AUTHORS' FAVOURITE WORKS.-In the recently written preface to the "Charles Dickens" edition of David Copperfield, Mr. Dickens honours his readers with a new and most interesting confidence, to the effect that of the numerous "children of his fancy" David Copperfield is elected to the prominent position of "favourite."

To an ardent lover of any special author such a statement would invest the work in question with an additional value and importance; and could a list be compiled of works distinguished by the acknowledged preference of their respective writers, I think it would be the means of imparting much gratification to every gradation of reader and student. Can any reader of "N. & Q." furnish me with any authenticated data of this description. EDWARD C. DAVIES.

THE COUNTESSES OF HEREFORD.-Have any of your genealogical correspondents ever tried to disentangle the confusion of the Bohun pedigree during the 13th century? Of three Earls and five Countesses, the mutual relationships baffle my genealogical acumen? These are-Earl Henry (son of Earl Humphrey), second Earl of Hereford, d. 1220; Earl Humphrey, his son, third Earl, d. 1239; Earl Humphrey, his son, fourth Earl, d. 1275; Countess M- (initial only given), who was divorced and had re-married Roger de Dantes before 12 H. III.; Countess Matilda, heiress of Essex, m. 1228, d. 1236; Countess Matilda, daughter of Ralph, Count of Eu; Countess Matilda de Auenesbiry, d. 1273; Countess Matilda, daughter of Ingelram de Fienes, who was cousin of Queen Eleanor (qy. which ?), and d. before her husband, on St. Leonard's day (year provokingly omitted). The fact that all, or all but one, of these ladies were called Matilda imparts an additional element of difficulty. The only one of them who can with confidence be assigned to any Earl in particular is the heiress of Essex, who was the wife of that Humphrey who died in 1239. But even here the dates connected with her children are inexplicable. We find an Alice, daughter of Humphrey, Earl of Hereford, who was married to Roger de Tony in 1239, her father then living. As one of the Earls died in this year, she might have been the daughter of either of the two. She does not appear in the Chronicle of Walden as daughter of the elder; and the Roll which records the marriage expressly states that she was the daughter of the younger, the son of Matilda of Essex.

Yet, according to the Chron. Wald., as Matilda was married in 1228, and her son Humphrey born in 1231, he can only have been eight years old when his daughter was married to Roger de Tony. Again, Ralph, the youngest son of Matilda of Essex, was born (on the same authority) in 1239, three years after the decease of his mother. Will anybody help me out of the labyrinth? HERMEN TRUDE.

MORTLAKE.-At this place, in Surrey, there was but one pottery existing in 1831, though at some time earlier there were two at work. The former one appears to have been a small affair of white stoneware, belonging to Joseph Kishire. The other pottery, for delf ware, had been worked by Wagstaffe & Co. I think this firm succeeded Price shortly before 1811. I am led to consider that Price succeeded Searles somewhere about 1800. I should be glad to know if this be correct; also if Searles founded the factory; if so, in what year; and also what became of his family. I was informed in my younger days that the brown "Toby" jugs were invented at this pottery, I presume either by Searles or by his predecessors, if there were any. W. P.

NUREMBERG.In the lower and frightful "oubliettes" yet to be seen by the curious, in the Prison Tower at Nuremberg, is a range of dungeons used so late as the 17th century. Over the door of each is a symbol representing (inter alia) either a horse, a stag, a hare, a dog, a stork, a camel, a cock, or a cat. Will any of your correspondents explain the reason of those hieroglyphics being so placed, and their meaning, and whether any similar instance can be cited. Peckham.

J. A.

POLKINGHORNE. What is the meaning or derivation of the name of Polkinghorne? Is Polquhairn the old Scotch version of Polkinghorne? I met with the name of Polquhairn Ranking in a note in Bell on the Laws of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 966. РАКЕНА.

Karauri, New Zealand.

JOAN. POSSELIUS.-I send the title of what I

fancy must be a rare as well as interesting little volume, and shall be glad to know anything further respecting its author. Was it in use as a school book?

"Apothegmata Græco-latina Joan. Posselii quondam

Professoris Academia Rostochiana, celeberrimi inter Græ

cos et philologos nostri seculi facile principis. Hactenus a multis multum expetita. Editio prorsus nova, elaborata opera Joan. Posselii filii, Græcæ linguæ in Rostochiensi academia Professoris.-Excudebat G. D. impensis Gulielmi Nealand, apud quem prostant venales sub signo Corona in vico vulgo vocato Duck Lane, MDCLII."

