fesses the same care of editor, &c. but 2. Sermones de arbore humanâ. of Geyler. Sidera in ætheream glorificata domum: Illa, inquam, ut vetitum malis absumere pomum Ausa fui, longum tollor in exilium. Prima etenim dubiæ damnosa pericula Navis Stultorum ingredior Stultitiæque parens. Nam quia divinam petii stultissima mentem, : Destinor exitio posteritasque mea : Immensos subigor pariens tolerare dolores, Nec cum virgineo gignere honore datur. Hei mihi, fallaci quæ cessi credula vipræ, Frænaque non posui sensibus ipsa meis. Nuda per ignotas cogor tranare procellas, Nescia quem portum, quemve habitura modum. 4. The Passion of Christ. In Ger- Namque supercilio si me Deus ipse tre man. 6. Ship of Saints. In German. The Navicula Penitentia, the Sermons also, and the Tracts, likewise the NAVICULA FATUORUM, all have been translated into the Doctor's vernacular tongue with exemplary care, by his admirers. Other publications pass current in Germany under the sanction of Geyler's name, which is deservedly popular. Of Brant's SHIP OF FOOLS numerous editions may be picked up. But of a female rarity of a similar nature, I never saw a single copy beyond that in my own humble collection. It is a thin quarto volume of twentyfour leaves, adorned with seven wood. cuts. The title runs: "Jodoci Badii Ascensii Stultiferæ Naviculæ seu Scapbæ Faluarum Mulierum: circa sen mendo Mr. URBAN, May 9. sus quinque exteriores fraude navi- A group of antient and very pic gantium. Stultiferæ naves sensus animosq: trahentes Mortis in exilium." Badius seems to have published this Tract at Lyons, 4th September, 1498. My copy is a reprint in 1502. The lament of Eve will serve to give Mr. Urban's Readers a tolerable specimen of the merit of the perform ance: Evæ prothoplastæ ad cunctos mortales Diecite, mortales, misers lamenta parentis: turesque houses, contiguous to the church-yard on the North side of St. Mary Magdalen Church in the city of Oxford, have at length been demolished; and the large plot of ground which for a considerable period has been thus occupied, is laid open to the spacious street leading towards St. Giles's Church. Whether or not any building of magnitude and use, or merely an obelisk, or a signpost, is to be erected within the nonrail enclosure, I cannot say; but I must observe, that in baving exposed the the curious architecture of the North side of the Church, an object of considerable interest, I may add of beauty, has been obtained: though it is doubtful whether the antient wall enclosing the churchyard might not have been suffered to remain. I have no where inet with any notice of the antient mansion, upon the ruins of which the lath and plaster gables, and groupes of brick chimnies lately remaining, were raised; but from repeated and particular observation, and from various concomi tant circumstances, I am inclined to believe that in former times this was the rectorial house. In support of this opinion, I shall, with your permission, furnish the Gentleman's Magazine with the particulars I have collected, which will be illustrated with one or two copper-plates, as the interest of the subject may require. Yours, &c. B. Mr. URBAN, Penzance, May 3. By tave the pleasure of seeing the Y the date of this letter you will rapidity of the circulation of your Miscellany. One of your Correspondents in last month makes enquiry (see the letter of "Academicus," p. 317) concerning an edition of Horace by Sir Thomas Hawkins. The copy which I have is the fourth edition, and is dated 1638, so that the first edition was evidently prior to that of Rider. It is printed by Haviland, for William Lee, and sold by him at the sign of the Turk's Head, in Fleetstreet. The Title-page announces "The Odes of Horace, the best of Lyrich Poels, containing much Morality and Sweetnesse; the Fourth Edition, selected, translated, reviewed, and enlarged, with many more, by Sir Thos. Hawkins." The text is printed with the translation. frontispiece contains two figures of Lyrica Poesis et Imitatio, which might excite rapture in the bosom of the scarcely initiated Bibliopolist. The imprimatur is dated March 2, 1637. Could there have been three editions in less than two years, or was there a fresh imprimatur to each edition? When Rider implies by his motto that his was the first translation, perhaps he refers to those Odes which Sir T. H. had omitted: but his The taking no notice of this prior translation is strange. Prefixed are several commendatory verses. The first by Sir John Beaumont, who says, "What shall I first commend! your hap- Of this most useful Poet, or your skill Mr. Hugh Holland dedicates an Ode in pure lambicks to him, in which he alludes to the Knight's skill in Music: "I knew before thy dainty touch Upon thy lordly Violl; But of thy Lyre who knew so much Before this happy trial? So tuned is thy sacred Harp Thy Musique and thy Muses, Be judge, who both peruses: If I may give my opinion, pardon me, Mr. Hugh Holland, the translation is in general as tough as the text: but you listened with the ears of a friend, and perhaps the Poet sang his Verse to the accompaniment of his own Violl. However, from the specimens given, I do not think that the Knight need shrink from a comparison with Mr. Rider. Take Ode vi. Lib. 2. Septimius ready bent with me, The Moorish seas high billows rear. From journeys, warfare, and rough seas. Earst subject to Phalantus' sway. Olives that equal Venafro. Envyeth not Falernian wines. O'er the warm ashes of thy friend." Your Readers may compare this with Rider's verses, given by "Academicus" demicus" in your Select Poetry, p. 351. I have no time to write more at présent, but I challenge him to produce Rider's translation of Lib. 1. Ode 22, ad Aristium; Ode 34, ad Seipsum; and Lib. 2. Ode 20, ad Mæcenatem; and I will promise that the Knight shall be forthcoming to meet his opponent Rider.