Chapter 3

_Cranmer and Calvin._--In the _Christian Observer_ for March 1827 (No. 303. p. 150.) it is stated that the late Rev. T. Brock, of Guernsey, had been assured by an eminent scholar of Geneva, afterwards a clergyman in our church, that he had met with, in a public library at Geneva, a printed correspondence in Latin between Archbishop Cranmer and Calvin, in which the latter forewarned the former, that though he perfectly understood the meaning of the baptismal service, yet "the time would come when" it "would be misconceived, and received as implying that baptism absolutely conveyed regeneration;" and that Cranmer replied, "that it is not possible such a construction can be put upon the passage, the church having sufficiently explained her meaning in the Articles and elsewhere." I have heard that search was made for these documents by M. D'Aubigné and others, but without success; one of the reports being, that "the documents had been apparently _cut out_." Mr. Brock's informant, I hear, was a Rev. Marc De Joux, who afterwards became an Irvingite, left Guernsey, and went to the Mauritius, where it is believed he still resides. With the _theological_ question I wish not here to meddle, or to express an opinion. But I should be glad if you will kindly permit me to inquire whether any of your readers can give any information as to the existence of the supposed "printed" correspondence {502} referred to? whether or not it does exist? and, if so, where?

C. D.

* * * * *

Minor Queries with Answers.

"_A Letter to a Convocation Man_" (Vol. vii., pp. 358. 415.).--I beg to thank "N. & Q." for the answer to my inquiry respecting the authorship of this letter. I should be very glad to learn further particulars respecting Sir Bartholomew Shower. Was he a member of the House of Commons, as the author of the Letter intimates that he himself was? I shall also be very thankful if TYRO, or any other correspondent, will answer for me these Queries, suggested by the same Letter.

"It was the opinion, indeed, of a late _great preacher_, that Christians under a Mahometan or Pagan government, ought to value the peace of the country above the conversion of the people there."

Who is the preacher here referred to?

Who were the authors, and what were the titles of the many _Defences_ of Sherlock's _Vindication of the Holy and Ever Blessed Trinity_, and _The Divinity and Death of Christ_? *

And what farther is to be learned of Mr. Papin, a Socinian, who jointed the Church of Rome about that period? +

Who was Chief Justice in 1697? Was it Chief Justice Treby? ++

Trelawney, Bishop of Exeter, excommunicated Dr. Bury. When was the living the latter enjoyed "untouched and even unquestioned by another bishop?" §

In case the answers to these should not appear of sufficient importance to be put into type, I enclose an envelope.

W. FRASER.

Tor-Mohun.

P.S.--The misprint you point out, Vol. vii., p. 409., of _Oxoniensis_ for _Exoniensis_, occurred in the Appendix to Wake's _State of the Church and Clergy of England_, p. 4.

[* The titles of nearly twenty works relating to Sherlock's Trinitarian Controversy will be found _s. v._ in the _Bodleian Catalogue_, vol. iii. p. 462. See also Watt's _Bibliotheca Britannica_.

+ A long account of Mr. Papin is given in Rose's as well as in Chalmers's _Biographical Dictionary_.

++ Sir George Treby was Chief Justice of Common Pleas in 1697.

§ Bishop Trelawney, it appears, suspended Dr. Arthur Bury from the rectorship of Exeter College for some heterodox notions in his work, _The Naked Gospel_. The affair was carried by appeal from the King's Bench to the House of Lords, when Bishop Stillingfleet delivered a speech on the "Case of Visitation of Colleges," printed in his _Ecclesiastical Cases_, part ii. p. 411. Wood states that Dr. Bury was soon after restored. For an account of this controversy, and the works relating to it, see Gough's _British Topography_, vol. ii. p. 147., and Wood's _Athenæ_ (Bliss), vol. iv. p. 483.

Any farther communications on the above Queries shall be forwarded to the correspondent.]

_Prester John._--I should be glad, through the medium of "N. & Q.," to be favoured with some information relative to this mysterious personage.

STRATH CLYDE.