E. H. A.

SHERIFFS' FIRE BUCKETS.-In the pages of The City Press of Dec. 7, 1867, there is a state

ment "that all they (the Sheriffs of London) get in turn from the citizens are six fire buckets-a strange present truly, if what one hears is true." This is the return for all their outgoings, the Guildhall dinner, the Old Bailey dinners, the carriages, the gold chains, &c. Is this gift a fact? and if so, what was the origin of it? W. P. ST. SIMON.-M. Jules Favre, in his speech on the Roman Question, in the French Legislative Assembly (Times, Dec. 5th), said the following:

"One of the most eminent speakers, Monseigneur de Paris (laughter)-pardon, Gentlemen, I speak like M. de St. Simon: since we are brought back to his epoch we may be permitted to use his language (laughter, and approbation on the left of the speaker):-Monseigneur de Paris recognises that the intervention is an expedient," &c. Why the laughter? Why the cheers? What was the language of St. Simon? Will some one please to elucidate, for DEPUIS LA REVOLUTION.

SMITH (THE POKER ARTIST).—What is known of this genius, who used the poker instead of the brush, and burned where others daubed? At the back of the western gallery in the fine old church of Skipton-in-Craven is a clever "Annunciation " from the irons of Smith. I have heard that he was a native of Skipton. He certainly had his studio in the castle there, immediately over the grand entrance. He was a man of talent, and "real Smiths" fetch a good price at the London picture-shops. Was he the inventor of the art ?

60, Hill Street, Garnet Hill, Glasgow. TRANSLATIONS. Will some correspondents kindly answer the following queries ? Which is the best Italian translation (in verse) of Paradise Lost?

Who is the best Italian translator of Shakspeare? Is there any literal prose translation in our language of the Purgatorio and Paradiso of Dante ? Dr. Carlyle has, I believe, limited his labours to the Inferno.

Whose is the best German-English and EnglishGerman Dictionary? JONATHAN BOUCHIER.

WALKLEY'S CATALOGUES OF PEERS, BARONETS, AND KNIGHTS.-In the list of baronets published by Thomas Walkley in 1652, is "Dame Mary Bolles of Ardworth" (p. 107). Was this lady a widow, or did she get on the list in her own right? There must have been more baronets' widows than

herself. In the same book it appears that, on the 23rd September 1635, the Earl of Lindsey knighted on board His Majesty's Royal ship the "Marehonor," John Lord Pawlet of Hinton St. George; John Pawlett his son; James Douglas, the son of the Earl of Morton; John Digby; Charles Howard, son and heir of Sir Francis Howard of Bookham, Surrey; and Elias Hicks, one What was his authority to confer knighthood? of the gentlemen Pensioners to His Majesty. On July 5, 1632, Anthony Vandike was knighted Martin Van Tromp, Admiral of Holland, was knighted at Dover, in February, 1641. The same work contains a catalogue of knights made from April 12, 1625, to the end of 1641. Another catalogue contains a similar list from 1641 to April 1646. T. F.

WOLWARDE.-In the following line (Pricke of Conscience, 1. 3514) —

"And fast and ga wolwarde, & wake,”— does wolwarde=woolward (i. e. "without linen "), or the Anglo-Saxon wól-weard-plague-ward? Going without linen seems to have been a common form of penance (see Halliwell); but the editor of the version of the Philological Society glosses wolwarde=wretched, plagued. JOHN ADDIS, Jun.

Rustington, Littlehampton, Sussex.

Queries with Answers.

THOMAS FRYE, born in Ireland 1710, died in London 1762, was a portrait-painter, and engraved in mezzotinto, besides other known portraits, about twenty, nearly the size of life, known as Frye's heads. They are evidently portraits, but it is not known of whom, except his own (marked Ipse), King George III., and Queen Charlotte. Can any of your readers supply the names of the persons, and identify them with the portraits, or give any particulars of Frye himself?"

Warwick.

SUBSCRIBER.

