tion. A Colloquial and Familiar Rhapsody, regarding Prosaic, Poetic, and Dramatic Fiction, by Quintin Queerfellow, Gent. It is of between two and three hundred pages of octosyllabic verse, very spiritedly written, with all the "facility" of that measure, and I think, here, not "fatal," very amusing, and by no means uninstructive; giving, besides general thoughts on the subject, notices of most of our writers, ancient and modern, and their works. Having some thoughts of publishing it, could you, or any of your correspondents, obligingly tell me the author? to whom, in my opinion, it would do no little honour. And it was evidently written for publication, though there is nothing in it to lead to the cause of its not having appeared; most probably the expense.

The MS. was bought at an auction at Puttick's sale-rooms in the spring.

M. M.

La Gazette de Londres.- Having lately met with a journal styled La Gazette de Londres, dated "Lundi 3, jusqu'au Jeudi 6 Mai, 1703, V. S.* No. 3830.," permit me to ask, through the medium of the "N. & Q.," if it were customary to publish the London Gazette in French at that period? I have never seen but that copy, which I have ascertained to be a translation of the London Gazette of Monday 3rd May to Thursday 6th May, 1703, No. 3911. Both are printed by the government printer, Edward Jones, in the Savoy. It will be remarked that they are differently numbered; and if one might infer anything from that, it would appear that the English copy had published eighty-one numbers antecedently to the French version of it.

Φ.

Catastrophe. - Arthur Wilson, the historian, referring (in his Autobiogruphy) to the period when he was secretary to the Earl of Essex, says:

"The winters wee spent in England. Either at Draiton, my lord's grandmother's; Chartley, his own house; or [at] some of his brother, the Earle of Hertford's houses. Our private sports abroad, hunting; at home, chesse or catastrophe. Our publique sports (and sometimes with great charge and expence) were masks or playes. Wherein I was a contriver both of words and matter. For as long as the good old noble families) her hospitable entertainment was garCountesse of Leicester lived (the grandmother to theise nisht with such, then harmless, recreations." Desiderata Curiosa, lib. xii. No. v. chap. vi. sect. 2. Can any of your correspondents elucidate the term catastrophe in the above passage? C. I. COOPER. Cambridge.

- Peck,

Judges' Robes.-During the court cassize just held in this town, the judge in the Cown Court, Lord Campbell, had a robe of scarlet and ermine: his brother judge in the Nisi Prius, Mr. Justice Wightman, one of plain black.

Is this distinction caused by the courts in which they sit, or by their official position as judges? A. B. Liverpool.

Minor Queries Answered. Bishop of London, 1713.-Who was Bishop of London, May 31, 1713? T. C. [Dr. Henry Compton, who died on July 7th, 1713.] Peterman. John Aubrey, in one of his MSS., says of Kington Langley, near Chippenham:

"Here was a chapel dedicated to St. Peter. The Revel is still kept (1670) the Sunday after St. Peter's day: it is one of the eminentest Feastes in these partes. Old John Wastefield told me that he had been Peterman in the beginning of Her Majesty's Reign."

It is probable from the above that the Peterman was a sort of Master of the Ceremonies at the Revel. But is there any other instance of the use of this word, and what is the accurate history of it? J. E. J.

[Phillips and Bailey explain Peter-men as "those who formerly used unlawful engines and arts in catching fish in the river Thames." See also Nares' Glossary. Petermen, in the slang dialect, are those who follow coaches and waggons to cut off packages. It appears, however, to have another meaning in the extract from Aubrey.]

Official Costume of the Judges. Is there any work from which I can obtain information respecting the history of the official costume of the judges

of England, especially of the coif, now so much diminished from its original size? J. H.

[For notices of the coif, consult Du Cange, v. Cufa: Spelman, v. Birretum album, Coifa: Strutt, 237. See also the article Coir in Ency. Metropol., vol. xvii. p. 2., which states that much curious matter respecting the degree of the coif will be found in a work by the late Serjeant Wynne, entitled Observations touching the Dignity of the Degree of Serjeant-at-Law, 1765. This work, however, is seldom to be met with, as only a few copies of it were printed for private circulation.]

I was at first disposed to believe that there was simply a typographical error as to the date of No. 11945, and that it should have been 1772; but in the description of No. 11944, it is again formally referred to as "the genuine edition of 1771."

I must confess that I read this description with great surprise. I knew, or believed, from Junius's private letters to Woodfall, that the first authorised and acknowledged edition, "the author's edition" as Junius calls it, was not published in Feb. 1772 (see Private Letters, Nos. 53. 55. 56.); and I happened to know that the following advertisement appeared in the Public Advertiser of March 2, 1772:

"The publication of the original and complete edition of Junius's Letters (printed by H. S. Woodfall, printer of this paper), with a Dedication, Preface, and Notes, by the Author, will be tomorrow at noon, price half a guinea, in two volumes, sewed."

