Chapter C: E. Bagot

Dublin.

* * * * *

MEGATHERIUM AMERICANUM.

(Vol. vii., p. 590.)

Is not the cast of a skeleton in the British Museum, recently alluded to by A FOREIGN SURGEON, and which is labelled _Megatherium Americanum_ Blume., better known to English naturalists by its more correct designation of _Mylodon robustus_ Owen; and if so, why is the proper appellation not painted on the label? If that had been done, _A Foreign Surgeon_ would not have fallen into the error of confounding the remains of two distinctly different animals.

Might I beg leave to add, for the information of your correspondent, that no British naturalist "of any mark or likelihood," has ever assumed that (though undoubtedly sloths) either the _Mylodon_, _Scelidotherium_, or _Megatherium_, were climbers. Indeed, the whole osseous structure of those animals proves that they were formed to uprend the trees that gave them sustenance. By no other hypothesis can we intelligibly account for the immense expanse of pelvis, the great bulk of hind-legs, the solid tail, the massive anterior limbs furnished with such powerful claws, and the extraordinary large spinal chord--all these the characteristic features of the _Mylodon_.

Whether there were palms or not at the period of the telluric formation, I cannot undertake to say; but as A FOREIGN SURGEON assumes that a palm is an exogenous tree (!), I am induced to suspect that his acquaintance with geology may be equally as limited as his knowledge of botany. Besides, what can he mean by speaking of a sloth "the size of a large bear?" Why, the _Mylodon_ must have been larger than a rhinoceros or hippopotamus. The veriest tyro in natural history would see that at the first glance of the massive skeleton.

It is a painful and ungracious task to have to pen these observations, especially, too, in the case of a stranger. But "N. & Q." must not be made a channel for erroneous statements, and we "natives and to the manner born" must be allowed to know best what is in our own museums.

W. PINKERTON.

Ham.

* * * * *

PHOTOGRAPHIC CORRESPONDENCE.

_Stereoscopic Angles._--Like many of your correspondents, I have been an inquirer on the subject of stereoscopic angles, which seems to be still a problem for solution. What is this problem? for until that be known, we cannot hope for a solution. I would ask, is it this?--_Stereoscopic pictures should create in the mind precisely such a conception as the two eyes would if viewing the object represented by the stereograph._ If this be the problem (and I cannot conceive otherwise), its solution is simple enough, as it consists in placing the cameras _invariably_ 2-1/2 inches apart, on a line parallel to the building, or a plane passing through such a figure as a statue, &c. In this mode of treatment we should have two pictures possessing like stereosity with those on the retinas, and consequently with like result and as our eyes enable us to conceive perfectly of any solid figure, so would the stereograph. I believe, therefore, that this is, under every circumstance, the correct treatment; simply because every other mode may be proved to be false to nature.

Professor Wheatstone recommends 1 in 25 when objects are more than 50 feet distant, and this rule seems to be pretty generally followed. Its incorrectness admits of easy demonstration. Suppose a wall 300 feet in extent, with abutments, each two feet in front, and projecting two feet from the wall, at intervals of five feet. The proper distance from the observer ought to be 450 feet, which, agreeably with this rule, would require a space of 18 feet between the cameras. Under this treatment the result would be, that both of the _sides, as well as the fronts_, of the three central abutments would be seen; whilst of all the rest, only the front and one side would be visible. This would be outraging nature, and false, and therefore should, I believe, be rejected. The eyes of an observer situated midway between the cameras, could not possibly perceive either of the sides of the buttress opposite to him, and only the side next to him of the rest. This seems to me conclusive.

Again, your correspondent [Phi]. (Vol. vii., p. 16.) says, that for portraits he finds 1 in 10 a good rule. Let the sitter hold, straight from the front, _i.e._ in the centre, a box 2-1/2 inches in width. The result would be, that in the stereographs the box would have both its sides represented, and the front, instead of being horizontal, consisting of two inclined lines, _i.e._ unless the cameras were {110} placed on _one line_, when it would be horizontal. In such treatment the departure from both is as great as in the first example, and the outrage greater, inasmuch as, under these circumstances (I mean a boy with a box), to any person of common sense, the caricature would be at a glance obvious. This rule, then, although it produces stereosity enough, being false, should also be rejected.