[The history of Prester John, or of the individuals bearing that appellation, appears involved in considerable confusion and obscurity. Most of our Encyclopædias contain notices of this mysterious personage, especially Rees's, and Collier's _Great Historical Dictionary_. "The fame of _Prester_ or _Presbyter_ John," says Gibbon, "a khan, whose power was vainly magnified by the Nestorian missionaries, and who is said to have received at their hands the rite of baptism, and even of ordination, has long amused the credulity of Europe. In its long progress to Mosul, Jerusalem, Rome, &c., the story of Prester John evaporated into a monstrous fable, of which some features have been borrowed from the Lama of Thibet (_Hist. Généaologique des Tartares_, part ii. p. 42.; _Hist. de Gengiscan_, p. 31. &c.), and were ignorantly transferred by the Portuguese to the emperor of Abyssinia (Ludolph. _Hist. Æthop. Comment._ l. ii. c. 1.). Yet is is probable that, in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, Nestorian Christianity was professed in the horde of the Keraites."]

_Homer's Iliad in a Nut._--On the tomb of those celebrated gardeners, Tradescant father and son, these lines occur in the course of the inscription:

"Whilst they (as Homer's Iliad in a nut), A World of Wonders in one closet shut."

Will you explain the comparison implied in the words "as Homer's Iliad in a nut?"

DAVID.

[It refers to the account given by Pliny, vii. 21., that the _Iliad_ was copied in so small a hand, that the whole work could lie in a walnut-shell: "In nuce inclusam Iliada Homeri carmen, in membrana scriptum tradidit Cicero." Pliny's authority is Cicero _apvd Gellium_, ix. 421. See M. Huet's account of a similar experiment in _Gentleman's Magazine_, vol. xxxix. p. 347.]

_Monogram of Parker Society._--What is the meaning of the monogram adopted by the Parker Society on all their publications?

TYRO.

[The monogram is "MATTHEW PARKER," Archbishop of Canterbury in the reign of Queen Elizabeth.]

_The Five Alls._--Can any of your readers give me an interpretation of a sign on an inn in Oxford, which bears this inscription?

"THE FIVE ALLS."

I can make nothing of it.

CURIOSUS.

Oxford.

[Captain Grose shall interpret this Query. He says, "The Five Alls is a country sign, representing five human figures, each having a motto. The first is a king in his regalia, 'I govern all.' The second, a {503} bishop in pontificals, 'I pray for all.' Third, a lawyer in his gown, 'I plead for all.' Fourth, a soldier in his regimentals, 'I fight for all.' Fifth, a poor countryman with his scythe and rake, 'I _pay_ for all!'"]

_Corvizer._--In a deed of the middle of the last century, I find this addition to the name of a person residing at Conway. The word is similarly employed in a list of interments of some "common people," contained in Browne Willis's account of Bangor Cathedral. What does it mean, and whence is it derived?

H. B.

Bangor.

[An obsolete word for a cordwainer or shoemaker. See Ash's _Dictionary._]

* * * * *

Replies.

ENGLISH COMEDIANS IN GERMANY.

(Vol. ii., pp. 184. 459.; Vol. iii., p. 21.; Vol. vii., pp. 114. 360.)

In 1605 the English comedians first appeared in Prussia. In October they performed before the Duchess Maria Eleonora at Koningsberg, for which they were well paid; they then proceeded to Elbing, whence they were dismissed with twenty thalers, since they produced scandalous things ("weil sie schandbare Dinge fürgebracht"). In 1607, they were again sent away, after they had performed the preceding year at Rostock. Some time after, the Elector of Brandenburg, Joh. Sigismund, employed a certain noble, Hans von Stockfisch, to obtain a theatrical company from England and the Netherlands. A troop of nineteen comedians, under the direction of John Spencer, came with sixteen musicians to add lustre to the electoral feasts. In 1611, they received 720 marks, as well as many hundred ells of various stuffs for costumes and decorations; of which great quantities were used in 1612. Many a time was it necessary to ransom them at great cost from inns and lodging-houses; so that the prince, in 1613, resolved to rid himself of these dear guests, and gave them a recommendation to the Elector of Saxony. In 1616 we find them in Dantzic, where they gave eight representations; and two years later, the Electress of Brandenburg, through Hans von Stockfisch, procured eighteen comedians, who performed at Elbing, Koningsberg, and other places, and were paid for their trouble ("für ihre gehabte Mühe eins für alles") 200 Polish guilders.

