Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub

MINOR CORRESPONDENCE.

J. O. is referred for the Pedigrees he enquires after, to the Heralds' College.

T. MOLINEUX will find the anecdote of Abp. Usher he enquires after, in vol. LXII. p. 715.

A COUNTRY GENTLEMAN'S Question concerning the Marquis of Stafford's Picture Gallery, is of too delicate a nature for a Public Print. An answer might be had for a shilling at the Prerogative office.

J. BEATSON, in reply to a CONSTANT READER, (p. 290.) adduces the following circumstance:-"The Rev. T. G. Clare, rector of St. Andrew's, Holborn, who died June 4, 1819," lived at the parsonagehouse, St. Andrew's-court, and his widow remained in the house for more than three months after, for by law she is given six months grace to remove."

In farther answer to MENTOR, p. 222, 66 In an a QUONDAM CHURCH WARDEN says, action upon the case for a disturbance of the enjoyment of a pew; if the plaintiff claims it by prescription, he must state it in the declaration as appurtenant to a messuage in the parish. This prescription may be supported by an enjoyment for 36 years, and perhaps for any time above 20 years. In such an action against the Ordinary, the plaintiff must allege and prove repairs of the pew."

A CORRESPONDENT replies to the Inquiry (p. 2.) respecting the issue of Lucy Knivett, daughter of John Knivett, of Norwich, esq. who married Lucy, daughter and co-heir of Charles Suckling, esq. of Bracondale, Norfolk. By her he had issue: 1st. Paston Knivett; 2d. Thomas Knivett; 3d. John Knivett, buried at Trowse, Norfolk, 1685-6; 4th. John or Jonathan Knivett, Captain in the army, buried at Trowse, but has since been removed to Ashwelthorp, Norfolk; 5th. Chas. Knivett; 6th. Henry Knivett; 7th. Elizabeth Knivett, married Henry Wilson, esq.; 8th. Lucy Knivett, married first, John Holt, esq. and 2d, John Field; 9th. Catherine Knivett.

MINIMUS E CLERIS says, "It is one of the questions usually put by the Governors of Queen Anne's Bounty prior to the augmentation of any small living

Is the Living a Chapel of Ease or a Perpetual Curacy?' He wishes therefore to ask, 1. "What is the distinction between a Chapel of Ease and a Perpetual Curacy? -2. If there be a distinction, are Chapels of Ease (distinct from Perpetual Curacies) numerous ?-3. Are not those Perpetual Curacies, which are under a Mother Church, likewise Chapels of Ease ?"

CLERICUS LANCASTRIENSIS remarks, "In your Magazine for March (page 271), you

inform your Readers that the Gazette of Feb. 22, contains the Proclamation usually issued, at the commencement of each new reign, for the encouragement of piety and virtue, and for the preventing and punishing of vice, profaneness, and immorality.-I wish to ask whether that Proclamation was issued earlier in the reign of our late beloved King than the 27th year, i. e. in the year 1787;-and by what former King it had been issued?"

M. observes, "a toast is often given in certain public companies- The Royal Family-and may they never forget the principles which placed them

Throne.'

on the

The sentiment is not sufficiently explanatory, as it does not allude to their rightful claims by descent, confirmed by the Act of Settlement, as being the next in the Protestant succession after the death of Queen Anne, without issue."

WHITCHURCH states, that the armorial in

signia of Earl Nelson, Sir Wm. Domville, &c. are frequently seen with the shield quarterly; in the first quarter, the Arms as augmented and enriched by royal order; the second containing the Arms as used before the augmentation; (the third and fourth a family quartering of ancestry;) is not this to be considered as a redundant method, it making the interesting objects in the augmentation too minute to be well distinguished? also is not the royal augmentation intended to do away the use of the former coat?

OSCAR asks, "When a man inarries an heiress, who afterwards dies in his lifetime, ought he after her death to quarter her coat with his own? Or otherwise, how is it to be known that his wife is not still living, if he wishes to continue bearing her coat, which he may do?"

[ocr errors]

G. H. W. says, in p. 188, Mr. Dick

is called " heir to the title of Braid." Query, whether any such title ever existed?"-Probably, heir to the Scotch Baronetage of Dick, of Braid, in Mid-Lothian,

was meant.

In the preface to "HASTED'S Kent," 8vo. 1797, the Author, in stating the embarrassments frequently arising from the neglect of pedigrees, and the consequent advertisements for the next of kin, says, "The well-known loss of the Selby Estate to the right heir, is a recent instance what care ought to be taken in this particular."-W. S. is anxious to ascertain what Selby estate is alluded to, or any circumstances connected therewith.

