land, youngest daughter of King Henry VIII. Declared heiress presumptive soon after her birth. Displaced and declared illegitimate by Act of Parliament 1536. Became again heiress presumptive on the accession of her sister, Queen Mary, 1553, and succeeded her on the throne 1558.

8. Lady Jane Dudley was declared heir to the throne by King Edward VI. June 21, 1553, and was proclaimed Queen July 10 following. Upon the death of King Edward VI. the order of succession stood thus:-1, Princess Mary; 2, Princess Elizabeth, the king's sisters; 3, Mary, Queen of Scots, representative of the king's aunt Margaret; 4, Margaret, Countess of Lennox, cousin-german to the king; 5, Henry, Lord Darnley, her (then) only son; 6, Frances, Duchess of Suffolk, cousingerman to the king; and 7, Her daughter, Lady Jane, wife of Lord Guildford Dudley. It will be noticed that the next male heir at the time of Edward's death was his cousin, the young Lord Darnley, who afterwards became the husband of Mary, Queen of Scots, and father of King James I. The four immediate heirs to the crown were females, and the next male heir after Henry Stuart was Edward Courtenay, only surviving son and heir of Henry, Marquis of Exeter, who had been executed in the reign of Henry VIII. Edward's own idea was to exclude all the females of his family from the succession, and for that reason the Duchess of Suffolk, Lady Jane's own mother, who certainly had a better right to the throne than her daughter, was passed over. But this did not suit Northumberland's views, who intended the crown ultimately for his own son, Guildford Dudley, or at least contemplated it prospectively on the head of a future grandchild. He prevailed upon the dying king to alter his programme so as to make the order of succession run thus:-" First (for lack of issue of my body) to the Lady Frances' (Duchess of Suffolk) heirs male if she have any such before my death, then to the Lady Jane and her heirs male, then to the Lady Catherine's heirs male, the Lady Mary's heirs male," and so forth. Thus entirely passing over Jane's mother and her sisters. 9. Lady Catherine Herbert, afterwards Countess of Hertford, was virtually heiress presumptive to the throne during the nine days of her sister's reign. The Duke of Northumberland informed his daughter-in-law that her sisters Catherine and Mary were to succeed her in case she died without issue, and of course she could have ruled it so herself; but, by the assignment of Edward VI., the crown, in default of male issue of Jane, was to go to the son of Catherine if she had one, thus passing over Catherine herself altogether.

10. Mary, Queen of Scots, only daughter and heir of King James V. of Scotland, became heiress presumptive to the English crown on the accession of Queen Elizabeth, Nov., 1558, and so continued until her own death in Feb., 1586/7.

11. Princess Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia, eldest daughter of King James I., was heiress presumptive from the accession of her brother Charles I., March 27, 1625, until the birth of her nephew, Charles James, Duke of Cornwall and Rothsay, May 13, 1629, and again from his death (which happened almost immediately) till the birth of Prince Charles, afterwards Charles II., May 29, 1630.

12. Mary, Princess of Orange, afterwards Queen Mary II., became heiress presumptive on the accession of her father, King James II., in Feb., 1684/5, and so continued until the birth of her brother, James Francis Edward, Duke of Cornwall and Rothsay, June 10, 1688. She was proclaimed queen Feb. 13, 1688/9.

13. Princess Anne of Denmark, declared heiress presumptive by Act of Parliament 1689, and so remained until the death of her brother-in-law King William III., when she ascended the throne as Queen Anne.

14. Princess Sophia, Electress of Hanover, declared heiress presumptive by Act of Parliament (failing heirs of Queen Anne), and remained such from March 8, 1701/2, until her death, June 8, 1714.

15. Princess Victoria of Kent (our present most gracious sovereign) became heiress presumptive upon the accession of her uncle, King William IV., 1830, and so remained until his death, June 20, 1837, when she succeeded to the throne.

16. Victoria Adelaide Mary Louisa, Princess Royal (now Empress Frederick of Germany), was heiress presumptive from her birth, Nov. 21, 1840, until that of her brother, Albert Edward, Duke of Cornwall and Rothsay, Nov. 9, 1841.