I believe that 2-1/2 inches will be found to be right under any circumstance; but should sufficient reasons be offered for a better rule, I trust I am open to conviction, and shall hail with great pleasure a demonstration of its correctness.

Should it, however, turn out that I have given a right definition, and a correct solution of this most interesting problem, I shall rejoice to know that I have rendered an essential service to a great number of anxious students in photography.

T. L. MERRITT.

Maidstone.

_Yellow Bottles for Photographic Chemicals._--The proposal of your correspondent CERIDWEN to employ yellow glass bottles for preventing the decomposition of photographic solutions has been anticipated. It was suggested by me, in some lectures on Photography in November 1847, and in January of the present year, that yellow bottles might be so used, as well as for preventing the decomposition, by light, of the vegetable substances used in pharmacy, such as digitalis, ipecacuanha, cinchona, &c. For solutions of silver, however, the most effectual remedy against precipitation is the use of very pure water, procured by slow redistillation in glass vessels at a temperature much below the boiling point.

HUGH OWEN.

* * * * *

Replies to Minor Queries.

_Earth upon Earth, &c._--I think the information which has been elicited in connexion with the so-called "Unpublished Epigram by Sir W. Scott," "N. & Q.," Vol. vii., p. 498., sufficiently curious to justify an additional reference to the sentiment in question; the more so as I have to mention the name of its putative author. In Montgomery's _Christian Poet_, 3rd edit. p. 58., he gives, under the title of "Earth upon Earth," five verses, which it would appear are substantially the same as those published by Weaver (whose _Funeral Monuments_, his only publication, I have not within reach), but they exhibit considerable verbal difference in the verses corresponding with those cited in "N. & Q.," Vol. vii., p. 576. Montgomery tells us in a note that this extract, given under the name of William Billyng, along with another from a poem entitled "The Five Wounds of Christ," by the same author, were from "a manuscript on parchment of great antiquity, in possession of William Bateman, Esq.," of which a few copies had been printed at Manchester, and "accompanied by rude but exceedingly curious cuts." Now who was William Billyng? And when did he live? Montgomery says "the age of this author is well known." The death of the Archbishop of Canterbury, to whom Weaver (_Fun. Mon._ 1631) applies the Stratford epigraph, is temp. Edward III. Is Mr. Bateman's MS. in a hand indicating so early a date?

J. H.

_Picalyly_ (Vol. viii., p. 8.).--In Barnaby Rich's _Honestie of this Age_, p. 37. of the Percy Society reprint, we find this passage:

"But he that some fortie or fifty yeares sithens should haue asked
after a Pickadilly, I wonder who could haue understood him, or could
haue told what a Pickadilly had beene, either fish or flesh."

Little did the writer think that in future years the name would become a "household word;" though his prophecy as to the meaning of the word has been fulfilled by the appearance of the Query in the pages of "N. & Q."

The editor of the work, Mr. Peter Cunningham, has a long note on the above passage; and I am indebted to him for the following.

"Ben Jonson (_Works_ by Gifford, viii. 370.) speaks of a _picardill_ as
a new cut of band much in fashion:

'Ready to cast at one whose band stands still,
And then leap mad on a neat _picardill_.'

"But Middleton, _The World tost at Tennis_, 1620, speaks of a
_pickadill_ in connexion with the shears, the needle, &c. of the
tailor; from which it appears to have been an instrument used for
plaiting the picked vandyke collar worn in those days.

"Mr. Gifford, in a note on another passage in Ben Jonson, says:

'_Picardil_ is simply a diminutive of _picca_ (Span. and Ital.), a
spear-head; and was given to this article of foppery from a fancied
resemblance of its stiffened plaits to the bristled points of these
weapons. Blount thinks, and apparently with justice, that _Picadilly_
took its name frown the sale of the 'small stiff collars so called,'
which was first set on foot in a house near the western [eastern]
extremity of the present street by one Higgins, a tailor.'"

The bands worn by the clergy and judges, &c., at the present day, are lineal descendants of the old _picadils_, reduced to a more sober cut; and the picked ornament alluded to by your correspondent no doubt derived its name from its resemblance in shape to these tokens of ancient fashion.

