his sword and died. The man and dog are buried in one grave, and any one travelling to Haidarabad may still see the grave by the roadside.”
It is interesting to note the varied forms which this story has taken. WILLIAM E. A. Axon.
CHURCH BRAsses.—I have read with much interest the remarks by Mr. T. W. King, Rouge Dragon, in the part of the Essez Archaeological Transactions just issued. He very properly objects to the wholesale destruction of brasses in churches which has taken place in recent years, and he also objects, but whether with equal propriety may be a question, to the custom of removing brasses with the slabs in which they are embedded from the floors of churches and placing them upright against the walls. Now, I happen to be the patron and lay rector of a small parish in Surrey. In the chancel within the communion rails are very fine brasses (late fifteenth century) of a man and woman and several children. The slab in which they are embedded is much worn and decayed, and the brasses are in places at least one-eighth of an inch above the slab, and parts of the figures of the children have already been broken off. Every time the vicar goes to the communion-table (the brasses are on the north side) he treads on them, and there is a danger of breaking off more pieces. I am willing to put the chancel of the church in such a state of repair, ornamental and otherwise, as may befit the sacred character of the place, and also the architecture of the church. But there are only three ways of
dealing with them: (1) by leaving them as they are, with the risk of further damage; (2) by tak. ing up the slab as it is, and putting it upright against the chancel wall; (3) by embedding the brasses in a new slab of stone or marble. I am told, on good authority, that the third alternative will be an act of vandalism. There are other brasses in the chancel, but they are, fortunately, nearly covered by carpets, and, besides, are not on the north side of the table. , Perhaps some of your readers would say what ought to be done. J. W.
FIRST THEATRE Royal IN THE PRovinces. Writes Mr. Belville S. Penley, at p. 35 of his recently published work on ‘The Bath Stage’:—
“Another and more important step taken by Palmer to defeat o was to petition Parliament for an Act to enable the King to grant him a patent. The only patent houses in existence at that time were Drury Lane and Covent, Garden, and no new letters patent could be granted by the King without the sanction of Parliament. To the younger Palmer was entrusted the task of securing the necessary Act, which was warmly supported by the Mayor and Corporation of the city. Surmounting the many difficulties which lay in the way of his undertaking, he succeeded in getting it passed, and in 1768 his Majesty George III. granted letters patent, under which the Bath Theatre obtained the title of ‘Theatre Royal.' ...This was the first Act ever passed in this country for the protection of theatrical property, and the Bath Theatre was the first Theatre Royal of the provinces.” Precise and circumstantial as all this reads, the premier distinction claimed for Bath seems to me, as the Scotch say, “not proven.” Mr. J. C. Dibdin has already shown us, in ‘The Annals of the Edinburgh Stage” (p. 147), that a company acted ‘The Earl of Essex’ under a royal patent at the old theatre in the Caledonian capital on December 9, 1767. This was the first legally performed play in Scotland. In all fairness, it must be conceded Mr. Penley that the first temple of Thespis north of the Tweed honoured with the title of “Theatre Royal" did not open its doors to the public until exactly two years after the date mentioned. But the fact that the Edinburgh patent was in existence so early as the year 1767—unless his data be incorrectly marshalled— to my mind puts the Bath annalist out of court.
