Notes and Queries, Number 49, October 5, 1850

The copy of the edition of Gaudentio of 1786, which is preserved in the British Museum, contains in the title-page the following note, in pencil:

"Written originally in English by Dr. Swale of Huntingdon. See Gent. Mag. 1786."

The Gentleman's Magazine for 1786 does not, however, contain any information about the authorship of Gaudentio; and the name of Dr. Swale appears to be unknown in literary history. At the same time, a positive entry of this sort, with respect to an obscure person, doubtless had some foundation. On the authority of this note, Dr. Swale is registered as the author of Gaudentio in the printed catalogue of the British Museum Library, whence it has passed into Watt's Bibl. Brit. Perhaps some of your correspondents, who are connected with Huntingdon, may be able to throw some light on Dr. Swale.

Lastly, it should be added, that the writer of the article "Berkeley," in the Biographic Universelle, adverts to the fact that Gaudentio di Lucca has been attributed to him: he proceeds, however, to say that—

"The author of a Life of Berkeley affirms that Berkeley is not the author of that book, which he supposes to have been written by a Catholic priest imprisoned in the Tower of London."

I have been unable to trace the origin of this statement; nor do I know what is the Life of Berkeley, to which the writer in the Biogr. Univ. refers. The Life published under the direction of his family makes no allusion to Gaudentio, or to the belief that it was composed by Bishop Berkeley.

The Encyclopédie Méthodique, div. "Econ. pol. et dipl." (Paris, 1784), tom. I. p. 89., mentions the following work:—

"La République des Philosophes, ou l'Histoire des Ajaoiens, relation d'un voyage du Chevalier S. van Doelvett en Orient en l'an 1674, qui contient la description du Gouvernement, de la Religion, et des Moeurs des Ajaoiens."

It is stated that this romance, though composed a century before, had only been lately published. The editor attributed it to Fontenelle, but (as the writer in the Encycl. Méth. thinks) probably without reason. The title of Berkeley to the authorship of Gaudentio has doubtless no better foundation.

L.

[Dunlop, Hist. Fiction, iii. 491., speaks of this romance as "generally, and I believe on good grounds, supposed to be the work of the celebrated Berkeley;" adding, "we are told, in the life of this celebrated man, that Plato was his favourite author: and, indeed, of all English writers Berkeley has most successfully imitated the style and manner of that philosopher. It is not impossible, therefore, that the fanciful republic of the Grecian sage may have led Berkeley to write Gaudentio di Lucca, of which the principal object apparently is to describe a faultless and patriarchal form of governnent." The subject is a very curious one, and invites the further inquiry of our valued correspondent.—ED.]

ON A PASSAGE IN "THE TEMPEST."

I was indebted to MR. SINGER for one of the best emendations in the edition of Shakspeare I superintended (vol. vi. p. 559.), and I have too much respect for his sagacity and learning to pass, without observation, his remarks in "NOTES AND QUERIES" (Vol. ii., p. 259.), on the conclusion of the speech of Ferdinand, in "The Tempest," Act iii., Sc. 1.:—

"But these sweet thoughts do even refresh my labours;Most busy, least when I do it."

This is the way in which I ventured to print the passage, depending mainly upon the old copies. In the folio, 1623, where the play for the first time appeared, the last line stands:

"Most busie lest, when I doe it;"

and in that of 1632,

"Most busie least, when I doe it:"

so that the whole merit I claim that of altering the place of a comma, thereby, as I apprehend, rendering the meaning of the poet evident. The principle upon which I proceeded throughout was that of making as little variation as possible from the ancient authorities: upon that principle I acted in the instance in question, and I frequently found that this was the surest mode of removing difficulties. I could not easily adduce a stronger proof of this position, than the six words on which the doubt at this time has been raised.

Theobald made an important change in the old text, and his reading has been that generally adopted:—

"Most busy-less when I do it."

In restoring the old text I had, therefore, to contend with prepossession, against which, it seems, the Rev. Mr. Dyce was not proof, although I only know it from MR. SINGER'S letter, never having looked into the book in which I suppose, the opinion is advanced.