In 1639, English comedians are again found in Koningsberg; and, for the last time, in 1650, at Vienna, where William Roe, John Waide, Gideon, Gellius, and Robert Casse, obtained a license from Ferdinand I.

In 1620 appeared a volume of _Englische Comedien und Tragedien, &c._ (2nd edit., 1624), which was followed by a second; and in 1670 by a third: in which last, however, the English element is not so prominent.

These statements of Dr. Hagen are confirmed by numerous quotations from original documents, published by him in the _Neue Preuss. Provincial Blätter_, Koningsb., 1850, vol. x.; vid. et _Gesch. der Deuts. Schauspielk._, by E. Devrient, Leipzic, 1848. Professor Hagen maintains, that in the beginning of the seventeenth century, the English comedies were performed in Dutch; and that, in Germany, the same persons were called indifferently English or Dutch comedians. They were Englishmen who had found shelter under the English trading companies in the Netherlands ("Es waren Engländer die in den englischen Handelscompagnien in den Niederlanden ein Unterkommen gefunden.")--From the _Navorscher_.

J. M.

* * * * *

A GENTLEMAN EXECUTED FOR WHIPPING A SLAVE TO DEATH.

(Vol. vii., p. 107.)

The occurrence noticed by W. W. is, I believe, the only instance on record in the West Indies of the _actual_ execution of a gentleman for the murder, by whipping or otherwise, of a slave. Nor is this strange. In the days of slavery every owner of slaves was regarded in the light of a gentleman, and his "right to do what he liked with his own" was seldom called in question by judges or juries, who were themselves among the principal shareholders. The case of Hodge was, however, of an aggravated character. For the trivial offence of stealing a mango, he had caused one of his slaves to be whipped to death; and this was, perhaps, the least shocking of the repeated acts of cruelty which he was known to have committed upon the slaves of his estate.

During slavery each colony had its Hodge, and some had more than one. The most conspicuous character of this kind in St. Lucia was _Jacques O'Neill de Tyrone_, a gentleman who belonged to an Irish family, originally settled in Martinique, and who boasted of his descent from one of the ancient kings of Ireland. This man had long been notorious for his cruelty to his slaves. At last, on the surrender of the colony to the British in 1803, the attention of the authorities was awakened; a charge of murder was brought against him, and he was sentenced to death. From this sentence he appealed to a higher court; but such was the state of public feeling at the bare idea of putting a white man to death for any offence against a slave, that for a long time the members of the court could not be induced to meet; and when they did meet, it was only to reverse the sentence of the court below. I have now before me the proceedings of both courts. {504} The sentence of the inferior court, presided over by an European judge, is based upon the clearest evidence of O'Neill's having caused two of his slaves to be murdered in his presence, and their heads cut off and stuck upon poles as a warning to the others. The sentence of the Court of Appeal, presided over by a brother planter, and entirely composed of planters, reverses the sentence, without assigning any reason for its decision, beyond the mere allegations of the accused party. Such was criminal justice in the days of slavery!

HENRY H. BREEN.

St. Lucia.

* * * * *

LONGEVITY.

(Vol. vii., p. 358., &c.)

On looking over some volumes of the _Annual Register_, from its commencement in 1758, I find instances of longevity very common, if we can credit its reports. In vol. iv., for the year 1761, amongst the deaths, of which there are many between 100 and 110, the following occur:

January. "At Philadelphia, Mr. Charles Cottrell, aged 120 years; and three days after, his wife, aged 115. This couple lived together in the marriage state 98 years in great union and harmony."

April. "Mrs. Gillam, of Aldersgate Street, aged 113."

July. "John Newell, Esq., at Michael(s)town, Ireland, aged 127, grandson to old Parr, who died at the age of 152."

August. "James Carlewhite, of Seatown, in Scotland, aged 111.

"John Lyon, of Bandon, in the county of Cork, Ireland, aged 116."

In September there are three aged 106; one 107; one 111; one 112; and one 114 registered. I will take three from the year 1768, viz.:

January. "Died lately in the Isle of Sky, in Scotland, Mr. Donald M^cGregor, a farmer there, in the 117th year of his age.

"Last week, died at Burythorpe, near Malton in Yorkshire, Francis Confit, aged 150 years: he was maintained by the parish above sixty years, and retained his senses to the very last."

April. "Near Ennis, Joan M^cDonough, aged 138 years."