H. C. K.

---- Rectory, Hereford.

_Mr. Justice Newton_ (Vol. vii., pp. 528. 600.; Vol. viii., p. 15.).--I did not answer MR. F. KYFFIN LENTHALL'S first Query, because it was {111} palpable, from the context, that the "Mr. Justice Newton" he inquired after could not possibly be the Chief Justice who flourished in the fifteenth century; and because I am not aware of any judge of the superior courts of that name, during the time of the Commonwealth, or the years which immediately preceded or followed that period. Indeed, his designation as "Mr. Justice Newton, _of the Middle Temple_," plainly proves that he could not have been a judge upon the Bench at Westminster. He may perhaps have been a Welsh judge; or, remembering that "Mr. Justice" was the common title for a Justice of the Peace, it is still more probable that he was merely a magistrate of the county in which he resided.

EDWARD FOSS.

_Manners of the Irish_ (Vol. viii., p. 5.).--In the very curious extract given by your correspondent H., _boyranne_ is very likely to stand for _borbhan_, the Irish for "lamentation" or "complaint." An Irish landlord knows full well that, even up to the present day, his tenants "keep the bread, and make _borbhan_." _Molchan_, I suspect, comes from _miolc_, whey. _Localran_ stands for _loisgrean_, corn turned out of the ear. As to the concluding line of the extract, I must leave it to some better Irish scholar than I can boast myself.

"I am the geyest mayed of all that brought the somer houme,"

plainly has reference to the old practice, still prevalent in some parts of Ireland on May-day, when young girls carry about a figure dressed as a baby, singing the Irish song, [Irish: thugamar fein an samhra linn], "We have brought the summer with us" (See _Transactions of the Kilkenny Archaeological Society_). _Ultagh_ (_Ultach_) is Irish for an Ulster man, as H. will see by consulting any Irish dictionary, and can have no connexion with Utlagh, the Kilkenny money-lender. _Ugteller_ is of course a misprint for _Kyteller_. Would that H. would give us his real name and address, or at least allow me to ask whether H. F. H. do not constitute his initials in full.

JAMES GRAVES.

Kilkenny.

_Arms of the See of York_ (Vol. viii., p. 34.).--I was about to send a note to "N. & Q.," pointing out that Mr. Knight, in his heraldic illustrations to 2 _Hen. IV._, in his _Pictorial Edition of Shakspeare_, has given the modern bearings of the see of York to Archbishop Scroope, instead of those which belonged to that date, when I observed a Query from TEE BEE, asking the date and origin of the _change_ of arms which took place. I am sorry that I am unable to give any authority for my statement, but I believe it to be not the less true, that the change in question took place when Cardinal Wolsey came to the see. Nor can I give any farther reason for that change than the notorious jealousy of the Cardinal towards the superior rank of the Archbishop of Canterbury. Up to this period the arms of the two sees were precisely the same, though TEE BEE gives the number of crosses "patee fitchee" on the pall for difference; I should be glad to know whether there is good authority for this statement. The present arms of the see evidently have reference to the dedication of the ancient cathedral church to St. Peter.

H. C. K.

---- Rectory, Hereford.

_"Up, Guards, and at 'em!"_ (Vol. v., p. 426.).--These oft-quoted words have already engaged the attention of the readers of "N. & Q." Your frequent correspondent C. (Vol. v., p. 426.) is of opinion that the Duke _did_ make use of these, or equivalent, words. The following extract I have copied from an article in the June number of _Bentley's Miscellany_. It will be found at p. 700. as a foot-note to a clever article, one of a series, entitled "Random Recollections of Campaigns under the Duke of Wellington," written by an officer of the second brigade of Guards.

"The expression attributed to the Duke of 'Up, guards, and at them
again!' I have good reason for _knowing_ was never made use of by him.
He was not even _with_ the brigade of Guards in question at the _time_
they rose from their recumbent position to attack the French column in
their front, and therefore could not well have thus addressed them. I
never heard this story till long after, on my return to England, when
it was related by a lady at a dinner-table; probably it was the
invention of some goodly Botherby. I remember denying my belief at the
time, and my view has since been sufficiently confirmed. Besides, the
words bear no internal evidence of the style either of thought or even
expression of him to whom they were attributed."