One reason why I should reject the substitution of "busy-less," even if I had not a better mode of overcoming the difficulty, is properly adverted to by MR. SINGER, viz. that the word was not in use in the time of Shakspeare. The only authority for it, at any period, quoted in Todd's Johnson, is this very (as I contend) corrupted passage in the Tempest; I have not met with it at all in any of the older dictionaries I have been able to consult; and unless the Rev. Mr. Dyce have been more fortunate, he was a little short-sighted, as well as a little angry, when he wrote his note upon mine. Had he taken more time to reflect, he might have found that after all Theobald and I are not so much at odds, although he arrives at his end by varying from, and I at mine by adhering to, the ancient authorities. In fact, I gain some confirmation of what, I believe, is the true meaning of Shakspeare, out of the very corruption Theobald introduced, and the Rev. Mr. Dyce, to my surprise, supports. I should have expected him to be the very last man who would advocate an abandonment of what has been handed down to us in every old edition of the play.

The key of the whole speech of Ferdinand is contained in its very outset:—

"There be some sports are painful, and their labourDelight in them sets off;"

and the poet has said nearly the same thing in "Macbeth:"

"The labour we delight in physics pain."

It is because Ferdinand delights in the labour that he does not feel it irksome:

"This my mean taskWould be as heavy to me as odious; butThe mistress which I serve quickens what's dead,And makes my labours pleasure."

He, therefore, tells us, at the close, that his labours are refreshed by the sweet thoughts of her; that, in fact, his toil is no toil, and that when he is "most busy" he "least does it," and suffers least under it. The delight he takes in his "mean task" renders it none.

Such I take to be the clear meaning of the poet, though somewhat obscurely and paradoxically expressed—

"Most busy, least when I do it;"

and when Theobald proposed to substitute

"Most busy-less when I do it,"

he saw, though perhaps not quite distinctly, that such was the poet's intention, only, as I have said above, he arrived at it by altering, and I by adhering to, the poet's language. I may be allowed to add that I came to my conclusion many years before I was asked to put my name to an edition of Shakspeare, which interrupted one of the most valuable friendships I ever formed.

MR. SINGER will see at once that my interpretation (which I consider quite consistent with the character of Shakspeare's mind, as well as quite consistent with the expressions he has used throughout the speech of the hero), steers clear of his proposal to alter "busie lest," or "busie least," of the folios of 1623 and 1632, to busyest or busiest; although everybody at all acquainted with our old language will agree with him in thinking, that if Shakspeare had used "busiest" at all, which he does not in any of his productions, he might have said most busiest without a violation of the constant practice of his day.

J. PAYNE COLLIER.

September 24. 1850.

GRAY'S ELEGY

Perhaps the HERMIT of HOLYPORT will be satisfied with proofs from GRAY himself as to the time and manner of the first appearance of the Elegy.

GRAY thus writes to Dr. Wharton, under the date of "Dec. 17, 1750." [I quote Mason's "Life" of its Author, p. 216.]

"The stanzas" [which he afterwards called Elegy at the suggestion of Mason] "which I now enclose to you have had the misfortune, by Mr. [Horace] Walpole's fault, to be made still more public," &c.

The next letter in Mason's publication is a letter from "Mr. Gray to Mr. Walpole" (p. 217.), and is dated "Cambridge, Feb. 11, 1751," which runs thus:—

"As you have brought me into a little sort of distress, you must assist me, I believe, to get out of it as well as I can. Yesterday I had the misfortune of receiving a letter from certain gentlemen (as their bookseller expresses it) who have taken the Magazine of Magazines into their hands: they tell me that an ingenious poem, called 'Reflections in a Country Church-yard,' has been communicated to them, which they are printing forthwith; that they are informed that the excellent author of it is I by name, and that they beg not only his indulgence, but the honour of his correspondence, &c.... I therefore am obliged to desire you would make Dodsley print it immediately from your copy, but without my name, &c. He must correct the press himself … and the title must be 'Elegy written in a Country Church-yard.' If he would add a line or two to say it came into his hand by accident, I should like it better … If Dodsley do not do this immediately, he may as well let it alone."

Dr. Johnson (Life of Gray) says:

"His next production, 1750, was his far-famed Elegy," &c.

The Doctor adds:

"Several of his [Gray's] pieces were published, 1753, with designs by Mr. Bentley, and that they might in some form or other make a book, only one side of each leaf was printed. I believe the poems and the plates recommended each other so well, that the whole impression was soon bought."