Should sufficient interest attach to this subject, and any of the correspondents of "N. & Q." wish it, I will be very happy to contribute my mite, and make out a list of all the deaths above 120 years, or even 110, from the commencement of the _Annual Register_, but am afraid it will be found rather long.

J. S. A.

Old Broad Street.

A few years ago there lived in New Ross, in the county of Wexford, two old men. The one, a slater named Furlong, a person of very intemperate habits, died an inmate of the poorhouse in his 101st year: he was able to take long walks up to a very short period before his death; and I have heard that he, his son, and grandson, have been all together on a roof slating at the same time. The other man was a nurseryman named Hayden, who died in his 108th year: his memory was very good as to events that happened in his youth, and his limbs, though shrunk up considerably, served him well. He was also in the frequent habit of taking long walks not long before his death.

J. W. D.

* * * * *

DERIVATION OF CANADA.

(Vol. vii., p. 380.)

The derivation given in the "cutting from an old newspaper," contributed by MR. BREEN, seems little better than that of Dr. Douglas, who derives the name from a _M. Cane_, to whom he attributes the honour of being the discoverer of the St. Lawrence.

In the first place, the "cutting" is not correct, in so far as Gaspar Cortereal never ascended the river, having merely entered the gulf, to which the name of St. Lawrence was afterwards given by Jacques Carter. Neither was the main object of the expedition the discovery of a passage into the Indian Sea, but the discovery of gold; and it was the disappointment of the adventurers in not finding the precious metal which is supposed to have caused them to exclaim "Aca nada!" (Nothing here).

The author of the _Conquest of Canada_, in the first chapter of that valuable work, says that "an ancient Castilian tradition existed, that the Spaniards visited these coasts before the French,"--to which tradition probably this supposititious derivation owes its origin.

Hennepin, who likewise assigns to the Spaniards priority of discovery, asserts that they called the land _El Capo di Nada_ (Cape Nothing) for the same reason.

But the derivation given by Charlevoix, in his _Nouvelle France_, should set all doubt upon the point at rest; _Cannáda_ signifying, in the Iroquois language, a number of huts (_un amas de cabanes_), or a village. The name came to be applied to the whole country in this manner:--The natives being asked what they called the first settlement at which Cartier and his companions arrived, answered, "Cannáda;" not meaning the particular appellation of the place, which was Stadacóna (the modern Quebec), but simply a village. In like manner, they applied the same word to Hochelága (Montreal) and to other places; whence the Europeans, hearing every locality designated by the same term, _Cannáda_, very naturally applied it to the entire valley of the St. Lawrence. It may not here be out of place to notice, that with respect to the derivation of _Quebec_, the weight of evidence {505} would likewise seem to be favourable to an aboriginal source, as Champlain speaks of "la pointe de Québec, ainsi appellée des sauvages;" not satisfied with which, some writers assert that the far-famed city was named after Candebec, a town on the Seine; while others say that the Norman navigators, on perceiving the lofty headland, exclaimed "Quel bec!" of which they believe the present name to be a corruption. Dissenting from all other authorities upon the subject, Mr. Hawkins, the editor of a local guide-book called _The Picture of Quebec_, traces the name to an European source, which he considers to be conclusive, owing to the existence of a seal bearing date 7 Henry V. (1420), and on which the Earl of Suffolk is styled "Domine de Hamburg et de Québec."

ROBERT WRIGHT.

* * * * *

SETANTIORUM PORTUS.

(Vol. vii., pp. 180. 246.)

Although the positions assigned by Camden to the ancient names of the various estuaries on the coasts of Lancashire and Cumberland are very much at variance with those laid down by more modern geographers; still, with regard to the particular locality assigned by him to the _Setantiorum Portus_, he has made a suggestion which seems worthy the attention of your able correspondent C.

