Part 5

It is the popular belief at Kirton in Lindsey that if a woman, who has contracted debts previous to her marriage, leave her residence in a state of nudity, and go to that of her future husband, he the husband will not be liable for any such debts.

A case of this kind actually occurred in that highly civilised town within my informant's memory; the woman leaving her house from a bedroom window, and putting on some clothes as she stood on the top of the ladder by which she accomplished her descent.

K. P. D. E.

In that amusing work, Burn's _History of the Fleet Marriages_, p. 77., occurs the following entry:--"The woman ran across Ludgate Hill in her shift;" to which the editor has added this note:--"The _Daily Journal_ of 8th November, 1725, mentions a similar exhibition at Ulcomb in {18} Kent. It was a vulgar error that a man was not liable to the bride's debts, if he took her in no other apparel than her shift."

J. Y.

Saffron Walden.

* * * * *

EDITIONS OF THE PRAYER-BOOK PRIOR TO 1662.

(Vol. vi., pp. 435. 564.)

As MR. SPARROW SIMPSON invites additions to his list from all quarters, I send him my contribution: and as I see that he has included _translations_ of our Liturgy into other languages, I do the same:

1552. Worcester. Jo. Oswen. Folio. 1560. London. Jugge and Cawood. 4to. 1565. London. Jugge and Cawood. 8vo. 1607. London. Folio. 1629. London. Folio. 1629. Cambridge. Folio. 1632. London. 4to. 1633. London. 4to. 1634. London. Folio. 1635. London. 4to. 1638. Cambridge. 4to. 1639. London. Folio. 1641. London. 4to. 1660. Cambridge. Folio. 1644. The Scotch, by Laud and the Scotch bishops. Printed by John Jones. 8vo. 1551. Latine versa, per Alex. Absium. Lipsiæ. 4to. 1594. " " London. 8vo. S. A. " by Reginald Wolfe. London. 4to. 1638. In Greek. London. 8vo. 1616. In French. London. 4to. 1608. In Irish. Dublin. Folio. 1612. In Spanish. London. 4to. 1621. In Welsh. London. 4to.

All the foregoing editions are in the Bodleian Library. I may add to them the following three:

1.--1551. Dublin, by Humfrey Powell. Folio 2.--1617(?). Dublin. Company of Stationers. 4to 3.--1637. Dublin.

The _first_ of these, which is the first book printed in Ireland, is extremely rare. I believe only two copies are certainly known to exist; one of which is in the library of Trinity College, Dublin; and the other in that of Emmanuel College, Cambridge. Both are in very fine condition.

The _second_ is in my possession. The book is quite perfect; but some wiseacre has carefully erased the date. The _Almanac for xxvi Yeares_ tells nothing, being for the years 1603 to 1628. But the book contains a prayer for "Frederick, the Prince Elector Palatine, and the Lady Elizabeth, his wife, with their hopeful issue." He married the princess in 1613; and in 1619 he was elected King of Bohemia, and thenceforward would be prayed for under his higher title. If the Sunday letter in the calendar is to be trusted, the book was printed (according to De Morgan's _Book of Almanacs_) in 1617. The Dublin Society of Stationers was established in that year; and it is not unlikely that they commenced their issues with a Prayer-Book. I have never seen nor heard of another copy, with which I might compare mine, and thus ascertain its date.

The _third_, of 1637, is reported; but I have never met with it.

H. COTTON.

Thurles.

* * * * *

ETYMOLOGY OF PEARL.

(Vol. vi., p. 578.)

The inquiry of your correspondent IFIGFOWL respecting the etymology of the word _pearl_ does not admit of a simple answer. The word occurs in all the modern languages, both Romance and Teutonic: _perla_, Ital. and Span.; _perle_, French and German, whence the English _pearl_. Adelung in v. believes the word to be of Teutonic origin, and considers it as the diminutive of _beere_, a berry. Others derive it from _perna_, the Latin name of a shell-fish (see Ducange in _perlæ_; Diez, _Grammatik der Romanischen Sprachen_, vol. i. p. 235.). Neither of these derivations is probable: it is not shown that _beere_ had a diminutive form, and _perna_ was a local and obscure name: see Pliny, _N. H._ xxxii. ad fin. Salmasius (_Exercit. Plin._, p. 40. ed. 1689) thinks that _perla_ is formed from _perula_, for _sperula_, the diminutive of _sphæra_. A more probable origin is that the word is formed from the Latin _pirum_, as suggested by Diez, in allusion to the pear-shaped form of the pearl. Ducange in v. says that the extremity of the nose was called _pirula nasi_, from its resemblance to the form of a pear. But _pirus_ was used to denote a boundary-stone, made in a pyramidal shape (Ducange in v.); and this seems to have been the origin of the singular expression _pirula nasi_, as being something at the extremity. Another supposition is, that the word _perla_ is derived from the Latin _perula_, the diminutive of _pera_, a wallet. A wallet was a small bag hung round the neck; and the word _perula_, in the sense of a small bag, occurs in Seneca and Apuleius. The analogy of shape and mode of wearing is sufficiently close to suggest the transfer of the name. _Perula_ and _perulus_ are used in Low Latin in the sense of _pearl_. Ducange cites a passage from a hagiographer, where _perula_ means the white of the eye, evidently alluding to the colour of the pearl.