A reference to the copy in the London Library, soon cleared up the mystery. It is all a mistake. The edition was not published by Woodfall at all, but by Wheble, whose name appears in the titlepage. It is not therefore the "first genuine edition," but one of the many spurious or pirated editions. It is not even what perhaps I may be allowed to call " a genuine spurious" edition, but a manufactured copy made up of many editions. Of this

66

the proof is simple and obvious. In the engraved title-page, the work professes to have been printed by John Wheble, 1771:" but the volumes contain the letter to Mansfield, not published until Jan. 21, 1772; the Dedication, not published, as I have shown, until March 3, 1772; and they conclude with a letter professedly written by and signed Junius, addressed to Lord Apsley, and dated Feb. 1775!

In my opinion, the first volume was a separate publication, issued, as professed in the title-page, in 1771, to which, after March, 1772, the Dedication was added. The second volume was a distinct publication in 1772. It must have been printed after March, 1772, as it contains notes which first appeared in "the author's edition." The letter of Feb. 1775 is a mystery which I must leave others to explain. I first met with it in an edition by Wheble, published in 1775.

I could add numberless other proofs that these volumes are a mere manufacture; but enough, I think, has been said to satisfy the most sceptical.

The

Having thus shown that the description in the well add, though it is of less importance, that the Catalogue of No. 11945 is a mistake, I may as account of No. 11944 is equally erroneous. rious edition," but, as I believe, the very last that edition referred to is certainly not the "first spupreceded the publication of the only genuine edition, that of 1772. As to what is meant by "Woodfall's last edition," the description is too vague to justify comment; for editions have been printed by H. S. Woodfall, George Woodfall, and the present Mr. Henry Woodfall. Neither is it correct to say that it contains many letters not included, &c. in Woodfall's last edition; for it does not contain a single letter by Junius-except the dozen lines on the Monody, which, being merely temporary in their character, Junius himself struck out-that is not to be found in every edition published by a Woodfall, and in every edition of Junius Letters. It contains, indeed, two letters by Draper, which had no business there, and no way concerned Junius; and an impudent forgery, professing to be a letter from the King in reply to Junius.

My attention having been thus drawn to the subject, I will hereafter, with your permission, say a few words and ask a few questions respecting these early piratical editions, the editions which preceded "the author's" of 1772. This will be the more readily excused, considering how little information we have on the subject; and that, as I believe, there is not one of these editions of this British classic, as Junius is called, to be found in our great national library, the British Museum.

L. J.

FRANCES, DUCHESS OF SUFFOLK, AND ADRIAN STOKES.

(Vol. vi., p. 128.)

For the information of A. S. A. (Wuzzeerabad), I forward the following particulars respecting Adrian Stokes, which will principally be found in Potter's Charnwood Forest, p. 79. :

"The Duchess, after the death of her husband (beheaded February 23rd, 1553-4, for his share in raising his daughter Lady Jane to the throne), underwent almost incredible hardships, but afterwards enjoyed much tranquillity and domestic happiness, at Beaumanor (in this county), in a second matrimonial connexion with Mr. Adrian Stocks, who had been her Master of the Horse."

They were married March 1st, 1554–5.

"This alliance, though censured by some as beneath her dignity, has been praised by others for its policy, as providing for her own security; which, from her near relationship to the Crown, might, in case of an equal match, have been disturbed. The Duchess died in 1559, in three years after which Mr. Stocks obtained, by letters patent from Elizabeth, a new lease of twentyone years of her Highness's manor of Beaumanor... Mr. Stocks had a daughter (who died an infant) by the Duchess; and about 1571, when he was returned as one of the members for the county, he took, for his second wife, Dame Anne, widow of Sir Nicholas Throckmorton, Knt."

In 1558, a George Stokes was one of the Knights of the Shire for this county.

"Mr. Stocks died in 1586 (Nov. 30th), leaving his brother William, then aged sixty, his heir."

Other particulars will be found in Nichols's Leicestershire, vol. iii. pp. 144-146., and Dugdale's Warwickshire, vol. i. P. 113.

By the following extracts, which I have made from the Chamberlain's accounts of this borough for the year 1576-7, it will be seen that he was at that time one of the Commissioners of the Musters for this county.

"The charges for the soldyars trayned.

Inprimis, paid to Nedeham, the smyth,}

calevers.

