id="pgepubid00033">296 Campbell.

—Can any of your readers tell me what he supposes Campbell to mean when he makes the sister, in delivering her curse on her brother, say—

Does havoc float? Does mountain fern float? What is the effect of either floating high? The lines are in "The Flower of Love lies Bleeding."

Also can any one say who or what this is?

The lines are near the end of The Pleasures of Hope.

W. W.

Cambridge.

297. Family of Cordeux.

—What is the origin of the name? When was it introduced into England? What are the armorial bearings of the family? What family or families bear gu. three stags' heads, on a chief arg. two griffins' heads erased: Crest, a griffin's head erased? Any information of the Cordeux family more than fifty years ago will confer an obligation on the querist.

W. H. K.

298. Panelling Inscription.

—I have recently discovered, in my investigations for the History and Antiquities of South Lynn, an old building in this town which bears the date 1605 on one of its gables; and in the course of my peregrinations through, I find some old panelling with the date 1676, and the following inscription in old English (large) characters:

It has been suggested to me that these lines form a quotation from some of our English poets; if so, of whom? for it is of great importance to me to know, as it will tend considerably to connect the date with the building; and if the lines can be traced to a writer of the period, it will establish what I require very much, and assist me in my researches.

J. N. C.

299. Infantry Firing.

—Can any of your correspondents refer me to authentic instances of the comparative numbers of rounds of cartridges fired in action, with the number of men killed? I think I have read it in Sir W. Napier's History of the Peninsular War, and also in The Times, but omitted to make a note. I have some recollection of 60,000 rounds beings fired, and only one man killed! and another instance of 80,000, and twenty-five killed! Any remarkable instances of the inefficiency of musketry fire will be acceptable.

H. Y. W. N.

Replies.

THE REVEREND RICHARD FARMER.
(Vol. iv., p. 379.)

Assuming that the principal ATROCITIES of the reverend Richard Farmer are his Essay on the learning of Shakespeare, and the substance of a note on Hamlet, Act V. Sc. 2., I shall transcribe, as a hint to the lovers of manly criticism, a general character of that writer, a character of his Essay, and the note in question:—

1. "His knowledge is various, extensive, and recondite. With much seeming negligence, and perhaps in later years some real relaxation, he understands more and remembers more about common and uncommon subjects of literature, than many of those who would be thought to read all the day and meditate half the night. In quickness of apprehension and acuteness of discrimination I have not often seen his equal."—Samuel PARR.

2. "It [the Essay on the learning of Shakespeare] may in truth be pointed out as a master-piece, whether considered with a view to the sprightliness and vivacity with which it is written, the clearness of the arrangement, the force and variety of the evidence, or the compression of scattered materials into a narrow compass; materials which inferior writers would have expanded into a large volume."—Isaac REED.

3. "There's a divinity that shapes our ends, Rough-hew [them how we will.] Dr. Farmer informs me, that these words are merely technical. A wool-man, butcher, and dealer in skewers, lately observed to him, that his nephew (an idle lad), could only assist him in making them;"—'he could rough-hew them, but I was obliged to shape their ends.' [To shape the ends of wool-skewers, i.e. to point them, requires a degree of skill; any one can rough-hew them.] Whoever recollects the profession of Shakespeare's father, will admit that his son might be no stranger to such a term [such terms]. I have [frequently] seen packages of wool pinn'd up with skewers.—STEEVENS.

This note was first printed by Malone in 1780, and was reprinted by him in 1790; the portions within brackets having been added in 1793? It is clear, from this statement, that it received the deliberate revision of its author. Now, I cannot deny that Farmer related the anecdote of the wool-man—suspicious as is the character of the witness, but I contend that the observations on it should be ascribed to Steevens alone; and so I shall leave your critic A. E. B. to his own reflections.

BOLTON CORNEY.

ANGLO-CATHOLIC LIBRARY.
(Vol. iv., p. 365.)

A SUBSCRIBER TO THE ANGLO-CATHOLIC LIBRARY has discovered one fault in one volume (published in 1844) of a series which now extends to sixty-three volumes; and on this one fault he builds a representation which implies, in general, incompetency in the editors, and neglect of proper supervision on the part of the committee of the Anglo-Catholic Library. I believe the character of the editions of most of the volumes sent out in this series is sufficiently known to theologians to render such a charge as this of little importance as respects their judgment. But it may not be so with many of the readers of "NOTES AND QUERIES."

The gravamen of the charge rests on the importance of a certain passage of St. Jerome bearing on the Presbyterian controversy,—on the necessity for a familiarity with that controversy in an editor of Overall's Convocation Book,—and the consequent incompetency of a person not thus familiar with it to edit that work without, not the assistance merely, but the immediate supervision of the committee.

Now the subject of episcopacy is not, as the Subscriber alleges, "the principal subject" of this Book; it occupies 30 pages out of 272: nor is a familiarity with that controversy in any special way necessary for an editor of the volume. The subjects of which the Convocation Book treats are wide and varied, and such omnigenous knowledge as a familiar acquaintance with them implies, is not, nor could be, required in any editor, nor be expected by subscribers.

The committee of the Anglo-Catholic Library undertook to publish careful reprints of the works of our old divines; and had they simply reprinted with accuracy the Convocation Book, as published in 1690, they would have fulfilled their covenant with the subscribers. They did, however, much more.

It was known that the