The choice seems to lie between _perula_ as the diminutive of _pera_ or of _pirum_. Neither derivation is improbable. It is to be observed that the modern Italian form of _pirum_, the fruit of the pear, is _pera_; the modern feminine noun being, as in numerous other cases, formed from the plural of the Latin neuter noun (see Diez, ib. vol. ii. p. 19.). The analogy of _unio_ (to which I shall {19} advert presently) supports the derivation from the fruit; the derivation from _pera_, a wallet, is, on merely linguistical grounds, preferable.

The Greek name of _pearl_ is [Greek: margaritês], originally applied to a precious stone, and apparently moulded out of some oriental name, into a form suited to the Greek pronunciation. Scott and Liddell in v. derive it from the Persian _murwari_. Pliny, _H. N._ ix. 56., speaking of the pearl, says: "Apud Græcos non est, ne apud barbaros quidem inventores ejus, aliud quam margaritæ." The Greek name _Margarita_ was used by the Romans, but the proper Latin name for the pearl was _unio_. Pliny (ibid.) explains this word by saying that each pearl is _unique_, and unlike every other pearl. Ammianus Marcellinus (lib. xxiii. ad fin.) thinks that pearls were called _uniones_, because the best were found single in the shell; Solinus (c. 53.) because they were always found single. The more homely explanation of Salmasius seems, however, to be the true one; namely, that the common word for an onion, growing in a single bulb, was transferred to the pearl (_Exercit. Plin._, pp. 822-4.; Columella _de R. R._ xii. 10.). The ancient meaning of _unio_ is still preserved in the French _ognon_.

L.

Your correspondent asks the "etymon of our English word _pearl_." It would not be uninteresting to learn, at the same time, at what period _pearl_ came into general use as an English word? Burton, who wrote his _Anatomy_ in the reign of James I., uses the word _union_ (from the Latin _unio_) instead of _pearl_ (_Anat. Melanc._, vol. ii. part 2. sec. 3. mem. 3., and ib., p. 2. sec. 4. mem. 1. subs. 4.). In the latter passage he says "Those smaller unions which are found in shells, amongst the Persians and Indians, are very cordial, and most part avail to the exhilaration of the heart."

The Latin term _unio_ differs from "margarita," in so far as it seems to have been applied by Pliny to distinguish the small and ill-shaped pearls, from the large round and perfect, which he calls "margaritæ." And in his ninth book, c. 59., he defines the difference philologically, as well as philosophically. Philemon Holland, who published his translation of Pliny in 1634, about thirteen years after Burton published the first edition of his _Anatomy_, uses the word _pearl_ indifferently as the equivalent both of _margarita_ and _unio_.

Query: Was the word _union_ generally received in England instead of _pearl_ in Burton's time, and when did it give place to it?

J. EMERSON TENNANT.

* * * * *

"MARTIN DRUNK."

(Vol. v., p. 587.)

Has not the following song something to do with the expression "Martin drunk"? It is certainly cotemporary with Thomas Nash the Elizabethan satirist, and was long a favourite "three man's" song. It is copied from _Deuteromelia, or the Second Part of Musick's Melodie_, 4to., 1609:

"MARTIN SAID TO HIS MAN.

"Martin said to his man, Fie! man, fie! O Martin said to his man, Who's the foole now? Martin said to his man, Fill thou the cup, and I the can; Thou hast well drunken, man, Who's the foole now?

"I see a sheepe shering corne, Fie! man, fie! I see a sheepe shering corne, Who's the foole now? I see a sheepe shering corne, And a cuckold blow his horne; Thou hast well drunken, man, Who's the foole now?

"I see a man in the moone, Fie! man, fie! I see a man in the moone; Who's the foole now? I see a man in the moone, Clowting of St. Peter's shoone; Thou hast well drunken, man, Who's the foole now?

"I see a hare chase a hound, Fie! man, fie! I see a hare chase a hound, Who's the foole now? I see a hare chase a hound, Twenty mile above the ground; Thou hast well drunken, man, Who's the foole now?