—I do not go out of my way for this pun: it is forced upon me by Hugh Holland, for he says, "A grace it is for any Knight A stately steed to stable; I your Correspondents, T. F." p. 239, and "A." for their answers to my enquiries respecting Faculty Pews, but I do not think the extract from Bura's Ecclesiastical Law entirely clears up the subject. My statement pointed out that the descendant of the person to whom the Faculty Pew was granted, still remains an Inhabitant of the same Parish, and I wished to be informed, whether an Inhabitant, or his Descendant, removing from a Mansionhouse to another house (or cottage) in the same parish, can (if I may be allowed the expression) take the Faculty Pew away with him. We frequently see an Advertisement for sale of Estates, the right of a Pew in a Parish Church included in the Conditions in the present instance no notice was taken of the Faculty Pew at the time of the sale of the Mansion-house. Your Correspondent, "T. F." is much mistaken if he thinks I wish to throw any responsibility alone upon the Incumbent as to the new pewing of Churches; my only wish is to give him FULL POWER by an Act of Parliament for that purpose, and to remove those large incumbersome pews in Churches, that the Inhabitants may be better accommodated; without which authority I understand that, however good and praiseworthy his intention, he cannot remove or alter a Faculty Pew, unless with the full consent of the owner; consequently it is impossible for the Reverend Divine to make the proposed alterations and improvements, as stated in my last Letter. Where there are Funds sufficient for the payment of the expences attending the new pewing of Churches, there need not probably be any occasion for an Act of Parliament for the purpose; but it is the want of such a Fund, made me suggest a power to enable the Rector or Vicar to raise the same by a Church-rate expressly for that purpose. I was very glad to hear your Correspondent "A.'s" sentiments upon the subject of New Pewing Churches, and pointing out a sacred building where such improvements have been made. An Inhabitant of the Village of Watton, in Hertfordshire, informs me the Church there has been entirely new pewed, and all the Inhabitants are now well-accoumodated, and that the expence has been defrayed by a highly respectable Gentleman in the neighbourhood, who must be considered a truly pious friend to the established Reli gion and the Laws of his Country. Yours, &c. Mr. URBAN, MENTOR. Strand, May 4. PERMIT a very old and constant reader of your valuable pages to convey a hint to your Correspondent Dr. Carey on the subject of his Ancient Anecdotes. Though I am highly pleased with his extracts from Valerius Maximus, as well as several of my acquaintance, I think there is something still wanting. Several of the Anecdotes are related by other Authors with different or additional circumstances, which surely cannot be unknown to Dr. Carey, who certainly must have an extensive acquaintance with the Classic Authors, as appears from his own numerous publications; and the number of vo lumes of the Regent's small Pocket Classicks that he has published as Editor. What I wish of him, Mr. Urban, is, that he would not confine himself to Valerius Maximus in every case, but occasionally notice the additions or variations of other authors who have related the same facts as Valerius Maximus. By doing this, I conceive that he would highly gratify many of your Readers, as most cer tainly your old friend and admirer, BOTH SIDES. If such Funds are under the controul of the Inhabitants, many of whom are most probably Dissenters, it becomes a question how far they would accede to such an appropriation. REVIEW REVIEW OF NEW PUBLICATIONS. 91. My Opinions since the Peace. By Sir Rowland Oldacre, Bart. 8vo. pp. 39. Longman and Co. THER HE Pamphlet before us involves the most important enquiry, which can now possibly agitate the public mind. The state of the finan ces is very serious; and to redress the evil is much like attempting to square a surd number. The Author before us, who is a respectable writer, argues upon dates, with closeness and precision. In page 32, he fairly states the opposite views of the two parties, who so widely differ, that neither can be acted upon through extravagant postulates, with confidence in the result. Party the first insist, upon the high-price system, by protecting corn laws, the commutation of some of the taxes for a property-tax, a paper currency, &c. Party the second recommends a dereliction of all duties upon corn, and of other impolitic restrictions upon a free commercial intercourse. Every body has read Mr. Ricardo's (we have heard it ascribed to him) admirable paper in the last Edin. burgh Review, in which the views of the latter are excellently supported. Now it must be self-evident that plenty is always a blessing, whether it is or is not converted into money, and that such inconvertibility can only proceed from the plenty being general; for scarcity of money under a banking system only ensues when nothing can be made of money. It is madness for a large landed proprietor to talk of the possibility of real poverty. We knew a gentleman of 2500l. per ann, who had a regular establishment, and held in occupation from 1 to 200 acres of good land. He kept six horses, five men servants, and six females, besides labourers. He reared every thing upon his domain (except beef); and the same practice is still continued in the Western counties with success. As he gained the farmer's profit, it may be truly said that he had a surplus of at least 2000!. per ann. for wine, taxes, aud incidentals. GENT. MAG May, 1820. is within our recollection that, when on a visit to this gentleman, he gave a whole hogshead of labourers' cider to the boys and rustics of his village upon a fifth of November. The company asked him the value of it, from surprize at such a donation. He answered eight shillings. That same gentleman