Thus the list begins and ends with a princess of England who became Empress of Germany.

The Princess Eleanor of Bretagne (La Belle Bretonne), sister and heir of Arthur, Duke of Bretagne and Earl of Richmond, would certainly have been heiress presumptive if her brother had succeeded Richard Coeur de Lion on the throne. But as he did not do so, the unfortunate princess had to pay for her vicinity to the crown by a life-long imprisonment at the hands of her uncle, King John, and her cousin, Henry III. She might be considered as heiress presumptive of John himself, however, from the time of her brother's death to the birth of Prince Henry, afterwards Henry III., in 1207, unless Mrs. Green is correct in giving 1203 as the date of Joanna's birth (the eldest daughter of John, and afterwards Queen of Scotland), in which case that princess would have been her father's heiress presumptive for that period of time. Miss Agnes Strickland (who claims most of the chroniclers of the period in support of her statement) gives 1210 as the year in which Joanna was born ('Lives of Queens of England,' vol. i. p. 341). If that was so, Eleanor of Bretagne

must have been her uncle's heiress presumptive for the space of four years. This makes the number of heiresses presumptive to the English throne since the Conquest sixteen in all.

H. MURRAY LANE, Chester Herald.

'HARPINGS OF LENA.'

(See 6th S. v. 129, 209, 314, 370, 413.)

I note that a review of the above work is given by R. R., Boston, Lincolnshire, and a short notice of the same by BRITO. In justice to all parties I think it is right to say that the material gathered by R. R. at the age of ten is erroneous. Edward Lenton was a clerk in our office, and I have frequently heard my father and mother speak of him as a promising poet. Of Bateman they gave a very different account; indeed, I personally knew the latter, and no such delusion should exist as that a single creditable line (if any line at all) in 'Harpings of Lena' could be placed to his

account.

"Facts are stubborn things" is as old an adage as our Wold hills, and it is as to facts, for poor Lenton's sake, and for the credit of a third person I am about to name, I write.

Adjoining my father's house lived another lad, Robert Uvedale West, subsequently known as Dr. West, and as vice-president of the Royal Obstetrical Society, London. Now in a rustic building called The Hermitage," in the garden adjoining my father's paddock, West and Lenton used to meet and compose poetry, &c., admitting Bateman (who had somehow made the acquaintance of Lenton) into their sanctum.

Lenton was born on October 29, 1812, and died on June 11, 1828. West was born at Louth in July, 1810. After Lenton's death Bateman (who had doubtless secured his MSS.) persuaded West to assist him in publishing 'Harpings of Lena.' I come now to the question of the real authorship of the work, and I am glad to say Dr. West's sister permits me to append the following extracts from her letters, from which it will be at once evident that the "gems" of the book were from the pens of her brother and Lenton, out of which Bateman subsequently made profit.

Extracts referred to.

"Sonnet written at Alford January, 1829, and first printed in a monthly periodical the Olio, afterwards, with many other poems by R. U. West, inserted in a little volume 'Harpings of Lena':

A Reverie.

'Crazed beyond all hope.'-Byron. Borne by the wings of thought, I took my flight Far where the Orbs of Night in splendour roll'd: 'O for a thousand tongues' to tell the sight,

The wonders which those brilliant worlds unfold! A soft, a soul entrancing music stole

O'er my lost senses-lost in rapture deep; The glare how bright-how painful! O my soul ! When wilt thou thither wing, ne'er more to weep?