"I see a goose ring a hog, Fie! man, fie! I see a goose ring a hog, Who's the foole now? I see a goose ring a hog, And a snayle that did bite a dog; Thou hast well drunken, man, Who's the foole now?

"I see a mouse catch the cat, Fie! man, fie! I see a mouse catch the cat, Who's the foole now? I see a mouse catch the cat, And the cheese to eate the rat; Thou hast well drunken, man, Who's the foole now?"

EDWARD F. RIMBAULT.

* * * * *

GÖTHE'S REPLY TO NICOLAI.

(Vol. vi., p. 434.).

Had M. M. E. gone to the fountain-head, and consulted Göthe's own statement in his autobiography, he would have seen in the _Werke_, vol. xxvi. {20} p. 229., that Mr. Hayward's note was not written with that writer's usual care. Göthe does not say that his reply to Nicolai's _Joys of Werter_, though circulated only in MS., destroyed N.'s literary reputation: on the contrary, he says that his squib (for it was no more) consisted of an epigram, not fit for communication, and a dialogue between Charlotte and Werter, which was never copied, and long lost; but that this dialogue, exposing N.'s impertinence, was written with a foreboding of his sad habit, afterwards developed, of treating of subjects out of his depth, which habit, notwithstanding his indisputable merits of another kind, utterly destroyed his reputation. This was most true: and yet all such assertions must be taken in a qualified sense. Nearly thirty years after this was written I partook of the hospitality of N. at Berlin. It was in 1803, when he was at the head, not of the Berlin literati, but of the book-manufactory of Prussia. He was then what, afterwards and elsewhere, the Longmans, Murrays, Constables, Cottas, and Brockhauses were,--the great publisher of his age and country. The _entrepreneur_ of the _Neue Deutsche Bibliothek_ may be compared with the publishers of our and the French great Cyclopædias, and our Quarterly Reviews.

It was unfortunate for the posthumous reputation of the great bibliopolist that he, patronising a school that was dying out, made war on the athletes of the rising school. He assailed nearly every great man, philosopher or poet, from Kant and Göthe downwards, especially of the schools of Saxony, Swabia, and the free imperial cities. No wonder that he became afterwards what Macfleckno and Colly Cibber had been to Dryden and Pope. In some dozen of the _Xenien_ of Göthe and Schiller, in 1797, he was treated as the Arch-Philistine.

M. M. E. characterises him as the "friend" and "fellow-labourer" of Lessing. Now Lessing was incomparably the most eminent _littérateur_ of the earlier part of that age,--the man who was the forerunner of the philosophers, and whose criticisms supplied the place of poetry. The satirists of the _Xenien_ affect to compassionate Lessing, in having to endure a companion so forced on him as Nicolai was, whom they speak of as a "thorn in the crown of the martyr." The few who care for the literary controversies of the age of Göthe in Germany will be greatly assisted by an edition of the _Xenien_, with notes, published at Dantzig, 1833.

H. C. R.

* * * * *

PHOTOGRAPHIC CORRESPONDENCE.

_Processes upon Paper._--The favourable manner in which the account I have given of the Collodion process has been received, not only by your readers in general, as has been evinced by many private letters, but also by the numerous correspondents it has drawn forth, induces me, after some little delay, to request space for a description of the following processes upon paper. In giving these I wish it to be understood that I may offer but little that is original, my object being to describe, as plainly as I possibly can, these easy methods, and to make no observation but what I have found to be successful in my own hands. I have had the good fortune to obtain the friendship of some of the most successful photographers of the day; and taking three very eminent ones, I find they have each some peculiarities in his mode of manipulation, varying with each other in the strength of the solutions employed, and producing results the most agreeable to their respective tastes. Reviewing these different processes in my own mind, and trying with patience the various results, I conclude that the following quantities are calculated to produce an adequate degree of sensibility in the paper, and yet to allow it to be prepared for the action of light for many hours previous to its use, and yet with more certainty than any other I am acquainted with. I think I may always depend upon it for twenty-four to thirty-six hours after excitement, and I have seen good pictures produced upon the third day. I believe it is a rule which admits of no contradiction, that the more you dilute your solution, the longer the excited paper will keep; but in proportion to its diminished sensibility, the time of exposure must be prolonged, and therefore I am, from this waste of time and other reasons, disposed to place much less value upon the wax-paper process than many do.

The process I am about to describe is so simple, and I hope to make it so intelligible to your non-photographic readers, that a perfect novice, using ordinary care, must meet with success; but should I fail doing so upon all points, any information sought through the medium of "N. & Q." shall meet with explanation from myself, if not from other of your experienced correspondents, whose indulgence I must beg should the communication be deemed too elementary, it being my earnest desire to point out to archæologists who are desirous of acquiring this knowledge, how easily they themselves may practise this beautiful art, and possess those objects they would desire to preserve, in a far more truthful state than could be otherwise accomplished.

