Notes and Queries, Number 189, June 11, 1853

In the antepenultimate line, Britaine was more than a century ago changed by Hanmer into Roman, therefore retained by Warburton, again rejected by Steevens and Johnson, once more replaced by Knight and Collier, with one of his usual happy notes by the former of the two, without comment by the latter, finally left unnoticed by Dyce. My Query then is this. What amount of obtuseness will disqualify a criticaster who itches to be tinkering and cobbling the noblest passages of thought that ever issued from mortal brain, while at the same time he stumbles and bungles in sentences of that simplicity and grammatical clearness, as not to tax the powers of a third-form schoolboy to explain?[1 - In a passage from L. L. L., lately winnowed in the pages of "N. & Q.," divers attempts at elucidation (whereof not one, in my judgment, was successful) having been made, it was gravely, almost magisterially proposed by one of the disputants, to corrupt the concluding lines (Mr. Collier having already once before corrupted the preceding ones by substituting a plural for a singular verb, in which lay the true key to the right construction) by altering "their" the pronoun into "there" the adverb, because (shade of Murray!) the commentator could not discover of what noun "their" could possibly be the pronoun in these lines following:"When great things labouring perish in their birth,Their form confounded makes most form in mirth."And it was left to Mr. Keightley to bless the world with the information that it was "things."] If editors, commentators, critics, and all the countless throng who are ambitious to daub with their un-tempered mortar, or scribble their names upon the most majestic edifice of genius that the world ever saw, lack the little discernment necessary to interpret aright the above extract from Cymbeline, for the last hundred years racked and tortured in vain, let them at length learn henceforth to distrust their judgment altogether.

    W. R. Arrowsmith.

P.S.—In article of No. 180. p. 353., a rather important misprint occurs, viz. date of 4to. King Richard II. with unusual title-page, which should be 1608, not 1605. Other little errors the reader may silently amend for himself.

VERNEY PAPERS—THE CAPUCHIN FRIARS, ETC

In the appendix to Notes of Proceedings in the Long Parliament, by Sir Ralph Verney, edited by Mr. Bruce for the Camden Society in 1845, are "Notes written in a Cipher," which Mr. Bruce gives in the hope that the ingenuity of some reader will discover their meaning. I venture thus to decypher the same:

"The Capuchin's house to be dissolued.
No extracts of letters to be aloued in this house.
The prince is now come to Greenhich three lette.
Three greate ships staied in France.
Gersea a letter from Lord S

Albones.
£11 per diem Hull.
The king's answert to our petition about the militia.
If a king offer to kil himselfe, wee must not only advise but wrest the weapon from.
A similitude of a depilat.
Consciences corrupted."

I ought to state that in one or two instances the wrong cypher has evidently been used by mistake, and this has of course increased the difficulty of decyphering the notes.

With reference to the note "The Capuchins' House to be dissolued," may I be allowed to refer to the following votes in the House of Commons, of the date 26th February, 1641-2:

"Ordered, That Mr. Peard, Mr. Whistler, Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Pideaux, Mr. Selden, Mr. Young, Mr. Hill, do presently withdraw, to peruse the statutes now in force against priests and Jesuits.

"Ordered, That Mr. Whittacre, Mr. Morley, do presently go to Denmarke House.

"Resolved, That the Capuchines shall be forthwith apprehended and taken into safe custody by the Serjeant-at-Arms attending on this house; and there kept till this house take farther order."

The Capuchins were under the protection of the Queen Henrietta Maria; Denmark House was the name by which Somerset House was at the period known.

Under date 2nd March, 1641-2, are the following entries in the Commons' Journal:

"Mr. Holles brings this answer from the French Ambassador, That the Capuchins being sent hither by Articles of Treaty between the Two Crowns, he durst not of himself send them without Order from the King his Master, or the King and Queen here: And said farther, That the Queen had left an express Command for their stay here; and that he would be ever ready to do any good Office for this House, and to keep a good Correspondency between the Two Crowns; and if this House pleased, he would undertake to keep them safe Prisoners at Somersett House; and that the chapel there shall have the doors locked, and no Mass be said there.