S. d.

Itm, pa to the tenne psones appoynted
for soldyars to be trayned, at there
firste going to Melton to be trayned xxvj viij
there iij dayes to geyther, eu'ye of
them alowed viijd, a daye

Itim of Sondaye, the xxiijrd of June,
geven to the said ten psones towardes
there charges att Loughborowe, then
being sente to St George Hastings,
Knight, & to Adrian Stookes, Esquier

This is the only instance in which I have met with his name in these accounts; and, as it was customary for the Corporation to present wine to

the noblemen, county justices, and others, on their visits to the town, it would seem to indicate that he must have led, probably from policy, a very retired life.

Thomas Stokes, Esq., of New Parks, recently High Sheriff of the county, is, I believe, a lineal descendant of the same family.

In the article on "Springs and Wells, &c.," p. 152. (No. 146.), read Fosse Road for Vosse Road. LEICESTRIENSIS.

VARIATIONS IN COPIES OF THE SECOND FOLIO EDITION OF SHAKSPEARE, 1632. (Vol. vi., p. 141.)

MR. COLLIER has had so much practice, and such long experience in the collation of the various old editions of Shakspeare, that I have no doubt he has taken the due precaution of examining, by means of a powerful magnifier, the passages in his corrected copy of the second folio, in which he states that it differs from all the other copies he has consulted. It is with considerable hesitation, therefore, that I venture to state the result of an throw a shade of doubt upon the subject. examination of several copies which may seem to

I have three copies of the second folio in my possession, which, for the convenience of reference, I shall designate by the letters W, S, and H. In all of these, the passages to which MR. COLLIER refers, when subjected to the test of a magnifying glass, give results at variance with his statement. In Measure for Measure, p. 70. col. 2. line 8 from bottom, the copy H reads unequivocally –

"For thine owne bowels which doe call thee, fire." The copy S has been tampered with, the inner part of the cross line of the "f" has been scratched out, and the comma at thee removed to the end of the line.

been carefully corrected throughout in a neat old The copy W is in its original binding, and has hand, which, from some evidences in the volume, may be safely considered of the date of the close of the seventeenth century. The conjectural readings are numerous, and some of them I have had the pleasure to find confirmatory of my own. This volume I have but recently acquired. The line in question is corrected by the erasure of the f in fire, and the substitution of a capital S.

In the other passage, King Richard II., p. 26. col. 2. line 21., the copy W reads clearly, "The flye flow hours," &c.* The inner part of the cross-line of the f, though short, is quite evident to the naked eye.

* In my edition of Shakspeare, I have printed "The fly-slow hours" as conveying an image highly beautiful and just.

In the other two copies this part of the crossline of the f is not so visible to the naked eye, but when magnified is distinctly seen to have been bent and broken off by an accident at press.

I feel it incumbent upon me to let MR. COLLIER know that there are variations in the copies of the second folio as well as in the first; corrections evidently made while the book was at press; but the printer certainly outdoes the negligence of him who put forth the first folio.

If MR. COLLIER will turn to Love's Labour's Lost, p. 143. col. 2. line 38., he will find a passage which, in the copies W and H in my possession, is thus given:

"If this austere unsociable life,

Change not you offer made in heate of blood: If frosts, and fasts, hard lodging, and thine weeds Nip not the gaudy blossomes of your Love." Which in copy S is properly corrected by the printer thus:

"If this austere insociable life,

Change not your offer made in heate of blood: If frosts, and fasts, hard lodging and thin weedes Nip not the gaudy blossomes of your Love." Again, in Much Ado about Nothing, p. 119. col. 1. line 10., copies W and S have "righthly," copy H corrects "rightly;" and in the same column, line 10 from bottom, W and S have "It thank," H

corrects "I thank."

The pagination of the second folio is very confused and incorrect; the mistakes are too numerous to mention, but in one instance I find it corrected. In copy S, Love's Labour's Lost, the page which should be 123 is 132; this is remedied in the other two copies, which have it rightly 132.

There are probably many other instances of variation which a closer examination would develope. MR. COLLIER is doubtless aware of the lines repeated in pp. 171. and 196., and of the numerous other sphalmata which disfigure this volume.

It is singular that I should, just at this moment, have met with a copy of the second folio, which, like MR. COLLIER's, has been carefully corrected throughout, and it may not be unsatisfactory to him to know that the passage in Coriolanus,

"You Heard of Byles and Plagues," has not escaped the MS. corrector, who has deleted you, and reads,

"A Heard of Byles and Plagues."

and the word being printed as it is with a capital letter, raises a doubt whether you Herd could possibly have been a mistake for unheard. The speech, interrupted and broken by passion, as it now stands seems to me more satisfactory.

But in these matters how difficult it is to propose any change which shall carry universal assent! I thought, with many others, the substitution of Bisson Multitude for Bosom Multiplied a happy emendation, yet we find that one strenuous dissentient voice is raised against it :

“Non equidem invideo; miror magis."