I have not myself met that uniform success with any other paper that I have with Turner's photographic of Chafford Mills: a sheet of this divided into two portions forms at the same time a useful and also a very easily-managed size, one adapted for most cameras, forming a picture of nine inches by seven, which is adequate for nearly every purpose. Each sheet being marked in its opposite corners with a plain pencil-mark on its smooth side (vide _antè_, p. 372.), the surface for {21} all future operations is in all lights easily discerned. In my instructions for printing from collodion negatives, a form of iodized paper was given, which, although very good, is not, I think, equal to the following, which is more easily and quickly prepared, exhibits a saving of the iodide of potassium, and is upon the whole a neater mode.

Take sixty grains of nitrate of silver and sixty grains of iodide of potassium; dissolve each separately in an ounce of distilled water; mix together and stir with a glass rod. The precipitate settling, the fluid is to be poured away; then add distilled water to the precipitate up to four ounces, and add to it 650 grains of iodide of potassium, which _should_ re-dissolve the precipitated iodide of silver, and form a perfectly clear solution; but if not, a little more must be carefully added, for this salt varies much, and I have found it to require 720 grains to accomplish the desired object.

The fluid being put into a porcelain or glass dish, the paper should be laid down upon its surface and immediately removed, and being laid upon a piece of blotting-paper with the wet surface uppermost, a glass rod then passed over it to and fro ensures the _total expulsion_ of all particles of air, which will frequently remain when the mere dipping is resorted to. When dry, this paper should be soaked in common water for three hours, changing the water twice or thrice, so as to remove all the soluble salts. It should then be pinned up to dry, and, when so, kept in a folio for use. I have in this manner prepared from sixty to eighty sheets in an evening with the greatest ease. It keeps good for an indefinite time, and, as all experienced photographers are aware, unless you possess good iodized paper, which should be of a _primrose_ colour, you cannot meet with success in your after-operations. Iodized paper becomes sometimes of a bright brimstone colour when first made; it is then very apt to brown in its use, but tones down and improves by a little keeping.

To excite this paper, dissolve thirty grains of nitrate of silver in one ounce of distilled water, and add a drachm and a half of glacial acetic acid; of this solution take one drachm, and one drachm of saturated solution of gallic acid[3], and add to it two ounces and a half of distilled water. The iodized surface of the paper may then be either floated on the surface of the aceto-nitrate of silver or exciting fluid, and afterwards a rod passed over, as was formerly done in the iodizing, or the aceto-nitrate may be applied evenly with a brush; but in either instance the surface should be immediately blotted off; and the same blotting-paper never used a second time for this, although it may be kept to develop on and for other purposes. It will be scarcely needful to observe that this process of exciting must be performed by the light of a candle or feeble yellow light, as must the subsequent development. The excited paper may be now placed for use between sheets of blotting-paper; it seems to act equally well either when damp or when kept for many hours, and I have found it good for more than a week.

The time for exposure must entirely depend upon the degree of light. In two minutes and a half a good picture may be produced; but if left exposed for twenty minutes or more, little harm will arise; the paper does not solarize, but upon the degree of image visible upon the paper depends the means of developing. When long exposed, a saturated solution of gallic acid only applied to the exposed surfaces will be sufficient; but if there is little appearance of an image, then a free undiluted solution of aceto-nitrate may be used, in conjunction with the gallic acid, the former never being in proportion more than one-third. If that quantity is exceeded, either a brownish or an unpleasant reddish tint is often obtained. These negatives should be fixed by immersing them in a solution of hyposulphite of soda, which may be of the strength of one ounce of salt to eight ounces of water--the sufficiency of immersion being known by the disappearance of the yellow colour, and when they have been once immersed they may be taken to the daylight to ascertain this. The hyposulphite must now be perfectly removed by soaking in water, which may extend to several hours; but this may be always ascertained by the tongue, for, if tasteless, it has been accomplished. If it is deemed advisable--which I think is only required in very dark over-done pictures--to wax the negative, it is easily managed by holding a piece of white wax or candle in front of a clean iron rather hot, and passing it frequently over the surface. The superabundant wax being again removed by passing it between some clean pieces of blotting-paper. Although the minuter details can never be acquired by this mode which are obtained by the collodion process, it has the advantage of extreme simplicity, and by the operator providing himself with a bag or square of yellow calico, which he can loosely peg down to the ground when no other shade is near, to contain spare prepared papers, he can at any future time obtain a sufficient number of views, which afterwards he can develop at his leisure.

It requires no liquids to be carried about with you, nor is that nice manipulation required which attends the collodion process.