becoming general, as in the civil law courts, I cannot see that the practice, if allowed, would be productive of any serious evils at a time like the present, when justice is so impartially administered; in Westminster Hall rules would soon be laid down, directing in what cases such evidence ought to be received: by such a course the loss of much time and expence, as well to the parties as the witnesses, would certainly be avoided. I am aware difficulties would attend the introduction of this as well as any new practice, but they would soon pass over, and be greatly counterbalanced by the benefits which would in time result from it. Should you deem the above worthy a place in your Magazine, it will greatly oblige your occasional Correspondent, E. I. C. P. S. Allow me to correct two errors in my Letter on the subject of the Inner Temple Hall, in p. 579, col. 2, line 4; you have printed "sashpanes," instead of " sash-frames," as I wrote; and my initials stand E.T.C. instead of E. 1. C. not be lawful for any person within the said dominions to keep any Ta. vern, or to sell or utter by retail, in any place, any of the said wine or wines, except it be in cities, towns, corporate boroughs, port-towns, or market-towns, or in the towns of Gravesend, Sittingborn, Tuxford, and Bagshot." I shall be obliged to any of your Correspondents who will have the goodness to communicate an adequate reason for naming these towns particularly in the Act. The whole Act is curious, as far as it recites the character, number, and distribution of wine-houses in the year 1553, and appears to have been a necessary extension of a system, upon which the Act relating to Alehouses was passed two years antecedently, 5, 6 Edw. VI. cap. 25. These Acts appear to be the foundation of the code for the regulation of publichouses at this day. The facilities for the importation of wines at Gravesend and Sittingbourne, may have suggested indeed the accommodation for them; this, however, does not apply to Bagshot and Tuxford. The two former towns were increasing at that time, and were severally made towns corporate in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, vide Hasted's Kent. Tuxford is omitted in a subsequent elause of the Act. King Henry VI. by letters patent, appointed John Jenyn and Richard Ludlow, Sargeants of his Cellar to the Bailwick of Bagshot.-Vide ManDing and Bray's Surrey, vol. 111. p. 85. Yours, &c. R. P. C. Mr. URBAN, Fawley Parsonage, Henley. HE discrepancy of opinion, as to the number of Marys in Holy Writ, is worth removing. Theo phylact mentions four; Mary, the mother of James, Joses, and our Lord; Mary, wife of Cleophas; Mary, the sister of Lazarus; and Mary Magdalene. Gregory Nyssen, on the authority of St. John, enumerates but three, leaving out the sister of Lazarus, unless I can, with all due respect to Dr. Lardner, prove her to be Mary Magdalene. It is positively said by St. John, that Mary of Bethany, sister to Lazarus, was that Mary which anointed the Lord with ointment, and wiped his feet with her bair (ch. xi. 1820.] Mary Magdalene. - Origin of Money. v. 1 and 2, and ch. xii. 1, 2, 3). St. Luke asserts, that the woman who did this was a sinner (ch. vii. v. 37, 38). St. Mark says, that Mary Magdalene was she out of whom our Lord cast seven Devils (chap. xvi. v. 9); aud perhaps our Lord's prohibition to touch him (John xx. 17) after his resurrection, might allude to her former demoniacal and sinful state. Thus far these two women seem to be identified, and the difficulty arises from the second name Magdalene, which has always been supposed to be nomen gentile, having reference to Magdala, an ideal city on the Western bank of the lake Siberias, whereas the family of Mary, the sister of Lazarus, was of Bethany. Now as the article in the original Greek is used indifferently in Μαρία ἡ Μαγδαληνή, Ἰωάννης ὁ Βαπτισης, Σίμων ὁ Κανανίτης, she might as justly be so called from some act of her life, like John the Baptist, as from her country, like Simon the Canaanite. The chief occurrence of her life was anointing our Lord's feet with oil, and wiping them with her hair, instead of a towel or napkin, of which they had none in antient Greece; but they had what served them instead, the soft part of bread on which they cleansed their hands, as the Persians and Abyssinians still do. This substance in classic Greek was called Maydaria (vide Scap. Lex. Art. paoow), and in vernacular Greek we have the authority of Dodwell for stating that a towel is called magdalee or μαγδαλη; hence Mary Magdalene, or Mary of the Napkin, may be the sister of Lazarus, and of the city of Bethany; there will then be only three Marys, and all discrepancy on this trifle ceases. I am further supported by the curious fact, that this surname or agnomen (since you observe I take it for granted that it is derived