[Thomas Frye was born in or near Dublin in 1710, trait-painting in oil, crayons, and miniature. The combut came very early to London, where he practised por

panion of his journey was Michael Stoppelaer, an artist also as well as player, but more celebrated for his Irish blunders than his acting. In 1734 Frye had the honour Wales, now in Saddlers' Hall, Cheapside. His genius to paint a full-length likeness of Frederick, Prince of was not confined to this art; but, it is said, he was the first manufacturer of porcelain in England, and that he spent fifteen years in bringing it to perfection at Bow. Here his constitution suffered from constantly working among furnaces, which compelled him to retire into Wales, where his health was perfectly restored. On his return to London he resided in Hatton Garden, and re

sumed his profession as an artist, to which he now added mezzotinto engraving. He died of a consumption, brought on by intense application, on April 2, 1762. A list of Frye's portraits is given by Nagler, KünstlerLexicon, iv. 515; but we fear the anonymous ones cannot now be identified. There is an excellent account of this artist in the European Magazine, xiv. 397, with a portrait. See also Pilkington's Dictionary of Painters.]

BATTLE AT WIGAN.- Is there any book or pamphlet that gives particulars of the battle of Wigan Lane on August 25, 1651, when the Earl of Derby and his forces were defeated by Colonel Lilburne "In which conflict the Lord Widrington, Sir Thomas Tildesley, Col. Trollop, Col. Beinton, Lieut.-Col. Galliard (faithful subjects and valiant soldiers), with some others of good note, were slain,"- -or any particulars of the Sir Thomas Tildesley or his family? SUBSCRIBER.

[The following pamphlet of eight pages, containing the imprimatur of Henry Scobel, Clerk of the Parliament, is entitled "A great Victory, by the blessing of God, obtained by the Parliaments Forces against the Scots Forces, commanded by the Earl of Derby, on the 25 of August, 1651, near Wigon in Lancashire, certifyed by a Letter from Col. Lilburne, and two Letters from Chester: also a Letter from

Col. Birche to Mr. Speaker. 1500 totally routed: Earl of Derby wounded and pursued towards Bolton: Lord Widdrington mortally wounded and taken prisoner: 400 prisoners taken, amongst which many officers and gentlemen of note. Slaine, three knights and divers collonels, and other considerable officers and gentlemen; with a list of the chief particulars of the victory." Lond. 1651, 4to. A copy of this rare pamphlet is in the British Museum. There is a biographical notice, accompanied with a portrait, of that gallant loyalist, Sir Thomas Tyldesley, in Baines's History of Lancashire, edit. 1836, iii. 610, and the inscription on his monumental pillar, marking the spot where he fell in Wigan Lane, is printed with an illustration at p. 546 of the same volume.]

Mildmay. Does it still exist? and was it built "before he had seen any good buildings," or after ? P. A. L.

[The mansion-house built by Inigo Jones for Sir Walter Mildmay was afterwards rebuilt upon the same site by Jeremiah Milles, Esq. in the year 1782, and finished in 1784, under the direction of James Wyatt, Esq. It is now the residence of Henry Coldicott, Esq.]

Replies.

THE PALACE OF HOLYROOD HOUSE.
(3rd S. xii. 269, 351, 438.)

In my former note I confined my observations to other authorities than Nicoll. Since, however, MR. PINKERTON now rests the whole question on that account, I have no hesitation in saying that in my opinion, so far from proving, it clearly disproves the burning of Queen Mary's rooms at that period.

"The whole royal part of that palace was put in a blaze and burnt to the ground in all parts thereof." From this it is evident that the whole palace was not burnt, but only the royal part thereof. This clearly means the state apartments, or the portion occupied by royalty in the time of Charles I. and II. Now the crucial question is, were Queen Mary's rooms included in these apartments? MR. PINKERTON has still to prove the affirmative of this; in fact, it is a matter to which he has not as yet adverted. My impression is that the probability is all the other way. The period from 1550 to 1650 is marked by a great change in buildings in reference to the matter of comfort. We are well aware of the exquisite architectural taste of the first Charles, and there can be as little doubt that his father had in his own way a great appreciation of comfort. Their residence in England, which was in advance of Scotland in these particulars, must have led them to desire to have the same advantages in their Scotch palace during any visits they might pay to it. We have therefore strong reason to believe that during this period more modern additions were made to Holyrood, in a very different style from the massive but gloomy work of James V. These would become known as the state apartments, or the royal part, and would remain as distinct from the older portion of the building as the state apartments at Windsor now are from the Round Tower. It is also probable that their walls were removed when the palace was rebuilt in a certain degree of accordance with the general style of its oldest portion.

