4. The interruption of the executing the office of Heralds in the times of the late rebellion.

5. The adversaries having the advantage of possessing themselves of all the memorandums and records of the late Earls of Northumberland, Algernon and Jocelyn, and the pedigrees and descents of that family.

"The advice abovesaid, given to the Claimant by Sir Edward Walker, Sir John Birkenhead, and the Claimant's counsel, to fix upon the wrong party, as the only way to find out the right; and which in truth had the hoped for effect. Nor is this an objection with any knowing, intelligent, and unbiassed person; it being a thing frequently in practice in the courts of law. Objection II. The obscureness of the Claimant, and meanness of his profession, having been a Trunk-maker.

"Answer. The obscureness was, as before is said, from the misfortunes and difficulties of the family of the Percies, in the troublesome times of Q. Elizabeth.

"Nor is it any real disreputation upon any noble family; the supporting families by lawful callings, though never so mean, being esteemed a virtue by all virtuous persons: and it is more frequent in the noblest families in Germany to train up their sons in the learning handicraft trades. Nor can any thing but vice disparage true nobility. Besides, the matter in controversy is not, whether the Claimant was of this or that trade; but whether he be cousin and next heir male to Jocelyn Percy, last Earl of Northumberland? which he hath, at several trials, and in several courts, proved to full satisfaction of the said courts, by all the methods and ways imaginable.

"As by proof of his lineal descent, and the ownings and declarations of the late Earls of Northumberland, Algernon and Jocelyn; that the Claimant (by the appellation of James Percy, the Trunk-maker of Dublin,) was of the blood and family of the Percies, and next heir male, after the said Jocelyn, to the Earldom; and by diverse other unanswerable proofs.

"This being the true state of the Claimant's right and title to the said Earldom, and of the means by which he has endea voured to recover his said right, wherein he hath been obstructed by the powerfulness of his adversaries, and the corruption of his agents; he humbly submits to the great wisdom, honour, and justice of the King's most sacred Majesty, and the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, in Parliament assembled; and (where it is not possible there can be any failure of justice) for relief and redress in the premises."

The compiler of the Northumberland article in Collins's Peerage (which I have already ascribed to Bishop Percy) treats this claim with contempt: asserting that Sir Ingelram Percy was never married, which he infers from the silence in his will as to any wife or children, except an illegitimate daughter. This is cer tainly a presumption of some strength; but far from conclusive, and capable of being rebutted by contrary proofs. The compiler adds, that "having persevered in his pretensions for twenty years; and being an illiterate man, and conducting his pursuit in an illiberal manner, at length, in 1689, the Lords sentenced him to wear a paper in Westminster Hall, declaring him ‘a false and impudent pretender to the Earldom of Northumberland.'" Dr. P. subjoins a note, that "he printed several editions of his case with various alterations; but none that offered even probable proof." His son, ANTHONY PERCY, became Lord Mayor of Dublin, and is mentioned as a sufferer under the tyranny of King James, by Archbishop King, in his account of The Sufferings of the Protestants of Ireland. See Collins's Peerage, edit. 1812, vol. ii. p. 357.*

* Joscelyn Percy, younger brother of Henry Percy, 5th Earl of North

Before we remark on this claim, it is necessary to remember the rule of " Audi alteram partem." If the Claimant has stated what is false, in regard to the declarations of that wise, and incorrupt Judge, Sir Matthew Hale; in regard to Champion's evidence of Sir Ingelram Percy's marriage; and in regard to the technical obstacles which were thrown in the way of his various suits at law, the inferences in his favour of course fall to the ground. But it must have been an hardened effrontery, not probable in the ordinary course of human conduct, and therefore not lightly to be believed, to publish these statements in the face of all the world, if untrue; as in that case it would then have been so easy to disprove them. On the other hand, to stamp this Percy with the ignominious character of an Impostor, would have been an act in the House of Lords not a little arbitrary and unjust, unless there had been strong evidence that his conduct had been grossly dishonourable. I am however at a little loss to guess by what law or authority this unhappy man was branded by this peculiar mode of punishment.

I confess, that till I can receive the contradiction of a strong case on the other side, I cannot reflect on the statements disclosed in this publication of Percy, without strong suspicions that there was a great deal of truth mingled up with his claim. He might have

umberland, was father of Edward Percy of Beverley, Esq. whose younger son, Thomas, is supposed to have been the Percy engaged in the Gunpowder Plot, who flying to Worcestershire, was there shot dead. From him is said. to have descended Charles Percy, a tradesman of Cambridge, whose son, Joscelyn Percy, A. M. had the Rectory of Marham, near Peterborough, and was supposed to be the next heir male of the family about 1753. See Masters' History of Bene't Coll. Camb. p. 355.

conducted himself illiberally, and thus have injured his own rights; but it seems to me contrary to probability, and the usual course of human actions, to have persevered in such assertions, and such pretensions, without a sort of family knowledge and conviction on his part, not always communicable in the shape of proof, because perhaps it consists of little inherited particles of information, which cannot be embodied in a tangible form. The story of this unfortunate Claimant therefore appears to me to possess an interest far from trifling. It is not impossible there was an illegitimacy in the course of the descent; for the printed case (unlike modern cases) neither states, nor refers to proofs, except the proof of Sir Ingelram's marriage, and the declaration of the Countess of Dorset, which, if true, is too vague to prove the particular line of descent relied upon.

I may here observe, that a treatise on the law of evidence, as applied to pedigree, is yet a desideratum, The brief outline, ably sketched in CRUISE's excellent Treatise of Dignities, is too general for the purpose.

B.

Oct. 14, 1815.

Penelope's Complaint: or a Mirror for wanton Minions. Taken out of Homer's Odissea, and written in English verse, by Peter Colse.

Armat spina rosas, mella tegunt apes.

London, printed by H. Jackson, dwelling in Fleetstreet, and are to be sold at his shop under Temple-barre gate, 1596.

4to. 32 leaves.

THE name of this writer appears to be new on the muster-roll of our Elizabethan poets, and Herbert records no production by Hugh Jackson the printer of a later date than 1590: this publication therefore is a novelty in a twofold point of view. The author, both in his dedication, and address to the readers, has a pointed and rather invidious allusion to a poem which was published in 1594, under the title of " Willobie his Avisa, or the true picture of a modest maide, and a chast and constant wife." In a second edition of that poem, edited by the author's "chamber-fellow," Hadrian Dorrell, in 1596, and examined with able care by Mr. Haslewood, in the British Bibliographer, iii. 241, the present writer is named as "one P. C." and his sinister reflections on that performance are repelled in a vindicating apology. I propose to exhibit the epistle dedicatory and address, as both allude to the poem of Henrie Willobie, who was termed by his editor and