was ruined in seven years by extraneous and unnecessary expences not by expending commodities, according to the Norman fashion of exchange, through rents paid in kind, but the absolute obligation of paying for his pleasures in money raised. We are not so unphiloso phical, or so absurd, as to talk of the days of Homer's heroes, or rail against the obvious convenience of money; or deny but that, under this system of the old Barons, the population and revenue must be ruined; only that they gained more than by mere money rents. We mean to say that a commercial man, like the old Baron, supplies his luxuries, in the main, by absolute bartery with immense profit, under a machinery system, often of more than cent. per cent.; while, by the landholder, nothing is exported wherewith he can purchase luxuries, with a balance of profit. The landholder's equivalent is not commodities, of which the prime cost is often trifling, but a revenue advanced by the population of his native country, which, through the improvements of that country in agriculture, and those of others, glut a decreasing market. In 1703, says Evelyn (Memoirs, ii. 79)," corn and provisions are so cheap that the farmers are unable to pay their rents." Add to this (1.) that the capital cannot be so profitably employed in agricul ture as in commerce; (2.) that the amount of taxes and rates imposed upon the land is, throughout the whole kingdom, about 15s. per acre; and that a large portion is not worth more than 7s. per acre. It therefore appears indispensible, to assist the landholder and occupier, by supporting a high price. These are the grounds upon which the recessity of corn bills are founded; and, and, to justify the policy, it is further presumed, that thus alone can England be rendered an agricultural country. We no more look upon this to be an advantage to England, than it would be to Holland, for the greater part of our arable land is poor; and we sincerely believe that a grazing system would pay better. But the grand evil of the corn laws is, that the poor pay nearly the whole of the tax thus created. For instance, a gentleman's butler, with 507. a year's salary, and his board, consumes only a quartern loaf per week; but a labourer's family with only 10s. a week wages, ten such loaves, for full payment of which he must come to the parish. It is a rule, that a trade which requires a bounty is not worth supporting. The cornlaws also imply a tyrannical limitation of the food of the poor to bread; but bacon, meat, and pota toes, daily become more and more in use, and the poor man prefers them. Every man who cats meat actually consumes the produce of 51⁄2 acres per annum, the consumer of wheat only 14 of an acre of potatoes only three quarters. Now it is evident, thal to compel the poor to dine off bread and cheese is a deduction from the demand for meat, and yet grass land stit lets for more than arable. If, therefore, we enable our poor manufacturers to buy two joints of meat in a week, instead of one; and lay down our poor land to pasture, artificial grasses, or wood, and import corn at the low prices of the Continent, in exchange for our manu. factures, the increase of the consumers of meat would keep up the rent of land to a good height. As it is, the cultivation of potatoes alone threatens the growth of wheat very seriously; and corn-bills favour this diversion of crops. We conceive, with due regard to Justice, that, where there are poor rates, there ought in equity to the landholder to be also corn-bills; but we also think that both corn-bilis and poor-rates ought to be gradually abolished together. We think fur ther, that the idea of making England a corn country, is only not so bad as an attempt to make it a wine country. It is naturally constituted for a commercial and grazing coun. try. The corn grown here costs more than double the price of that raised abroad: and, by compelling the manufacturer to give 1s. for what he could elsewhere buy for 6d. is to take that 6d. out of his pocket, for the consumption of tea, sugar, &c. which would increase the revenue, and monied capital of the country. It might indeed be shown satisfacto rily, that corn-laws act very unfavourably upon our naval resources and commerce of the Colonies. And what is more, corn-laws, as permanent measures, are nugatory and injurious; for if the poor had to pay a pound a bushel for wheat for ten years, potatoes would be substituted long before the expiration of that term, and as grass land brings double the rent of arable, it should seem, as if the publick was by such bills called upon to pay a large tax, in order to support a losing mode of cultivating poor soils; because thus they are capable of paying higher rents. We have stated the case as impartially as we can; but we shall add a peculiar and obvious evil in such a mode of taxation as this. It levies cruel tax of not less than twenty, thirty, or forty additional pounds per annum, upon persons with large families. It must be plain that, as the mass of the Houses of Parliament is composed of landed proprietors, Ministers have no choice as to adoption of a corn-bill, if required. The numerous and powerful limitations of the position, as a legislative measure, lead however to no doubts, as to its general cruelty and injustice ; and to many, as to its policy. But the error seems to have originated in one grand fallacy; that of placing the prosperity of England in its being a corn country; and this in the very face of the glaring fact, that grassland produces double the rent of arable. But there is a powerful support of this error. All farmers have not capital sufficient to stock a large grass farm, and therefore must have recourse to arable. Still we must glut the market, and cheapness not be the result! Next, as to taxation. Under the property-tax, the amount was saved among the middling classes by abstaining from dinner-parties, and va |