His position for _Morecambe Bay_ is a small inlet to the south of the entrance of _Solway Firth_, into which the rivers _Waver_ and _Wampool_ empty themselves, and on which stands "the abbey of _Ulme_, or _Holme Cultraine_." He derives the name from the British, as signifying a "crooked sea," which doubtless is correct; we have _Môr taweh_, the main sea; _Morudd_, the Red Sea; and _Môr camm_ may be supposed to indicate a bay much indented with inlets. It is needless to say that the present _Morecambe Bay_ answers this description far more accurately than that in the Solway Firth. _Belisama Æstuarium_ he assigns to the mouth of the Ribble, and is obliged to allot _Setantiorum Portus_ to the remaining estuary, now called Morecambe Bay. However, he seems not quite satisfied with this last arrangement, and suggests that it would be more appropriate if we might read, as is found in some copies, _Setantiorum_ [Greek: limnê], instead of [Greek: limên], thus assigning the name of Setantii to the inhabitants of the _lake district_.

The old editions of Ptolemy, both Greek and Latin, are very incorrect, and, there is little doubt, have suffered from alterations and interpolations at the hands of ignorant persons. I have not access at present to any edition of his geography, either of Erasmus, Servetus, or Bertius, so I know not whether any weight should be allowed to the following circumstance; in the _Britannia Romana_, in Gibson's _Camden_, this is almost the only _Portus_ to be found round the coast of England. The terms there used are (with one more exception) invariably _æstuarium_, or _fluvii ostium_. If this variation in the old reading be accepted, the appellation as given by Montanus, Bertius, and others, to _Winandermere_, becomes more intelligible.

H. C. K.

---- Rectory, Hereford.

* * * * *

PHOTOGRAPHIC CORRESPONDENCE.

_Stereoscopic Queries._--Can any of your readers inform me what are the proper angles under which stereoscopic pictures should be taken?

Mr. Beard, I am informed, takes his stereoscopic portraits at about 6½°, or 1 in 9; that is to say, his cameras are placed 1 inch apart for every 9 inches the sitter is removed from them. The distance of the sitter with him is generally, I believe, 8 feet, which would give 10-2/3 inches for the extent of the separation between his cameras. More than this has the effect, he says, of making the pictures appear to stand out unnaturally; that is to say, if the cameras were to be placed 12 inches apart (which would be equal to 1 in 8), the pictures would seem to be in greater relief than the objects.

I find that the pictures on a French stereoscopic slide I have by me have been taken at an angle of 10°, or 1 in 6. This was evidently photographed at a considerable distance, the triumphal arch in the Place de Carousel (of which it is a representation) being reduced to about 1¼ inch in height. How comes it then that the angle is here increased to 10° from 6½°, or to 1 in 6 from 1 in 9.

Moreover, the only work I have been able to obtain on the mode of taking stereoscopic pictures, lays it down that all portraits, or near objects, should be taken under an angle of 15°, or, as it says, 1 in 5; that is, if the camera is 20 feet from the sitter, the distance between its first and second position (supposing only one to be used) should not exceed 4 feet: otherwise, adds the author, "the stereosity will appear unnaturally great."

When two cameras are employed, the instructions proceed to state that the distance between them would be about 1/10th of the distance from the part of the object focussed. The example given is a group of portraits, and the angle, 1 in 10, is afterwards spoken of as being equivalent to an arc of 10°.

Farther on, we are told that "the angle should be lessened as the distance between the nearest and farthest objects increase. Example: if the farthest object be twice as far from the camera as the near object, the angle should be 5° to a central point between these two.

Now, I find by calculation that the measurements and the angle here mentioned by no means {506} agree. For instance, an angle of 15° is spoken of as being equivalent to the measurement 1 in 5. An angle of 10° is said, or implied, to be the same as 1 in 10. This is far from being the fact. According to my calculations, the following are the real equivalents:--

An angle of 15° is equal to 1 in 4. " 12° " 1 in 5. " 10° " 1 in 6. " 6½° " 1 in 9. " 6° " 1 in 10. " 5° " 1 in 12. " 4° " 1 in 15.

Will any of your readers oblige me by solving the above anomalies, and by giving the proper angles or measurement under which objects should be taken when near, moderately distant, or far removed from the camera; stating, at the same time, at how many feet from the camera an object is to be considered as near, or distant, or between the two? It would be a great assistance to beginners in the stereoscopic art, if some experienced gentleman would state the best distances and angles for taking busts, portraits, groups, buildings, and landscapes.

It is said that stereoscopic pictures at great distances, such as views, should be taken "with a small aperture." But as the exact dimensions are not mentioned, it would be equally serviceable if, to the other details, were added some account of the dimensions of the apertures required for the several angles.