MR. PINKERTON is also, it appears to me, led away by giving too literal a sense to the expres sions of a Scotch writer of the time of Nicoll. In Lesly's Account, p. 478, of the raids of Sir Ralph

Evars and Sir Brian Latoun in the years 1544 and 1545, we are informed: "In the same [1544] year, Melrose was destroyit and again pillaged the next year." The same strong mode of expression still lingers in remote districts. In one of these a man not many years ago was injured by an explosion of gunpowder, and a lad was hurriedly sent for the medical man of the village, to whom he exclaimed: "Doctor! doctor! you maun come this instant, for Jamie so-and-so has had his head blawn off." "My good lad," replied the doctor (a cool Peninsular veteran), "what is the use of my being in a hurry if the poor fellow has had his head blown off? "Oh doctor, but you maun come, as they think you will be able to save his "I am happy to add that the een were saved. GEORGE VERE IRVING.

een.

MR. PINKERTON "thinks he has said enough to prove to any reasonable person" that Holyrood House was burnt to the ground in 1650, but the evidence adduced has led me to quite a contrary opinion.

66

The passage from Nicoll may fairly enough be disputed; that the palace was repaired to the full integritie," does not necessarily imply that it was entirely burnt down. The improbability that the rooms in the north-west tower were planned by Cromwell to correspond with the account of Rizzio's murder, still remains; and the preservation of that portion of the building by Sir W. Bruce in 1674 would rather lead to the conclusion that it was never burnt, but that it is what it has always been considered, the work of James V. I do not write, however, merely to reiterate what your correspondent G. has already fully and clearly stated, but to give an extract from a work first published in 1693, and even MR. PINKERTON will surely allow that it confirms what has been said. I refer to John Slezer's "Theatrum Scotia, containing the Prospects of his Majesty's Castles, Palaces, &c. London, 1718." At page 6 he says: "The fore part of the palace is terminated by four high towers, two of which towards the north were built by King James the Fifth and the rest by King Charles the Second." W. R. C.

Glasgow.

I feel no inclination and assuredly less necessity to notice the new remarks of MR. PINKERTON, but am quite willing to leave to the judgment of your readers the justice of his charge against me of misrepresentation, and the extent of his own credulity. MR. BARKLEY's argument seems to involve an obvious non sequitur. The strength of it is in the fact (which to note it he puts in italics), that in the case of Weare, the body was never brought into the house at all, while he appears to forget that the room in which the murder of Rizzio was perpetrated is in the house, and is yet existing and identified. G.

EPISCOPAL WIGS. (3rd S. xii. 335.)

The bishops laid aside their wigs during the Reform agitation of 1831-2, when the animosity of the mob was being constantly excited against them by the more unscrupulous portion of the Radical press. It became unsafe for a bishop to appear in the streets of London, and I especially remember the outrageous manner in which the Bishop of Peterborough was insulted by the rabble on the occasion of his preaching one Sunday at St. Bride's church. I have not a newspaper file to refer to, but it must have been in 1831 or 1832. Very shortly after this event the episcopal wigs disappeared.

Those who are too young to remember the Reform agitation can hardly imagine the virulence with which the bishops were then assailed. Not only was their right of sitting in the House of Lords objected to, but the low journals and caricaturists selected them as special objects of insult and ribaldry. In the coarse caricatures of Grant and others, the typical bishop was a fat, bloated man, with a bottle-nose, intent upon all kinds of self-indulgence and tyranny. I remember seeing on the show-bill outside the office of The Satirist newspaper in the Strand, a woodcut of three bishops in their robes hanging on a gibbet. About the same time Carlile, at his house at the corner of Bouverie Street, used to exhibit a life-sized effigy of a bishop, with robes and mitre, and by his side a black figure with horns, &c., to represent the devil. These signs of the times escape the notice of the historian, but are perhaps worth putting on record in a corner of "N. & Q.

JAYDEE.

The late Archbishop of Canterbury wore his wig when he was Bishop of Chester, when he

wore his lawn sleeves. I have seen him in his

wig at a confirmation or consecration, and have lunched with him afterwards, the wig and canonicals being then laid aside. P. P.

In reply to the question "What is the use of history? "I should say, very little, unless we are enabled to weigh the evidence, and distinguish it from tradition and fiction. For this, I like to see authorities cited at the foot of the page. A very high one is required to authenticate the anecdote of George III. and Lord Eldon: the request being contrary to the character of the one, and the answer somewhat above the wit of the other. Moreover, the king has no authority over the dress of the judges.

James Allen Park wore his wig in court, but not even on circuit when the bar dined with the judges. On Saturday, Nov. 23, all the judges in the Queen's Bench and Exchequer wore wigs, and in my forty years' experience at the bar I have