"Lenton, R. U. West, and Bateman used to meet in our Hermitage, and there show each other the prose articles, poems, &c., which they at first contrived to get inserted in a magazine, the Olio, R. U. West signing Roger Walton.' I myself remember several of these poems as my brother's. In the volume 'Harpings of West :-A Colloquy, September 3, 1828; A Dream in Lena' the following poems are certainly by R. Uvedale Spenserian Stanza, January, 1829; The Fire Bridge,' 1829; The Lost Ship,' Counsels, December 9, 1828; The War Ship,' May, 1829. In his own copy of the Hardings of Lena,' now in the possession of his son, his own signature in pencil. Perhaps he foresaw they John Gilby West, R. U. West wrote the above dates and would be attributed to or claimed by others. But besides these proofs that they are his composition, there is my own testimony, because when the book came out it made some sensation, of course, in Alford, and I was questioned as to the authorship of A Colloquy,' which was very was not believed to be by Bateman. I asked my brother, much admired, and, not being undersigned by E. Lenton, and he told me it was his, and also the others I have named. He also related how he received the idea of 'The Fire Bridge,' which poem had struck my youthful well, a little, pale, and very shy boy. We all looked on fancy as better than the Colloquy.' I remember Lenton him as promising to be a genius. As for Bateman-do you know that the spelling his name Baitman was adopted because he thought Bateman common? his real name was Bateman-he was quite incapable of writing supervision, and assistance of every kind. He was a low, any of those poems, or any articles, without corrections, ignorant fellow, and it seems strange to me that he ever was accepted as a coadjutor by the poets.'

6

"I have read with interest, and also great indignation, the article in Notes and Queries. I am sure the person who wrote it knew nothing about the Alford of the time did not write any of the poems in Harpings of Lena.' he writes. I have good reason to believe that Bateman Those with the name of Lenton were undoubtedly his; but all those unsigned were written by R. U. West. R. U. West never posed as a poet, and did not care to have his name affixed, because he was half afraid they were not good enough to be published. The tales and articles he wrote for the Olio were signed' Roger Walton.' Lenton also wrote for the Olio. I do not recognize the description of Alford and its society in Notes and Queries at all. The Listers, Carnleys, &c., and very numerous others made up a society that could not be classed amongst the poachers and smugglers.' Certainly William Bateman had not access to any of these families. Bateman was an ignorant, immoral, dishonest fellow, a scamp in every sense. For a long time my brother helped him here and there years after the acquaintance was given up, and my brother had returned to settle in Alford. I do believe there was plenty of poaching and smuggling going on in the neighbourhood and in the marshes. I remember many romantic cases of the latter myself. In all little market towns at that period there were plenty of idle and dissolute people. Bateman was one. To call Alford vulgar and ignorant is an injustice on the part of the writer of that article in Notes and Queries, who is in error in almost all his statements and assertions.

"The last time I saw Bateman shufflingalong (when I was in Alford years ago) my brother, who was with me, said

as we were approaching him, 'I do not even speak to him. It is impossible. He is a worthless vagabond and an impostor.' I said, 'Had he any ability really?' Not any pretensions to poetical ability; he could not write a line correctly. He was a parasite who hung on Lenton. He was older than Lenton, who really would have turned out a genuine poet had he lived.' I also recollect my brother said that Lenton would have been at least a second Henry Kirke White."

Bateman is dead, and with him I would bury my thoughts concerning him. I know, however, that he never was married, and was the terror of many of the poor folk in the neighbourhood, and when he asked for a meal they dare not refuse him. The statement that he knew Lord Byron when in Italy, and had translated William Tell,' 'Silvio Pellico,' &c., is too absurd to need comLISTER WILSON.

ment.

Alford.

ENGLISH AS SHE IS DERIVED.-We have heard of some amusing facts concerning "English as she is taught"; it would be equally amusing, if it were not deplorable, to illustrate "English as she is derived."

In a scientific periodical we are really entitled to expect science. But I have just met with two articles, in the same number of the same paper, which cannot justify a claim to anything of the

kind.

The first is called 'Aryan Speech traced to the Stone Age.' Here we have an argument to prove that the English words kill and hill are the same word; which is easily proved by an abuse of Grimm's law. The author takes a couple of pages to prove what he might have proved, according to his method, in a line. Briefly, hill is cognate with Lat. collis; and the connexion between collis and kill is obvious. Q.E.D. This is all wrapped up in a cloud of words and most peculiar illustrations. The following specimens are choice.