W. J. LAwRENCE.
BERKshire WILLAGES IN “KENIlworth.”— When “Kenilworth’ comes out with notes, some remarks are due upon the villages mentioned in course of talk in Giles Gosling's hostelry. Sir Walter has collected the Berkshire village names with great care. Were they supplied to him by a local correspondent Wootton, Bessesley (now known as Besselsleigh), Padworth, and Drysandford (more properly written Dry Sandford, and so named in distinction from Sandford on Thames, on the opposite shore) are all familiar names. But “Prance of Padworth" should not have been hanged at Oxford Castle. His offence, if committed at home, would have been expiated at Reading. Edward H. MARSHALL, M.A., , Hastings. Jyosovo. Jo — to 2, u/, HAYDN’s “DictionARY of DATEs’ AND AstroNoMY.—Whilst willingly bearing my testimony to the general care with which astronomical information is brought up to date in the new (twentieth) edition of this valuable and well-known work —even the discovery of Jupiter's fifth satellite, in September last, being mentioned—I should like to point out two errors, that the readers of ‘N. & Q.’ may follow Captain Cuttle's advice, and “make a note” of each of them in their copies. 1. At p. 860, under “Saturn,” we are told that the ring surrounding that planet was “discovered to be twofold by Messrs. Ball, Oct. 13, 1665.” This statement was formerly made in many astronomical books, apparently for the first time in one on telescopes by William Kitchiner, in 1825. Doubt was first thrown upon it by myself in 1880, in a letter to the Observatory, in which I pointed out that it was founded upon a remark in the Philosophical Transactions for 1666, with reference to an omitted drawing which it was desirable to find that the true meaning of the suggestion (for it was no more) might be understood. This led to search, and a few copies of the Transactions were at last found containing the engraving, which had been suppressed in the greater number. Afterwards the late Prof. Adams discovered in the archives of the Royal Society the actual drawing, or rather paper cutting, made by William Ball in 1665, which led Sir Robert Moray, who wrote the notice respecting it in the Philosophical Transactions, to suspect that the ring was double. This conjectured duplicity, however, was of a totally different kind from a division in the breadth of the ring (which was first discovered by Cassini ten years later), and has no real existence, the appearance being due either to an indistinct view of the planet, or (as Prof. Adams suggested) to the folding of the paper with which the cutting was made. 2. At p. 1029, under “Uranus,” we are told that that planet is attended by eight moons or satellites, six of which were discovered by Sir William Herschel. The whole number really known amounts to only four, two of which (afterwards named Titania and Oberon) were discovered by Herschel in 1787, and two (called Ariel and Umbriel) by Lassell and O. Struve respectively in 1847. Herschel was mistaken in supposing that he had discovered four more, the objects seen having been probably very faint stars seen near the planet, though unsuccessful attempts have been made to identify one or other of them with the satellites
“BRoueTTE.”—Théophile Gautier, in the “Wersailles” chapter, section iv. of his ‘Tableaux de Siége,’ says:—
“Le frontispice d'un petit livre du temps, que nous consultons pour faire cet article, nous fournitun curieux détail de moeurs: Une jeune dame franchit la grille du Labyrinthe, trainée en brouette par un vigoureux porteur. ......L'usage de la brouette était d'ailleurs fréquent sous Louis XIV. et la course promenait dans le jardin voituree fort commodément de la sorte.”
I do not clearly understand what is meant by brouette here. The primary meaning of brouette is wheelbarrow ; but it also means a “Bath-chair” (Gasc and Spiers), and a “sort of sedan-chair" (Roubaud). I can scarcely suppose that the magnificent courtiers of Louis Quatorze were in the habit of “taking the air” in the immortal conveyance in which Mr. Pickwick went to the shooting party. “A female markis,” as Sam Weller says, with her falbalas and vertugadin, trundling about the grounds of Versailles in a wheelbarrow would have been a sight for gods and men . On the other hand, if the brouette in which the “jeune dame” was “voituree" was either a sedan-chair or what we call a Bath-chair, so ordinary a circumstance would hardly be worth mentioning, and would not be “un curieux détail de moeurs,” as Gautier calls it. Gautier uses the word trainée, which favours the “Bath-chair” meaning; a wheelbarrow would, I suppose, be poussée. Sedan-chairs must have been common enough at that period. See the scene of Mascarille and the chairmen in “Les Précieuses Ridicules.” A sedan-chair, however, would be neither tražnée nor poussée, but portée. Were what we call Bath-chairs known in either France or England in the seventeenth century?