It contains six poems, one being the Elegy. I have before me a copy of this collection, which is folio. The plates are clever, and very curious; a copy was sold at the Fonthill sale for 3l. 4s.! The copy, admirably bound, which I quote, was bought at a bookseller's front-window stall for 4s. The title of this collection is "Designs by Mr. R. BENTLEY, for six poems by Mr. J. GRAY."

According to the title-page, it was "printed for R. DODSLEY, in Pall Mall, MDCCLIII.," two years previously to the date to which your correspondent refers. This (1753) collection gives the line,—

"Save where the beetle wheels his droning flight."

In the Elegant Extracts (verse), ed. 1805, which, it must be needless to mention, was prepared by the able and indefatigable Dr. Vicesimus Knox, the accomplished scholar gives the line—

"Save where the beetle wheels his drony flight."

Dr. Johnson's Dictionary does not insert the word "droning" or "drony;" but among his Illustrations attached to the verb "to drone," there are two from Dryden, each, it may be seen, using the word "droning." There is no quotation containing the word "drony." Gray's language is:

"Save where the beetle wheels his droning flight,And drowsy tinklings lull the distant folds."

Johnson's second quotation from Dryden may be worth repeating, as showing that Gray's language is not wholly different from his predecessor's:—

"Melfoil and honeysuckles pound,With these alluring savours strew the ground,And mix with tinkling brass the cymbal's droning sound."

It is perhaps hardly worth noticing, that there is not uniformity even in the title. Johnson calls it, Elegy in the Church-yard; Dodsley (1753) styles it, Elegy written in a Country Church-yard.

A HERMIT AT HAMPSTEAD.

Gray's Elegy (Vol. ii., p. 264.).—The HERMIT OF HOLYPORT is referred to the 4to. edit. of the Works of Gray, by Thos. Jas. Mathias, in which, vol. i. at the end of the Elegy, in print, he will find "From the original in the handwriting of Thos. Gray:

"'Save where the beetle wheels his droning flight.'"

From the autograph the Elegy appears to have been written in 1750; and the margin states, published in Feb. 1751, by Dodsley, and went through four editions in two months; and afterwards a fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth, ninth and tenth, and eleventh; printed also in 1753, with Mr. Bentley's designs, of which there is a second edition; and again by Dodsley in his Miscellany, vol. iv.; and in a Scotch collection, called the Union. Translated into Latin by Chr. Anstey, Esq., and the Rev. Mr. Roberts, and published in 1762; and again in the same year by Rob. Lloyd, M.A. The original MS. of the above will be found among the MSS. of Thos. Gray, in the possession of the Masters and Fellows of Pembroke House, Cambridge.

W.S.

Richmond, Sept 21. 1850

BISHOPS AND THEIR PRECEDENCE

(Vol. ii., p. 254.)

Arun is not right, in reference to this Query, in saying that the precedence of bishops over the temporal barons is regulated by the statute of 31 Hen. VIII. The precedence of bishops over the temporal lords is not regulated by the Act of 31 Hen. VIII. for placing the lords. They may have originally been summoned to sit in parliament in right of their succession to certain baronial lands annexed to, or supposed to be annexed to their episcopal sees; but as some of the temporal peers were also summoned in right of lands held of the king per baroniam, that is not a satisfactory reason why they should take precedence of temporal barons.

The precedency must have been regulated by some other laws, rules, or usage than are presented by the Act of 31 Hen. VIII. The Archbishop of Canterbury precedes the Lord Chancellor; the Archbishop of York the Lord President of the Council and the Lord Privy Seal; and all bishops precede barons. This precedency, however, is not given by the statute. The Act provides only, in reference to the spiritual peers, that the Vicegerent for good and due ministration of justice, to be had in all causes and cases touching the ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and for the godly reformation and redress of all errors, heresies, and abuses in the Church (and all other persons having grant of the said office), shall sit and be placed in all parliaments on the right side of the parliament chamber, and upon the same form that the Archbishop of Canterbury sitteth on, and above the same archbishop and his successors; and next to the said Vicegerent shall sit the Archbishop of Canterbury; and then, next to him, on the same form and side, shall sit the Archbishop of York; and next to him, on the same form and side, the Bishop of London; and next to him, on the same side and form, the Bishop of Durham; and next to him, on the same side and form, the Bishop of Winchester; and then all the other bishops of both provinces of Canterbury and York shall sit and be placed on the same side, after their ancienties, as it hath been accustomed.