The E. horse is the same word (!) as the Goth. aihws, which is cognate with the Latin equus. This is because the ho- in horse answers to Goth. aih-; the -rse does not matter. Next, equus is so called because he was "sharp"; the word is allied to ac-er, and is derived from the Skt. ço, to sharpen, whence also the E. whet (I am afraid Benfey's Dictionary' is responsible for some of this). Further, cal-x, which means a stone, is so called from its kill-ing people, or from its hur-ting them. Of course, kill is the same as the hur- in hurt; the final t cannot matter. Coll-is, a hill, is composed of stones. Hence the Aryan languages go back to the stone age; for the stones of the hill, i.e., of collis, were used for kill-ing and hur-ting. Do not, gentle reader, put me down as suddenly gone mad. I am merely giving a summary of this extraordinary article.

A few pages further on we have an article on the History of some Common Words.' This is

better, and some of it is true, being merely compiled from other sources. But the account of bluestocking is written in blissful ignorance of a certain article in Murray's 'Dictionary'; and the same is true of the remarks on bachelor. But we are not without gems. We are gravely told that it is now the "generally received opinion" that Domesday is derived from domus dei, the house of God; because (I always shudder when this "because " has to be used) the Domesday Book was one preserved in a sacred edifice. After this, I am not surprised to learn, also for the first time, that navvy is a corruption of the Danish nabo, a neighbour; and that the verb to cow is merely a contraction of coward. At what period of our history such a phrase as "he cowarded him " would have been intelligible we are not informed.

To prove that I am not romancing, I give the references. Both of these amusing articles will be found in Knowledge, in the number for Feb. 1, 1889, pp. 77 and 92. CELER.

THE ADDITIONAL NOTE IN ROGERS'S 'ITALY,' ED. 1838. (See 7th S. vi. 267, 352, 409, 457.)-It was long since pointed out in N. & Q.' (1st S. v. 196) that the very same remark which Rogers here says had been made to him by an old Dominican at Padua was made to Wilkie by an old Jeronymite at the Escurial, as related by Wilkie's travelling companion Lord Mahon in his 'History of England,' vol. vi. p. 498 (published 1851). Much negative evidence has now been brought to show that there was no Dominican convent at Padua. Is this may justly be regarded with suspicion? Did the particular the only part of Rogers's story which Escurial and to a Dominican or other monk at same thought occur to the Jeronymite at the Padua; and was the same remark actually made to Wilkie at the one place and to Rogers at the other; or must some other solution be sought for this very curious problem?

Wilkie visited the Escurial in October, 1827, and his 'Journal' comprises notes both on Titian's Last Supper' in the refectory and the same master's Gloria' in another apartment. On the latter picture he observes, "S. Rogers has a sketch of it." He was at this time corresponding with Sir Thomas Lawrence, who wrote to him on January 10,

1828:

"I read to our friend Mr. Rogers......one or two passages of your letter (perhaps more), and he was much gratified......to have had the interest of his sketch increased by your eloquent description of its original.”— Cunningham's 'Life of Wilkie,' vol. ii. pp. 485, 492. Wilkie's letter is not given, but as it related to the pictures at the Escurial it seems not unlikely that it mentioned the incident in question. The lines to which the additional note refers, where the contrast is drawn between the transiency of the man and the permanency of the picture, are in the second part of 'Italy,' which was published in 1828.

But whether or not Rogers had then heard of the Jeronymite's remark, he must have known of it in 1835, several years before the appearance of his note, as it was then made public by Wordsworth in the Lines suggested by a Portrait from the Pencil of F. Stone,' contained in the volume entitled 'Yarrow Revisited, and other Poems,' scribed "To Samuel Rogers, Esq.":

The hoary Father in the Stranger's ear

Breathed out these words: "Here daily do we sit,
Thanks given to God for daily bread, and here
Pondering the mischiefs of these restless Times,
And thinking of my Brethren, dead, dispersed,
Or changed and changing, I not seldom gaze
Upon this solemn Company unmoved

By shock of circumstance, or lapse of years,
Until I cannot but believe that they—