All OLD CORrespondent is referred for an explanation of an oriel window, to vol. LXIX. p. 191.

A complete List of the New Parliament shall be given in our SUPPLEMENT.

THE

[ 387
387

GENTLEMAN'S MAGAZINE,

For MAY,

MAY, 1820.

MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE.

[blocks in formation]

As it has been generally stated S it has been generally stated

take place in the Royal Crown of England, by the omission of the fleur de lis upon its circle, I beg leave, through the medium of your pages, to call the attention of those who may be interested in the enquiry, to a suggestion whether the form of this regal ornament has been improved by the depression of the arches by which it is surmounted, and by the squareness of outline which is thus given to it. To such of your Readers as are familiar with delineations of the Crowns of our last Plantagenets and Tudors, the circumstance above described will, I believe, be perfectly intelligible: they will recollect examples, in particular, of the highraised Crown of Elizabeth, the most opposite, in this respect, from that of the present age. There are, however, others of a less elevation, though of the same character, which I have often regarded as extremely graceful: perhaps a better instance cannot be given than that afforded by the coins of Henry VII. Perhaps, Mr. Urban, I must not venture so far as to recommend a revival of this antient form, but I think I may safely advise a comparison of the present Crown with those which have preceded it, at a time when its fabric must necessarily be new modelled. I may also be permitted to hope that, as the barbarous taste which prevailed after the Restoration (when, by the way, our present Regalia were made), is now fortunately exploded, the more appropriate style of antient English art will be appealed to in whatever concerns either these, or the august ceremony to which they particularly belong.

With regard to the change of ornaments on the rim of the Crown, I suppose the place of the fleur de lis

will be supplied by the beautiful leaf which is often seen on antient Crowns, and now on the ducal coronets. The circle will in that case resemble that assigned to Nephews of the blood Royal-crosses and leaves alternate. The substitution of thistles and shamrock,-a conceit of some of the newspapers, is of course too absurd for notice.

I had forgotten to mention that most of the Crowns of foreign Sovereigns are of the form to which I have referred above; - the bows forming a regular obtuse arch above the head: and this appears to be also the case in that of Hanover, judging from the representation of it on the shield of our new half-crowns.

There is another point connected with the subject of this Letter upon which you will allow me to add a few words. The COINS of all our Kings, from the earliest time down to the Restoration, are rendered particularly interesting to the student of Regal Antiquities, by their presenting figures of the Crowns, and in some instances the Sceptres also, which were in use at different periods of our history. Surely, Sir, there is much reason to regret that the practice of exhibiting the Sovereign's head with its peculiar and appropriate ornament hath since been laid aside. The laurel wreath, however justly we may have been used to admire it on the brow of a Roman Emperor, ceases to be classical when applied to an English King; its adoption is contrary to good taste, for it is in violation of historical truth and consistency. Let us hope, then, that this may be considered in the forthcoming Coinage of his present Majesty. Yours, &c.

I

Mr. URBAN,

A. T.

May 10.

LATELY made an accidental purchase of a copy of Isaac Wal

ton's

ton's Lives of Dr. Donne, Sir H. Wotton, Hooker, and Herbert, which, apon inspection, proved to be the identical Volume presented, or intended for presentation, to his brother, by the amiable and learned author, as appears from his autograph Iz. Wa. which is in a very small neat character above the portrait of Dr. Donne, facing the title-page, together with the words "ffor my brother Mr. .. .” The name struck through with a pen so as to have become illegible. It is not, however, on account of this particular (although every particular relative to that excellent man is deserving of notice), that I presume to obtrude upon you at present, but in order to mention that in the same hand-writing of "Honest Izaac,” on a blank in the 81st page at the close of the life of Dr. Donne, and immediately preceding the Epitaph upon the Dean by Dr. Corbet, Bishop of Oxford, there appears the following Elegy, which I copy verbatim et literatim:

"An Elegy on Dr. Donne.

I cannot blame those men yt know yee well,

Yet dare not help ye world to ring thy

knell

knowen

[ocr errors]

In tunefull Elegies. There's no language [owne. Ffit for thy mention but was first thine The Epitaphs yu writtst have so bereft Our Tongue of Witt, there is no ffancie

left

[blocks in formation]

have mentioned, and not recollecting to have met with it before; perhaps some of your Correspondents will either confirm or correct my conjecture respecting its author: and if this should happen to meet the eye of the learned Editor of the Athenæ Oxonienses, in whose elaborate work so many curious particulars relative to many of our antient worthies are embalmed for the benefit of posterity, he may perhaps not think it impertinent in the writer to request information whether these lines have before appeared as the accredited production of the noble person whose name is annexed to them?. C. R. O.