Are not wheelbarrows used at the present da as a means of personal conveyance in China Ż
do not mean the “cany waggons light” which discover its origin or exact meaning, I venture to “ Chineses drive with sails and wind," described hope one of your readers may be able to help me. by Milton in Paradise Lost,' but actual wheel. See chapter lii. : “You must bave a great deal of barrows like our own. JONATHAN BOUCHIER. Shillam eidri, nevertheless you startled me when Ropley, Alresford.
you asked,” &c.
J. PLATT, Jun.
RICHARD SMITH.-I am desirous of obtaining Derrybrosk (Derrybrusk), in county Fermanagb,
any information about this person, who is the ancestor of Montgomery of Blessingbourne, and of Archdale of Castle Archdale, was a member of
author of the following book, published by Robert the Braidstane branch of the family of Montgomerie
Dexter (4to., 1691):of Eglinton, in Scotland. (See Hill's 'Montgomery
“The Trial of Truetb, a Treatise wherein is declared
who should be Judge betwene the Reformed Churches MSS.,' pp. 99 and 389; Burke's 'Hist. of the
and the Romish, in which is showed that neither Pope Commoners,' vol. ii. p. 108; Lodge's Peerage of nor Councils nor Fathers nor Traditions nor Succession Ireland,' 1754, vol. ii., note to article on Earl of nor Consent nor Antiquitie of Costumes but the only Mount Alexander. &c.). According to Paterson's written Worde of God ought to determine the Con
troversies of Reli History of the County of Ayr' (ed. 1847, vol. i. trov
T. CANN HUGHES, M.A. p. 280), this Hugh Montgomery was the son of the
The Groves, Chester. fourth son (Dame unknown) of Adam John Montgomery, Laird of Braidstane, grandfather of Sir PAGANINI'S PaysIC : LEROY.—Mr. Haweis, in Hugh Montgomery, first Viscount Montgomery of his interesting account of Pagapini ( My Musical Ards. Can the name of this fourth son of Adam
Life,' second edition, 1888, p. 292), says :John Montgomery be ascertained ; or was Hugh
"Paganini seldom consulted doctors, but his credulity of Derry brusk himself Adam John Mootgomery's was worse than his scepticism. He dosed himself imson, and not his grandson ? I may mention that moderately with some stuff called “Leroy'; he believed in the Montgomery pedigree, printed in Mr. J. H. that this could cure anything. It usually produced a Montgomery's book (Philadelphia, 1863), and in powerful agitation in his nervous system, and generally
ended in upsetting the intestinal functions. Sometimes the history by General George S. Montgomery,
Montgomery, it seems to have deprived him of the power of speecb." C.S.I., Derry brosk is misprinted Donnybrook.
Is it known what this staff was ?
"Wirgin.”—Is this word known in East referring to Dodd, who had been chorister in St. Anglia ? I cannot find it in any of the publisbed Paul's Cathedral, speaks of “a surplice—bis white
glossaries ; but I have a note, made some twelve stole and albe," as if such garments might have years ago, from the report of a lady whom I met, been worn by him in that capacity. In the twenty
that a Yarmouth boatman once remarked to her, first century perhaps some historian of the post
" Your father, the admiral, was a regular old Tractarian movement called Ritualism might be wiggin" (? =“sea-dog" or "salt"). led into antedating it, if he trusted to Lamb as
A. SMYTHE PALMER, D.D. qualified to speak on the subject as an accurate
Woodford. observer of things ecclesiastical. Has this error
ALDINE 'Swift,' 1833.-In a copy of this book been pointed out anywhere ? PALAMEDES.
I saw in Watt's shop at Hastings recently, vol. ii. Paris.
I pp. 128-134, are not numbered. Was this deHERALDIC.—To whom does the following coat fective pagination subsequently put right? If so, of arms belong ?-Gules, a fess argent engrailed here is another “first” first edition. between three estoiles of the second.