They are in truth the Substance, we the Shadows." R. D. WILSON. COAL OR CABBAGE.-An amusing error, almost as good as the historic curmudgeon of Asb, suggests with what a slender equipment of French Dr. Jamieson made his 'Etymological Dictionary of the Scottish Language.' He explains chows as "a particular kind of coal, smaller than the common kind, much used in forges; perhaps from French chou, the general name of coal." Now, of course, chou is not, and never was, coal, but it is "the general name" of cole, i. e., cabbage. But coal was formerly spelt cole, so that it is evident either that Jamieson lost his way between the chou, cole, and the charbon, cole, of a sixteenth century French dictionary, or else that some wag to whom he applied for help upon the Scotch chows, small coals, poked fun at him by referring him to the French choux, coles.

J. A. H. MURRAY.

A FALSE EPITAPH: "MARTHA GWYNNHATCHED A CHERUBIN."-All men (i.e., a great many) have heard of Mrs. Martha, or Margaret, Gwynn, celebrated in an epitaph which I may give as follows:

Here lie the bones of Martha Gwynn,
Who was so very pure within,
She broke the outer shell of sin,

And thence was hatched a Cherubin. Being desirous to find the true form and also the place of this epitaph, I lately searched for and found it in three published collections, each of which gives a text differing from the other two. For the place of it one collector, Mr. Augustus Hare, says Cambridgeshire. Had he said England he would have committed himself to less, and the reference would have been about equally useful. Another more definitely assigns it to St. Albans, Herts. By the help of a friend I was enabled to learn with something like certainty that it is not to be found there, though my friend happily suggested that as Nell Gwynn once had a house of her own not far off, Martha the immaculate and naughty Nelly may have been sisters. But unhappily for her

"Maria Wentworth, illustris Thomæ Comitis Cleveland Filia premortua prima animam virgineam exhalavit [-] Januar ano Dni. MDCXXXII., ætat. xviii,

And here ye pretious dust is layde
Whose purelie temper'd clay was made
So fine that it ye guest betray'd.
Else the soule grew so faste within,
It broke ye outwarde shelle of sin,
And soe was hatch'd a Cherubin.
In height it soar'd to God above,
In depth it did to knowledge move,
And spread in breadth to generaile love.
Before a pious duty shind,

To Parents curtesie behind,
On either side an equal minde.
Good to ye poore, to kindred deare,
To servants kinde, to friendship cleare,
To nothing but herself severe.
See though a Virgin yet a Bride
To everie grace, she justified
A chaste Poligamie, and dyed.

C. B. MOUNT.

PIGOTT.-As the verb "to pigott" may hereafter become as common as that "to boycott," will N. & Q.' record, for the benefit of Dr. Murray's descendants, that the former word was born in the House of Commons on February 28, 1889 ?

HERMENTRUDE.

POPE'S SIZE. -A year or two ago I bought a merino vest. On the bill I noticed P.S. after it, and by inquiry I elicited that P.S. stood for "pope's size," and that "pope's size" meant short and stout. This was very humiliating, as I had always flattered myself that I was of middle height; but I consoled myself with the reflection that I had, after all, probably learned something, for it seemed likely that in days gone by popes, as a race, had been looked upon as short and stout. I knew very well that abbots, monks, and friars had had the reputation of being fat and jolly, but I was not aware that popes had likewise been charged with a too vivid enjoyment of the things of this life. I could not, however, discover any further evidence upon this point, and let the matter drop. Very recently, however, in 'Madame Phaéton,' a novel, by Clovis Hugues, p. 21, I came across the follow

ing: "Il était gros comme un pape," so that it seems that in France also popes enjoyed, and perhaps still enjoy, the reputation of being stout. And I would compare also the name pope, applied to a small, short, thickset fish with a large head, also called ruff. That pope in this case is no corruption, but is really the name of the head of the Roman Catholic Church, is shown by the German Papst, which has the same two meanings (Hilpert, Sanders). F. CHANCE.

DESSERT IN AMERICA. The review of 'Americanisms, Old and New,' by John S. Farmer, given in 'N. & Q.,' ante, p. 119, contains the following

sentence:

"Dessert in America is applied not only to fruit, as in England, and fruit and cheese, as in France, but to the sweets, such as pastry, puddings, &c."