Mr. URBAN, Cambridge, May 15.

A LATE popular Work, entitled

"Peter's Letters to his Kinsfolks," concludes its account of Mr. DUNBAR, the Greek Professor at Edinburgh, with informing its readers that he is the author of some pieces in the "Cambridge Classical Researches." Having lately perused a publication bearing the name of Mr. Dunbar, I felt great surprise at the above assertion, and was led to enquire of the Editor of our Classical Researches, whether there was any foundation for it. He assured me that it was totally untrue, and that there never could have been the least ground for such a report.

Thinking it right that an assertion should be contradicted which is injurious to the character of a respectable Work, as well as of our University, I take the liberty of begging you to notice this mistatement, which occurs in vol. 1. p. 172, of " Peter's Letters to his Kinsfolks." Yours, &c.

CANTABRIGIENSIS.

THE SEA-BATHING INFIRMARY.
Redeunt Saturnia regna!
Mr. URBAN,
Chelsea.

IN your Magazine for May 1819, page 392; and in the Review department of that for April 1820, pp. 337, 338; your numerous Readers are informed of certain differences

whereby an excellent London Charity has been partially injured. — Allow your present Correspondent to reverse the picture, and to exhibit to full view the sweet contrast of unanimity in benevolence.

On Saturday, May 13, 1820, I dined with the Directors and Stewards at the

1

1820.] Royal Sea-Bathing Infirmary.-Historic Relation. 389

the London Coffee-House in Ludgate-
street. The Meeting was unusually
large. At the head of the table sat
the Right Hon. the Earl of Liver-
pool, K.G. When his Lordship, after
dinner, gave the first toast, "THE
KING," he delighted his auditors with
the intelligence that his Majesty de-
clared himself PATRON of the Insti-
tution, and directed that henceforth
its name be changed from the Gene-
ral Sea Bathing Infirmary to THE
ROYAL SEA BATHING INFIRMARY.
In terms pithy, eloquent, and deeply
pathetic, the noble Chairman eulo-
gized the Charity, and expressed his
own firm determination to support
it. Sir William Blizard, John Blades,
Esq. Sir Everard Home, Rev. Dr.
Yates, Rev. Weeden Butler, Dr.
Brown, Thos. Chevalier, Esq. and
various other warm friends to the
Charity, spoke their sentiments in
the course of the evening. Sir W.
B. recommended the Infirmary to
all medical gentlemen as a grand
necessary adjunct to the London Hos-
pitals; J. B. Esq. noticed a splendid
act of liberality by Thomas Warre,
Esq. and professed his own readiness
to co-operate in a similar manner.
Sir E. H. cheerfully agreed to accept
the office of Steward at the next
Anniversary, and avowed his wish
thereby to demonstrate his attach-
ment as a professional man to the in-
terests of the diseased Poor. Dr. Y.
reported the good government and
accommodation of the Building, and
the sense entertained by its happy
patients; he made his luminous re-
port from personal survey. He left
to his clerical brother at his elbow
to express more at large their com-
mon satisfaction. Rev. W. B. gave
a concise narrative of the Establish-
ment, from its origin to its present
state of stability: and figuratively
observed, that he had watched the
PLANT throughout its growth, under
various changes in its atmosphere.
It was now mature. Its soil was rich:
its culture was most favourable.
Thank God! its roots had struck
deep into British hearts; it was pro-
tected by his Lordship, and nurtured
by public munificence; it was now
warmed by the rays of Royal Patron-
age; and often, indeed, would it be
watered in silence by tears of grati-
tude from the Poor. Dr. B. very
neatly thanked the company for

drinking his health, and assured them of the zeal of Sir Thomas Grey and himself. T. C. Esq. did not speak till after the Noble Chairman had quitted the room, and Sir Thomas Blizard, V.P. had succeeded him; but that gentleman then riveted the attention of his hearers by remarks which were original in their nature, and convincing in argument. AMICUS. Yours, &c.

On the Extent of the Historic Relation, in discovering and marshalling the Subjects of Human Knowledge. (Continued from Vol. LXXXIX. Part ii. p. 606.)