There is nothing here to show in what order they are to rank among the great officers, or other temporal peers; nor is the precedency given to the Lord Chancellor over the Archbishop of York.

By the Act of Union of Great Britain and Ireland, the archbishops of that kingdom have rank immediately after the Archbishop of York, and therefore before the great officers (excepting only the Lord Chancellor), as well as above dukes; and the Irish bishops immediately after those of England.

It may be rightly stated that the high spiritual rank of the bishops is a reason for giving them precedence over the temporal lords sitting as barons; but has that reason been assigned by any writer of authority, or even any writer upon precedence?—the Query suggested by E. (Vol. ii., p. 9.) Lord Coke does not assign that reason, but says, because they hold their bishopricks of the king per baroniam. But the holding per baroniam, as before observed, would equally apply to the temporal lords holding lands by similar tenures, and sitting by writ, and receiving summons in ancient times in virtue of such their tenure.

The precedence of bishops over barons was clearly disputed in the reign of King Henry VI., when Baker says in his Chronicle (p. 204.), judgment was given for the lords temporal; but where the judgment, or any account of the dispute for precedence, is to be found I cannot say. That is what your correspondent G. inquired for (Vol. ii., p. 76.).

C.G.

Your correspondent ARUN (Vol. ii., p. 254.) states, on the authority of Stephen's Blackstone, that—

"Bishops are temporal barons, and sit in the House of Peers in right of succession to certain ancient baronies annexed or supposed to be annexed to their episcopal lands."

This position, though supported by Lord Coke in more places than one (see Coke upon Littleton, 134. a, b; 3 Inst. 30.; 4 Inst. 44.), and adopted by most other legal text-writers on his authority, cannot, it is conceived, be supported. It seems to be clearly ascertained that bishops sat in the great councils of this and other kingdoms not ratione baroniarum but jure ecclesiarum, by custom, long before the tenure per baroniam was known. In the preambles to the laws of Ina (Wilkins' Leges Ang.-Sax. f. 14.), of Athelstan (ib. 54.), of Edmund (ib. 72.), the bishops are mentioned along with others of the great council, whilst the tenure per baroniam was not known until after the Conquest. The truth seems to be that

"The bishops of the Conqueror's age were entitled to sit in his councils by the general custom of Europe and by the common law of England, which the conquest did not overturn."—Hallam's Mid. Ag. 137-8, 9th ed.

Can any of your readers throw any light on the much disputed tenure per baroniam? What was its essential character, what its incidents, and in what way did it differ from the ordinary tenure in capite?

BARO.

REPLIES TO MINOR QUERIES

Leicester and the reputed Poisoners of his Time (Vol. ii., pp. 9. 92.).—This subject receives interesting illustration in the Memoirs of Gervas Holles, who at some length describes the seduction of the Lady Sheffield, by Leicester, at Belvoir Castle, while attending the Queen on her Progress. A letter from the Earl to the lady of his love, contained the suspicious intimation—

"That he had not been unmindful in removing that obstacle which hindered the full fruition of their contentments; that he had endeavoured one expedient already which had failed, but he would lay another which he doubted not would hit more sure."

This letter the Lady Sheffield accidentally dropped from her pocket; and being picked up and given to the Lord Sheffield by his sister Holles, he read it with anger and amazement. That night he parted beds, and the next day houses; meditating in what manner he might take honourable and just revenge. Having resolved, he posted up to London to effect it; but the discovery had preceded him to the knowledge of Leicester, who finding a necessity to be quick, bribed an Italian physician ("whose name," says Holles, "I have forgotten") in whom Lord Sheffield had great confidence, to poison him, which was immediately effected after his arrival in London. Leicester, after cohabiting with the Lady Sheffield for some time, married the widow of the Earl of Essex, who, it is thought, says Holles, "served him in his own kind, every way."

