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 met 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 concomitant 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. Mr. URBAN, B. Penzance, May 3. BY Y the date of this letter you will have the pleasure of seeing the rapidity of the circulation of your Miscellany. One of your Correspon dents 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. The 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 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 happy choice 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 loidly Violl; But of thy Lyre who knew so much Before this happy trial? So tuned is thy sacred Harp 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. 86 Septimius ready bent with me, Rude Cantaber or Gades to see And those inhospitable quicksands, where The Moorish seas high billows rear. Tybur, which th' Argives built, O! may That be the place of my last day; May it my limit be of ease, From journeys, warfare, and rough seas. But if the Sister Fates deny, I'll to rich fleec'd Galesus hie, And thence down to Tarentum stray, Earst subject to Phalantus' sway. That tract of land best pleaseth me Where not Hymettia's full fraught bee Yields better honey, and where grow Olives that equal Venafro. Where the mild aire yeelds gentle frost, And a long Spring-tyde warns the coast, And Aulon, fertile in rich vines, Envyeth not Falernian wines. There let thy due-paid teares descend O'er the warm ashes of thy friend." 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, I "A grace it is for any Knight Mr. URBAN, C. V. L. May 6. THANK your Correspondents, "T. F." p. 239, and "A." for their answers to my enquiries respect ing Faculty Pews, but I do not think the extract from Burn'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 convey a hint to your Correspondent reader of your valuable pages to 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 something still wanting. Several of my acquaintance, I think there is 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 volumes 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 ditions or variations of other authors case, but occasionally notice the adwho 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. REVIEW OF NEW PUBLICATIONS. 91. My Opinions since the Peace. By Sir Rowland Oldacre, Bart. 8vo. pp. 39. Longman and Co. THE HE Pamphlet before us involves the most important enquiry, which can now possibly agitate the public mind. The state of the finances 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 Edinburgh Review, in which the views of the latter are excellently supported. 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 mʊney 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 Now it must be self-evident that plenty is always a blessing, whether it is or is not converted into mo-" ney, 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 gentle-``unable to pay their rents." Add to man of 25001. 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 £0001. per ann. for wine, taxes, and incidentals. It GENT. MAG May, 1829. this (1.) that the capital cannot be so profitably employed in agriculture as in commerce; (2.) that the amount of taxes and rates imposed upon the land is, throughout the whole kingdom, about 158. 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 50%. 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, neat, 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 5 acres per annum, the consumer of wheat only 14 of an acre of potatoes only three quarters. Now it is evident, that 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 ContiDent, in exchange for our 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. manu 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-bills 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 satisfactorily, that corn-laws act very unfa vourably upon our naval resources and commerce of the Colonies. And what is more, corn-laws, as perma. nent 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 mode of taxation as this. It levies a 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 rious luxuries, especially the consumption of wine. But, if the commerce of the country augments, the assessed and consumption taxes will increase also. If too corn be 33s. per quarter at Hamburgh, as stated in this pamphlet, and we can buy the 33s. by 20 or 25s. worth of wrought goods, leaving a profit of 8 per cent. upon the exportation, and another upon the corn here introduced; we see not why such traffick will not bear a moderate duty. For, though it may be highly impolitic to grow that at ten shillings cost, which may be bought at five; yet it is manifestly inequitable that the home corngrower, who raises his crop at a loss, should bear the great burden of rates and taxes, in addition to his disadvantage, while the corn importer pays nothing of the kind, and can yet obtain the same money in the market. Before we finally close our remarks,' we beg to observe, that as Church livings, where the tithes are taken in kind, produce a treble gross return in value to the receipt by composition; so the old landholder, by his rents in kind, was far richer than the modern; nor was he subject to like fluctuation in the value of money, or such heavy taxation. To relief the modern landholder is entitled, 10asmuch as, by taking a money rent he has absolutely eofranchised, and enabled to grow rich, a large part of society, who must otherwise have been mere serfs. But whether robbing "Peter to pay Paul" is the right mode of relief is another question. It is plain too, by the necessity of legislative assistance, that he can not levy his burden upon the consumer by augmenting at option the price of provisions. We think, theoretically, that his proper mode of relief is, as before said, the gradual abolition of poor-rates, and commutation of other burdens to the assessed taxes, &c. because, generally speak ing, these best shew what persons can afford. We dismiss the subject with observing, that we do not consider what we have said to be worth attention any further than hints, vice cotis, purposely thrown out, like sparks among combustibles, to produce explosions of ideas. We mean them only for theses of essays but we do not think that we are injuring the landholder by what we have said, for, to judge by the state of pauperism in Ireland, events will in a few years bring the question, not to Bullum versus Boat. um, or Corn-bill versus Anti-Corn bill, but to Potatoes, versus Wheat: nor is there a position better attest. ed, in confutation of the absurd iden of making England an agricultural country, than that such countries are never, simply as such, rich or civi lized. There are no beggars in Wales; but there is little or no money; or taste for, or pleasure derived from, refinement, literature, or arts. 92. Reflections on the Nature and_Tendency of the Present Spirit of the Times, in a Letter to the Freeholders of the County of Norfolk. By the Rev. George Burges, B. A. Vicar of Malvergate and of Moulton. 8vo. pp. 36. Baldwin, Cradock, and Joy. THIS Book is a severe Philippick upon the politicks, &c. of Mr. Coke of Norfolk, and his adherents, writ ten in the manner of " Mr. Burke's Reflections," by a gentleman, evideutly of no contemptible talents, but who would fain persuade the world that there is no good man to be found, except among the friends of Ministers and of Orthodoxy. We solemnly believe that such persons form, generally speaking, the best and most respectable classes of so. ciety; but we are of opinion, that temper and rational discussion are the best methods of increasing their oumber. We recommend to Mr. Burges the perusal of Bishop Sherlock's Sermon on the text of " Let not then your good be evil spoken of." Mr. B.'s writings, in the present form, irritate only; have merely the ephemeral existence of electioneering squibs; and, of course, render no lasting service to the cause: paly bringing down upon the author abuse and obloquy. We mean no disrespect to Mr. Burges. They are not the worst horses, that require a curb bridle. |