from the act, and not from the city) is never added by any Evangelist till after the record of the act of wiping the feet. I cannot conclude without acknowledging, and calling on my brethren to acknowledge, with humble gratitude, the blessing of God, who has caused all the researches of modern travellers to abound in results which elucidate more and more the dark passages of holy writ, and serve to confirm the wavering. Lam indebted to our countryman Mr. Dod 215 well for the observation, that paySaan is now in common use amongst modern Greeks. Yours, &c. CHARLES ROBERT FANSHAWE. Mr. URBAN, Edgbaston, Birmingham, Apr. 7, 1818. ANY writers have undertaken to give a History of the Silver Coinage of Scotland from the earliest authentic records, and also of that of our own country subsequent to the Norman Conquest; it is also my intention to present your readers with a short account of the origin of money, and to enumerate some of the more striking particulars concerning the coins of our Anglo-Saxon an cestors. At For a long series of years the transactions of the commercial world were carried on in the way of barter, or the exchange of one commodity for another, a practice which was attended, as may readily be supposed, with very great inconvenience. length, however, after mature deliberation, it occurred to the minds of some of the most enlightened of our ancestors, that the metals, particularly gold and silver, on account of structibility and superior specific gratheir scarcity and value, their indevity, might be advantageously employed as a circulating medium in all commercial transactions, and would contribute in no small degree to simplify and facilitate all trading concerns whatever. When the inetals were first used for this purpose, their value was determined only by the weight, a circumstance which afforded to the dishonest trader frequent opportunities of defrauding others with regard to the quality or fineness of the metals which he gave in payment; and this inconvenience had already been very extensively and very severely felt, when it was ordained that all the metals used as money should be divided into small pieces of equal size, and that each piece should be impressed with certain marks which should indicate at the same time its weight and value. Thus originated the practice of that most valuable art, which, in the present state of civilization, seems almost necessary to our existence, but when or where the first coins were struck, appears now to be a matter matter of considerable uncertainty. The art of coining, however, is said to have been introduced into this country soon after the invasion of our island by Julius Cæsar, or about twenty-five years before the birth of Christ; but though a variety of circumstances tend to prove this fact, it does not appear that any British coins are now extant prior to the time of Cunobeline, a prince who flourished in this island a short time after the commencement of the Christian æra. The subsequent attacks which were made upon Britain by the Emperor Claudius, and the final establishment of the Romans within its peaceful shores, A. D. 43, was followed by the introduction of Roman money among our ancestors, when the circulation of the coins which had hitherto been current in the island, was prohibited under very heavy penalties. On the departure of the Romans from Britain, about the beginning of the fifth century, they took with them all their cash and most valuable effects; as they had long treated the native inhabi tants of our island rather as friends than enemies, and had defended them against the incursions of the Scots and Picts, and other warlike nations of the North, their return into their own country was regarded by our ancestors as a serious evil, since it left them in an impoverished and defenceless condition. The tranquillity which the Romans had preserved throughout the island for so long a period, was disturbed very soon after their removal by the fierce and warlike Saxons, to whom Britain proved an easy prey, and our ancestors again bowed their necks beneath a foreign yoke. On the settlement of the Saxons in this country, they divided it into seven small principalities or kingdoms, each of which had its distinct ruler, who exercised the power of coinage and the various other functions of regal authority. The most ancient of the coins struck by the Anglo-Saxon princes, of which we have now any specimens, are those of Ethelbright, who began his reign A. D. 561. I will now conclude by stating the various coins, both nominal and real, which were introduced amongst us by the Saxons; of these, the first which claims our notice is the Pound, which appears never to have been a real coin, but to have originally implied as many of the smaller silver coins as would weigh 5400 Troy grains, or a Saxon, since