The words here italicized had better have been scratched out, or altered to make them correct. Littré has the following definition : Dessert, le dernier service d'un repas, composé de fromage, de confitures, de fruits et de pâtisserie." The same article in the dictionary of the Academy is as follows:

"Dessert, ce qu'on sert, ce qui se mange à la fin du repas, comme le fruit, le fromage, les confitures, la pâtisserie, &c. On disait aussi quelquefois le fruit, surtout dans les grandes maisons."

I think, then, that the sentence above quoted would have run more accurately thus:

"Dessert in America is applied not only to fruit, as in England, but, as in France, to the sweets, such as pastry, puddings, &c."

No doubt the Americans have derived the meaning of the word from their intercourse with the French towards the end of the last century.

Paris.

DNARGEL.

LITERARY PLAGIARISMS.-Public Opinion of February 1, copying from St. James's Gazette, states that the well-known lines of Goldsmith commencing

When lovely woman stoops to folly

longing to the famous John Byrom, but now located in the Chetham Library, Manchester, according to the bequest of my friend the late Miss Atherton, is the Life of Archbishop Whitgift,' printed for Ri. Chiswell, and to be sold at the Rose and Crown, and at the Rose in St. Paul's Churchyard, 1699. Before coming into John Byrom's possession it was the property of Dr. White Kennett, Dean of Peterborough, 1707-18, and afterwards bishop of the same. The book-plate describes him as dean. On the fly-leaf of this volume occurs an entry of which I send a copy, in the thought that it may prove not only interesting to your correspondents as somewhat exemplifying the episcopal leanings of the George Inn," St. Martin's, Stamford, but also useful as a record in 'N. & Q.' There is no signature to indicate the writer, but as the handwriting seems to be of the end of the seventeenth or beginning of the eighteenth century, I incline to the belief that it is a note by Kennett himself, to say nothing of his close neighbourhood to the inn in question. Perhaps some more learned correspondent know who the Mr. Griffith is of whom mention is made, and so determine the matter :— "Mr. Griffith, in his MSS. Collections in my custody, writes thus:

66

may

"Coll Gervase Holles (one of his Maties Masters of Requests) told me on the 27th of January, 1672/3, that travailing thro Stamford, in Lincolnshire, he accidentally met wth a picture of ABp. Whitgifts in his lodgings at the George Inne in that Town, wch he knew to be so by ye Coat Armour and Motto under express'd in one corner thereof, wch he bought for fifty shillings, and so ye Colonel' is come into the possession of this Picture, wch he told me he would not take twenty pounds for, it being an assured Original done by an excellent hand upon wainscoat, wch by some accident is cracked, tho not much to the Detriment of the Piece.

"Mr. Henry Peachman [sic], in his 'Complete Gentleman,' ch. iii., being directions for Painting, describes John Whitgift, ABp. of Canterbury, blackhaired and of a brown complexion."

Askengarth Dale, Yorks.

JOHN TINKLER, M.A.

THE ZODIAC.-In an old book of mine entitled "The Marrow of Physick,' dedicated "to the Honour

Lorsqu'une femme, après trop de tendresse,
D'un homme sent la trahison,
Comment pour cette si douce foiblesse
Peut-elle trouver une guérison?

Le seul remède qu'elle peut ressentir,

La seule revanche pour son tort,

Pour faire trop tard l'amant repentir

Hélas! trop tard-est la mort.

Waltham Abbey.

A. COLLINGWOOD LEE.

'LIFE OF ARCHBISHOP WHITGIFT.' (See 7th S. v. 241, 294, 330.)-Amongst the books once be

"The second Signe Taurus raigneth in April, it bath the name of Bull: forasmuch as Jacob wrastled and strove with the Angel: whosoever is borne in this signe shal have good successe in all manner of beasts and cattle of the field.

"The third Gemini raigneth in May; it hath the name of twinnes, forasmuch as Adam and Eve were