N

EED we any longer, therefore, be surprised at HUME and ADAM SMITH of the French school having lost their way, for want of the historical clew that guides us through the knowledge of things? For three quarters of a century these men, endowed with genius, and having fol lowers of no ordinary sagacity, have been gravely enquiring," How, by what means the mind prefers one tenor of conduct to another :-how it denominates one right, and the other wrong: and wherefore it considers ONE as the object of approbation or reward, and the OTHER of reprobation or punishment?"

and

To illustrate this more satisfactorily, let us here notice the leading points in the most celebrated speculations upon Ethics and Philology. The French were not the original inventors of those speculations-for they invent nothing-they only give a name and a fashion to the discoveries of others. The spirit of these speculations was re-produced in our modern times, first, in the reign of Charles II. It was an essence formed out of the fanatic acid of those days, mixed with the lees and dregs of that intoxicating speculation called DEISM: the wine of a profligate, gambling, and corrupt court. But to drop the figure-this philosophy of HOBBES, MANDEVILLE, and finally of LORD Bolingbroke, made it necessary for the great Dr. CLARKE to ascertain and fix what he calls the eternal relations and fitnesses of things. He has thus made it even a matter of demonstration, the historical order.

He was preceded by NEWTON, and accompanied by Bishop BUTLER : the former had to ascertain and fix even

the

:

the laws of the creation, a standing fact and by a scientific chronology, to lay down the authentic Chart of History. While the latter (Bishop BUTLER) showed the grand historical analogy of things, human and divine. As LOCKE and BISHOP BERKELEY (though both of them virtuous men, in fact) are admitted to have lost their way, in speculations upon paper-it is hardly necessary for us, here, to follow them, if we had time even, which we have not.

The philosophy of the good Dr. HUTCHESON has laboured to show that BENEVOLENCE is the principle of virtue. But to what extent is this true? By what medium is it measured, and regulated? His principle of benevolence is plainly referable to our historical relations: 1. That to the Deity as our common FATHER: 2. To his creature, man, who is our

BROTHER.

But, thirdly, it is a matter of the highest record, that these two relative duties were enjoined in positive, express terms by the author of Christianity-at the Jewish Reformation -revealed from the Deity himself. This is a fact, therefore, contained in SACRED history.

Then follow the wandering sys tems, till speculation is lost in the inextricable labyrinth of Scepticism: the centre of which is occupied by a fatal atheism, that mare mortuum, or dead sea. One system is that "vir. tue consists merely in the wise and prudent pursuit of our own real and solid happiness." Upon which we may observe, by the way, that to make happiness your direct object, is the very way to be miserable:-just as the very way to spoil your physical constitution, is to be ever running after health. Those who never think of health or happiness, but of their active duties, are found to attain indirectly both these objects! This system precisely inverts the his torical or natural order.

One would think that Philosophers were meaning to give the world a specimen of irony, or a piece of the most exquisite and refined pleasantry, when in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries they are thus gravely inquiring (like Diogenes with his lanthorn in noon-day) "what is happi

ness? and wherein does virtue consist? What recommends it to us

more than any other, the most indifferent thing? Is there any standard of truth? What is truth-and where is it-How do we know that there is any such thing as truth?" &c. &c. One would suppose we had fallen among a set of disguised Jews and Stock-jobbers, and not an assembly of Philosophers, to hear it gravely asked, whether conscience is a real, or an imaginary faculty!

But by following the historic relation, as above indicated by Scripture, all these things will be discovered, defined, and attained, as well as we can reasonably expect in this given state of things. Or, to use the emphatic language of LORD BACON,

1

we shall be endued with all the public and private virtues, and ALL

AT ONCE."

It has been a favourite enquiry whether we have any peculiar organ called the moral sense? Whether this principle is a modification only of some other principle in human nature, to which it is reducible: as reason, good taste, sympathy, and the like?

. Conscience is that inward record upon the consciousness of any thing we have intended, said, or done-put in apposition with the memory of the golden rule-relating historically to God and our neighbour. For as to the sympathy borrowed by ADAM SMITH from the petite morale of the French school-this sympathy is the accord or musical harmony of two or more minds-whether one is contemplating the composed picture of the other suffering or this other imagines a composed spectator. It belongs to the fine arts, not to morals-What else is the standard of propriety, but the historical order of things? What else are even prudence, temperance, fortitude, and justice?

There are three senses of justice: Do as you would be done by : Do no wrong: Do not these certain assigned wrongs, laid down and forbidden by law? By what relation do we arrive at these rules? Who told us of them? How are we able to apply them?

It is pleasant enough that ADAM SMITH, in his Theory of Moral Sentiments, should think it worth remarking that "the best systems of Moral Philosophy (as distinguished from the licentious ones of Mandeville, Hobbes, and others) do all con

tribute

« VorigeDoorgaan »