In the suit afterwards instituted by Sir Robert Dudley, with the view of establishing his legitimacy, the Lady Sheffield was examined, and swore to a private marriage with the Earl of Leicester, but that she had been prevailed on, by threats and pecuniary largesses, to deny the marriage, as Queen Elizabeth was desirous that Lord Leicester should marry the widow of the Earl of Essex.

One curious circumstance arises out of the revival of these dark doings. Are the particular drugs employed by Leicester's Italian physician "in removing obstacles" now known and in operation? By a remarkable coincidence, in a case of supposed poisoning at Cheltenham, some time since, the intended victim escaped with the loss of his hair and his nails.

H.K.S.C.

What is the correct Prefix of Mayors? (Vol. i., p. 380.)—In Leicester the usage has always been to designate the chief magistrate "The worshipful the Mayor," which, I believe, is the style used in boroughs. In cities, and places specially privileged, "Right worshipful" are the terms employed.

JAYTEE.

Marks of Cadency (Vol. ii., p. 248.).—The label of the Prince of Wales has, from the time of Edward III. up to the present time, been of three points argent, and not charged.

F.E.

MISCELLANEOUS

NOTES ON BOOKS, SALES, CATALOGUES, ETC

Although we do not usually record in our columns the losses which literature sustains from time to time, we cannot permit the death of Thomas Amyot, the learned Director of the Camden Society, and for so many years the Treasurer of the Society of Antiquaries, to pass without rendering our grateful tribute to the memory of one of the most intelligent and kindest-hearted men that ever breathed; from whom we, in common with so many others, when entering on our literary career, received the most friendly assistance, and the most encouraging sympathy.

Every fifty years commences a discussion of the great question when the current century, or half century, properly begins. We have just seen this in the numerous Queries, Answers, Replies, and Rejoinders upon the subject which have appeared in the columns of the daily and weekly press; the only regular treatise being the essay upon Ancient and Modern Usage in Reckoning, by professor De Morgan, in the Companion to the Almanack for the present year. This Essay is opposed to the idea of a "zero year," and one of the advocates of that system of computation has, therefore, undertaken a defence of the zero principle, which he pronounces, "when properly understood, is undoubtedly the most correct basis of reckoning," in a small volume entitled, An Examination of the Century Question, and in which he maintains the point for which he is contending with considerable learning and ingenuity. All who are interested in the question at issue, will be at once amused and instructed by it.

Mr. Charles Knight announces a new edition of his Pictorial Shakespeare under the title of the National Edition; to contain the whole of the Notes, Illustrations, &c., thoroughly revised; and which, while it will be printed in a clear and beautiful type across the page, and not in double columns, will have the advantage of being much cheaper than the edition which he originally put forth.

The Declaration of the Fathers of the Councell of Trent concerning the going into Churches at such Times as Hereticall Service is said or Heresy preached, &c., is a reprint of a very rare tract, which possesses some present interest, as it bears upon the statement which has been of late years much insisted on by Mr. Perceval and other Anglican controversialists, that for the first twelve years of Elizabeth's reign, and until Pius V.'s celebrated Bull, Regnans in Excelsis, the Roman Catholics of England were in the habit of frequenting the Reformed worship.

We have received the following Catalogues:—W.S. Lincoln's (Cheltenham House, Westminster Road) Sixty-first Catalogue of English and Foreign Second-hand Books; W.D. Reeve's (98. Chancery Lane) Catalogue No. 13. of Cheap Books, many Rare and Curious; R. Kimpton's (31. Wardour Street, Soho) Catalogue No. 29. of Second-hand Books in good Condition at very reduced Prices.

BOOKS AND ODD VOLUMES

WANTED TO PURCHASE

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY POLL-BOOKS FOR 1780, 1784, 1790, and 1829.

OXFORD UNIVERSITY POLL-BOOKS for 1750, 1768, 1806.

BEN JONSON by CLIFFORD. 8vo. Vols. II., III., and IV.

Letters, stating particulars and lowest price, carriage free, to be sent to Mr. BELL, Publisher of "NOTES AND QUERIES," 186. Fleet Street.

NOTICES TO CORRESPONDENTS

VOLUME THE FIRST OF NOTES AND QUERIES, with Title-page and very copious Index, is now ready, price 9s. 6d., bound in cloth, and may be had, by order, of all Booksellers and Newsmen.