W. F. WALLER. FLORENCE PEACOCK. I " PAILAZER.”_Iu Calendar of State Papers,' JOHN TREWORGIE, Commissioner of Newfound-1660, I came across this : “Office of Philazer in land during the Commonwealth, owned a factory the Court of Common Pleas for the County and in Saco, Mo., U.S. Is there any reference to him City of Lincolo." . What is meant by “Philazer”? in West Country histories ?
WM. STONARDE. G. R. FARRAR PROWSE. Sowerby Bridge.
“DE MORTUIS NIL NISI BONUM.”—Is the author
of this trite expression known! Perbaps the Rev. “SHILLAM EIDRI.”—The ‘Bible in Spain,' by E. Marshall, with bis usual erudition, will be able George Borrow, contains the above expression, to give the authorship, which all books of quotations apparently Hebrew, as it is placed in the mouth consulted by me have failed to supply. Ray, in of a Jew, who applies it to the author in a com- bis ‘Collection of English Proverbs,' sub “Speak plimentary sense ; but as I have been unable to well of the dead," has: “Mortuis non conviciandum,
John CUTTs.—He is said to have “greatly distinguished himself at the siege and capture of Buda [in 1686], being the first to plant the flag upon the walls.” (Cf. Mr. C. R. B. Barrett's * Essex, p. 124.) I should be glad to have the authority for this statement. Jacob Richards, the English engineer, who was serving in the beleaguering army, does not even mention Cutts in his diary (Harley MS., 4989). Hammer mentions a “Cuts” among the “lords anglais” who fell on the fatal July 13. According to the “Dict. of Nat. Biog.' Cutts was among the English volunteers serving under Charles, Duke of Lorraine, against the Turks in Hungary, and greatly distinguished himself by his heroism at the siege
and capture of Buda, for which he received the
appointment of “adjutant general” to the Duke of Lorraine. The authority for these statements is the ‘Compleat History of Europe’ (1707, p. 455), which I have not seen. Is this book in the British Museum ; and if it is, can some kind reader supply the press-mark? L. L. K.
“TRIssino Type.”—G. G. Trissino's ‘Grammatichetta’ (sm. 4to., Vicenza, 1529)—one of the earliest attempts at an Italian grammar, for it was preceded only by Fortunio's ‘Regole Grammaticali dellaWolgar Lingua' (Ancona, 1516),and Flaminio's ‘Compendio della Volgar Gramatica’ (Bologna, 1521)—is printed, like the other Italian works of this poet and humanist, with so-called “Trissino type.” The main distinction of this type, I notice, is its constant use of the Greek letter w instead of o, whenever it denotes a long vowel. It would be interesting to ascertain whether this alteration of one character was adopted by other Italian writers, or whether it is peculiar to Trissino's works.
H. KREBs. Oxford.
PORTRAITS OF ROBERT BURNS. (8th S. ii. 428.) That the poet Burns visited Miers for the purpose of having his “profile” cut, there is abundant proof in the fact that he forwarded one to Mr. William Tytler, of Woodhouslee, with an address commencing, “Revered defender of beauteous Stuart” (an allusion to Mr. Tytler's book, “An Inquiry into the Evidence against Mary Queen of Scots'). The ode continues:– I send you a trifle, a head of a bard, A trifle scarce worthy your care; But accept it, good sir, as a mark of regard,
Sincere as a saint's dying prayer. In a letter to Robert Ainslie, dated Mauchline, June 23, 1788, asking his friend to sit for his profile, the poet says: “The time is short. When I sat to Mr. Miers I am sure he did not exceed two minutes.” In the course of three years' patient and persistent research anent the portraiture of Robert Burns, I have never seen any contemporary copy, duplicate, or replica of the Miers silhouette; and I think the descendants of Mr. Wm. Tytler should be appealed to, in order to ascertain if the original profile is still in their possession.
The earliest engraved reproduction of the Miers
profile I have seen is that appearing in Cunningham's octavo edition, published by James Cochrane & Co., Waterloo Place, London, 1834–5. Should there be no earlier engraved transcript, the question arises, What was it engraved from ? Had they access to the original “shade,” or outline?