"Ordered, That Mr. Hollis do acquaint the French Ambassador, that this House doth accept of his Offer in securing the Persons of the Capuchins, till this House take farther Order: and that the Doors be locked, and made fast, at the Chapel at Somersett House; and that no Mass be said there.

"Ordered, That the Lord Cramborne and Mr. Hollis shall acquaint the French Ambassador with the desires of this House, that the Capuchins be forthwith sent away; and to know if he will undertake to send them away; and, if he will, that then they be forthwith delivered unto him.

"That Mr. Hollis do go up to the Lords, to acquaint them with the Resolutions of this House, concerning the Capuchins, and desire their Lordships' concurrence therein."

Some particulars of the proceedings of the parliament against the Capuchins may be found in "Memoirs of the Mission in England of the Capuchin Friars of the Province of Paris by Father Cyprian Gamache," in The Court and Times of Charles I., vol. ii. pp. 344. 354.

    Thompson Cooper.

Cambridge.

EARLY SATIRICAL POEM

On the turning over the pages of an old printed copy of Durand's Rationale Divinorum Officiorus, edited by Bonetus de locatellis bergomensis, and printed at Lyons in 1506, by Natalis Brabam, for Jaques Huguetan, I found the following copy of verses written on the fly-leaf. They are written in a hand which I am inclined to assign to a date not much later than that of the book. There is no clue to the author. If they are thought worthy of insertion in "N. & Q.," I beg to inquire, through the medium of your columns, whether they are to be found in any collection of early English poems? and whether the author is known?

The ungallant sentiment of the first three stanzas is obvious. The fourth is not so plain; nor is its connexion with the others evident, though it is written without anything to mark separation; and the word "finis" is placed below it, as if to apply to the whole. I should be obliged if some one of your readers would give some explanation of it.

    W. H. G.

Winchester.

"Wen [sic] nettylles in wynter bryngythe forthe rosses red,
And a thorne bryngythe figges naturally,
And grase berrythe appulles in every mede,
And lorrel cherrys on his crope so hye,
And okkys berrythe datys plentyusly,
And kykkys gyvythe hony in superfluans,
The put in women yower trust and confydenc.

"When whythynges walke forrestys hartyse for to chase,
And herrings in parkkys the hornnys boldly bloc,
And marlyons[2 - Merlin's hawks.] … hernys in morrys doo unbrace,
And gomards shut ryllyons owght of a crose boow,
And goslyngs goo a howntyng the wolf to overthrow,
And sparlyns bere sperrys and arms for defenc,
Then put yn women yower trust and confydenc.

"When sparrowes byld chorchys and styppyllys of a hyght,
And corlewys carry tymber yn howsys for to dyght,
Wrennys bere sakkys to the myll,
And symgis[3 - Doubtful; but perhaps for syngies, an old name for the finch.] bryng butter to the market to sell,
And wodcokkys were wodknyffys the crane for to kyll,
And gryffyns to goslynges doo obedienc,
Then put in women yower trust and confydenc.

"O ye imps of Chynner, ye Lydgatys pene,
With the spryght of bookkas ye goodly inspyrryd,
Ye Ynglyshe poet, excydyng other men,
With musyk wyne yower tong yn syrryd,
Ye roll in yower rellatyvys as a horse immyrryd,
With Ovyddes penner ye are gretly in favor,
Ye bere boys incorne, God dyld yow for yower labor.
Finis."

THE LETTERS OF ATTICUS

The editor of the Grenville Papers has alluded to some "very judicious and pertinent remarks in the 'N. & Q.'" respecting the Letters of Atticus, and as most of your readers will probably agree with him that the authenticity of these letters is "a curious and interesting question, and one that deserves very particular attention," I beg to correct an error into which he and others have fallen, as to the date when Junius ceased to write under the signature Atticus. The Atticus forwarded by Junius to George Grenville on the 19th October, 1768, was, there is every reason to believe, the last from the pen of that writer, who was then preparing to come before the public in a more prominent character. When another correspondent adopted the signature Atticus, Woodfall gave his readers warning by inserting the following notice into the Public Advertiser:

"The Address to the Freeholders of the county of Middlesex, signed Atticus, in our next. The Printer thinks it his duty to acquaint his readers that this letter is not by the same hand as some letters in this paper a little time since, under the signature Atticus."—Pub. Ad., March 19, 1769.