The majority on this occasion may be in the wrong, for I heard a defeated candidate at the late election declare that the minority were generally right! S. W. SINGER.

66 - Friend hast thou none.

For thine own bowels which do call thee, fire The meere effusion of thy proper loynes,

Do curse the gout," &c.

Richard II., Act I. Sc. 3.:
The second passage is thus printed in my copy,

"The flye flow hours shall not determinate

The datelesse limit of thy deer exile: " You will observe the word is printed "flye" with the final e, and the word dear is printed "deer." Mine is a very clean, well-printed copy, and the type remarkably distinct and clear.

It may be proper, however, to state, that although I have always considered my folio to be the edition of 1632, having purchased it as such about twenty years ago, when it had that date lettered on the back, yet it has not the original and genuine title-page, but instead thereof one beautifully executed with a pen :

MR. WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE'S

COMEDIES,
HISTORIES, &

TRAGEDIES.

[Here is inserted the Portrait by Dræshout.]

LONDON

Printed by Isaac Iaggard, and Ed. Blount.

I once had an opportunity of comparing it, rather hastily, with one which professed to be the third edition, and I was struck with their exact resemblance in many particulars.

Perhaps MR. COLLIER may be able to determine whether my copy be indeed the edition of 1632, or favour me with some certain criteria for settling the point. J.T. A.

ARMS IN CHURCHES.

I find that in the year 1547, the first of Edward VI.'s reign, the curate and churchwardens of St. Martin's, in Ironmonger Lane, London, took down from their church the crucifix, and the images and pictures of the saints, and in their place painted the walls with texts of Scripture, and where the crucifix had stood they put the Royal arms. (Knight's History of England, vol. ii. p. 731.) Among the Churchwardens' Accounts belonging to the church of St. James, Louth, Lincolnshire, are the following entries:

"1561.

"Paid to the Wryghtis for takynge doune the Roodloft, vs iiija.

"Paid for ij books, for Mr. Jewell's Apology and for Salvyn's (Calvin's) Institucyons enjoined for hus by the Byshopp, xvjs.

"Paid to the Apparitor for citing us (the Church wardens) to Lincoln for not having the King's armes painted in ye church, ijs."

The "Act for the Uniformity of Common Prayer," and the "Act restoring to the Crown the ancient Jurisdiction over the State Ecclesiastical and Spiritual," had appeared in 1559, and it is probable that some clause in one or other of those Acts provided for the erection of the Royal arms in all churches. Whether in this case the churchwardens had neglected the injunctions of the State, or of the bishops of the diocese, I cannot say, but I should be inclined to think that the Royal arms, like Jewell's Apology and Calvin's Institutions, had been "enjoined for them by the Byshopp."

E. A. H. LECHMERE.

told the story how the lady had calculated on her husband's absence, and had appointed her lover to

come in at a certain window:

"But the wind and the rain
Have brought him back again;

And you can have no lodging here." It was further said or sung, that the lady having no other means of apprizing her paramour of the change of circumstance, sang this warning from her open casement. I am sorry to say that my recollection adds a more disagreeable feature to the tale; for, as it was told to me, the lady had moved her child's cradle to the window, and, the better to deceive the slumbering husband, sang the song as if a lullaby to her baby.

Is it not very strange that your septuagenarian correspondent †, myself, another, and Mr. Bacon of Norwich (as quoted by DR. RIMBAULT), should all remember only the same half-dozen lines of a ballad that probably contained several stanzas, and that the said lines, and they alone, should also be preserved, with some uncouth variations, in Beaumont and Fletcher. I am driven to suspect, as the only explanation of this partial preservation, that the groundwork was a prose tale recited, into which the song of two or three stanzas was introduced. This is the only guess I can make to account for the partial preservation of the song.

Allow me, in my turn, to ask whether any one remembers another song of somewhat the same class which I learned about the same time, in the same nursery. The story is a kind of Romeo and Juliet one. The young lady receives her lover through her window, and means to keep him as long as she safely can; so she invokes the vigilance of the cock to warn them when it should be time to part:

66

Fly up, fly up, my bonny bonny cock,
But crow not until it be day;

And your breast shall be made of the burnish'd gold,
And your wings of the silver grey.

"But the cock he proved false, and very very false, For he crow'd full an hour too soon; The lassie thought it day,

And she sent her love away,

When 'twas only the glimpse of the moon!" The bonny and the lassie denote a Scotch origin: the air, too, which also I remember, is of a Scottish character. There seems in the plumage promised to the cock, an allusion to the dove in Ps. Ixviii. 13.

TWO FULL MOONS IN JULY.

(Vol. vi., p. 172.)

C.

This newspaper wonder, and its rhyme, the thunder, seems to have arisen out of an idea that two