called a Tower pound; the silver coinage of England was uniformly regulated by this weight till the year 1527, when Henry the Eighth substituted the Troy pound, containing 5760 grains, in its stead. The next denommation of money in use amongst the AngloSaxons was the Mark, which, like the Pound, was only a nominal coin, signifying eight Saxon ounces, or 3600 grains Troy. The Mancus, which next follows, is not certainly known to have been a real coin, though it is strongly suspected as such; and whether the Ora, or Saxon ounce, was a real or only a nominal coin, is now also a matter of dispute; the former weighed 675 grains, the latter 450. The Shilling appears to have been one of the most common of the Anglo-Saxon coins, and is very frequently mentioned by the historians of this period; its weight was 112 grains Troy, and four of them were equal to the Ora or Saxon ounce, six to the Mancus, thirty-two to the Mark, and forty-eight to the Pound. The Thrimsa was the next silver coin in size, a piece which bore to the shilling the proportion of threefifths, its weight being 674 grains. The penny, with its subdivisions, the halfpenny and farthing, all of silver, and the styca, or half-farthing of brass, close the list of the AngloSaxon coins; the weight of the penny was fixed at 224 grains Troy, twenty of them being equal to the Saxon or Tower ounce, and two hundred and forty to the pound; so that the term penny originally signified a penuyweight; how considerable is the reduction which the weight of this coin has since sustained! The silver penny of George the Third weighs only eight grains. night an account of the City of Florence, in which is given a splendid description of the Grand Chapel or Mausoleum erected to the memory of the Medici family, it struck me as a good time to propose some 1820.] Monument proposed for our late Most Gracious King. 217 thing of the same sort to be erected to the remembrance of our late good old King, the venerable father of his people, George III. We have seen, Mr. Urban, by the loyal and patriotic suggestions of Mr. Wyatt, what can be raised on an occasion of this sort, by his endeavours to erect a Cenotaph to the Memory of her Royal Highness the Princess Charlotte of Wales. If then such success attended his endeavours, what may not be expected from a wellworded address of this kind laid before the opulence of this great and mighty empire. When I reflect on the enormous fortunes made by individuals from the bumbler walks of Life * during the reign of his late Majesty, I trust the very idea alone would call forth a sum more than sufficient to build the largest Church in the City of.. London, to be dedicated to his me mory. Through the channel of your loyal Miscellany let the suggestion come forth in such manner as you in your judgment may deem meet./ With the assurance of the highest consideration and respect, I remain, yours, &c. G. AF.A.S. Mr. URBAN, Feb. 18. IT surely can never be reconciled to principles of Religion and Morality, that instruments for committing murder, should be publicly put up to sale by auction, or sold in tradesmen's shops. I am led to this remark by seeing in a Catalogue of Philosophical and other Instruments to be sold this day in London, "A Pair of Duelling Pistols," &c. and by hav ing lately observed painted on the outside of a shop window "Duelling Pistols." If such open violations of Morality are permitted, we must not be surprized, however we may la ment it, that the endeavours to inculcate Morality and Religion by precept have not their due effect. There is a very true adage, that example is better than precept; and well would it be if it was more attended to than it is. Britain has, it appears, been called lately in the House of Commons the *Such names will readily occur to every person's recollection. GENT. MAG. March 1820, "Nurse of Morality, and Protectress of Religion;*" which appellation it can scarcely be said to deserve, whilst duelling and many other crimes are countenanced in the manner they are, In your Magazine for July last, you have noticed the Academy at Dijon having offered a premium for an Essay on the means for preventing Duelling. I believe the following are the terms in which the question for the Prize are offered t. "What may be the most effectual means of extirpating from the hearts of Frenchmen that moral disease, a remnant of the barbarism of the middle ages, that false point of honour which leads them to shed blood in duels, in defiance of the precepts of religion and the laws of the state?" AN OCCASIONAL CORRESPONDENT. Mr. URBAN, Newcastle upon-Tyne, THE remarks of G. C. B. in vol. LXXXIX. ii. p. 609, induce me to offer a few observations to your notice. I agree with him, that “a person has a Coat of Arms;" but at general opinion prevails that every the same time I can only conceive such an opinion to have arisen from the total want of knowledge on the subject,—as it is a rule in Heraldry, that no man has a right to bear a Coat of Arms, unless he can prove himself a lineal descendant of one to whom that distinction was originally granted, or of one whose claim thereto has been recognized by the Heralds. I certainly conceive the bearing of another Coat of Arms without right or title to be actionable; but whether, in the present vitiated state rights, a Jury would award damages of the public mind on Genealogical for the injury, is, I am afraid, very doubtful. At the moment I write this, it occurs to me, that there is an Act of Parliament, or a Proclamation of the Sovereign, now in force (though obsolete) which provides a punishment for the offence in the shape of a penalty of ten pounds, for the purpose of supporting the authority of the * New Times, (House of Commons, Debates,) Nov. 24, 1819. + See Tilloch's Philosophical Magazine, Nov. 1819. Heralds, Heralds, which was so much impaired by the abolition of the Earl Marshal's Court, in which it will be remembered many important trials took place relative to the right of bearing the same arms, several of which are on record. (See Dallaway's Heraldry). Then it was considered a high crime and misdemeanour, but these good old days (at least so far as rights of this nature were concerned) are goneby; and we may now see every man who has risen to any respectability in society, assume a Coat of Arms which he thinks proper to say belong to his family, merely because his name happens to be spelt the same as that of a gentleman whose property they are. The same Correspondent, in p. 2, requests to be informed "whether all persons have Crests and Mottos; and, if they have, can they change them to any other, without giving notice, or receiving a grant from the Heralds' College?" To this I answer, that the various Writers on Heraldry acknowledge the right, although the custom of granting Crests has long prevailed, as I find in my own family a grant of Crest and confirmation of Arms in 1581. I believe it is the general practice in the present day to grant a Crest along with the Arms; and I should certainly think that all gentlemen who do not inherit this distinction would rather possess it through the regular channel, than take advantage of a doubtful right. IN NICHOLAS JOHN PHILIPSON. Mr. URBAN, March 8. N answer to your Correspondent "G. C. B." (p. 609, of your last Supplement), who asks, whether persons can assume arms, "without incurring some disgrace, blame, or cognizance from the rightful owners" I beg to inform him that though upstarts frequently assume arms to which they are not entitled yet they are liable to undergo a trial in the High Court of Chi * Blazoners call Assumptive Arms such as are taken up by the caprice or fancy of upstarts, though of never so mean extraction, who being advanced to a degree of fortune, either assume some without having deserved them, or appropriate to themselves those of any family, whose name they happen to bear."-Pournay's Heraldry, p. 11. 4to. edit. In Dr. Radcliffe's Life (p. 3, fourth edit.) is the following passage-"Notwithstanding the Heralds, as appears by their books, thought fit to disclaim his father's pretensions to bear arms as a descendant from the Radcliffe's of Dilston, co. Northumberland; yet the late Earl of Derwentwater, Sir Francis Radcliffe, acknowledged him for a kinsman, and suffered the son to wear a Bend engrailed Sable, field Argent, on his coach, which none of the college belonging to the Earl Marshal thought fit to animadvert upon during his life; though they have admonished the University of Oxford not to erect any such escutcheon over, or upon his monument, since his decease." The arms born by Sir Henry Blunt, baronet (Barry nebulé of six, Or and Sable,) were the same as those of the antient family of Blount; but the legality of Sir Henry's right to bear them was controverted, and after a long trial in the High Court of Chivalry, sentence was given against him in that Court by the Deputy Earl Marshal of England. Sir Henry appealed to the Court of Delegates; but how the cause was determined I know not. Possibly Sir Henry established his right to bear the arms above-mentioned. R. U. Mr. URBAN, Feb. 1. IN looking over your Volumes for the last Year, your Readers have much to regret in the loss of your very agreeable Correspondent, the "Leicestershire Clerical Traveller.+" But they have to congratulate you on the acquisition of such excellent papers as have been communicated by " E. P." which they hope to see very often in your future Numbers. P. 580. I agree with much of what "O. P. Q." says of the manner of building New Churches; but he does *"State Worthies," p. 67. 2d edit. 1670. The Rev. Aulay Macaulay: see our last Volume, i. 276. not |