The invention of the goodly Botherby has prospered!

CUTHBERT BEDE, B. A.

_Coleridge's Christabel--The 3rd Part_ (Vol. viii., pp. 11, 12.).--MR. J. S. WARDEN asks if I am correct in stating the 3rd part of _Christabel_ to be the composition of Dr. Maginn. I can but "_give my authority_" in a reference to a sketch of Maginn's life, in a new and well-conducted periodical, _The Irish Quarterly Review_, which, in the number for September, 1852, after giving a most humorous account of a first interview between Blackwood and his wild Irish contributor, who had for more than a year been mystifying the editor by contributions under various signatures, proceeds thus:--

"A few days before the first interview with Blackwood, Maginn had sent
in his famous 'Third part of Christabel.' It is only to be found in the
Magazine; and as many of our readers must be unacquainted with the
poem, we here subjoin it."

{112} The poem follows, containing the lines which led to the first inquiry on this subject.

It was having read the Memoir in _The Irish Quarterly_ which enabled me so promptly to remember where the lines were to be found; but I had long before heard, and never doubted, that the clever parody was composed by Dr. Maginn.

A. B. R.

Belmont.

_Mitigation of Capital Punishment_ (Vol. viii., p. 42.).--I am sorry MR. GATTY takes the phrase "mythic accompaniments" as an imputation on himself. I did not intend it for one, having no doubt that he repeated the story as he heard it. In it were two statements of the highest decree of improbability. One I showed (Vol. v., p. 434.) to be contrary to penal, the other to forensic practice. One MR. GATTY found to have been only a report, the other to have occurred at a different place and under different circumstances. Had these been stated in the first version, I should not have disputed them. Whittington was thrice Lord Mayor of London--that is history, to which the prophecy of Bow-bells and the exportation of the cat are "mythic accompaniments."

A word as to "disclosing only initials." I think you, as a means of authentification, should have the name and address of every correspondent. You have mine, and may give them to any one who pays me the compliment of asking; but I do not seek farther publicity.

H. B. C.

Oxford.

_The Man with the Iron Mask_ (Vol. vii., pp. 234. 344.).--I think that Mr. James, in his _Life and Times of Louis XIV._, has, to say the least, shown strong grounds for doubting the theory which identifies this person with Mathioli; and since then several writers have been inclined to fall back, in the want of any more probable explanation, on the old idea that the captive was a twin brother of Louis. What has become of the letter from M. de St. Mars, said to have been discovered some years ago, confirming this last hypothesis? Has any such letter been published, and, if so, what is the opinion of its genuineness?

J. S. WARDEN.

_Gentleman executed for Murder of a Slave_ (Vol. vii., p. 107.)--Sometime between 1800 and 1805, Lord Seaforth being Governor of Barbadoes, a slaveowner, having killed one of his own slaves, was tried for the murder and acquitted, the law considering that such an act was not murder. Thereupon Lord Seaforth came to England, obtained an act of parliament declaring the killing of a slave to be murder, and returned to Barbadoes to resume his official duties. Soon afterwards another slave was killed by his owner, who was tried, convicted, and sentenced to be hanged for murder under the new act of parliament. At the time appointed the prisoner was brought out for execution, but so strong was public feeling, that the ordinary executioner was not forthcoming; and on the governor requiring the sheriff to perform his office either in person or by deputy, after some excuses he absolutely refused. The governor then addressed the guard of soldiers, desiring a volunteer for executioner, adding, "whoever would volunteer should be subsequently protected as well as rewarded then." One presented himself, and it thenceforth became as dangerous to kill a slave as a freeman in Barbadoes.

G. M. E. C.

_Jahn's Jahrbuch_ (Vol. viii., p. 34.).--Permit me to inform your correspondent E. C. that there is a copy of Jahn's _Jahrbuecher fuer Philologie und Paedagogik_ in the library of Sir Robert Taylor's Institution, Oxford. Although this library is for the use of members of the university, I am sure the curators of the institution will give their permission to consult the books in it, to any gentleman who is properly recommended to them.

J. MACRAY.

Oxford.

_Character of the Song of the Nightingale_ (Vol. vii., p. 397.).--I imagine that many of the writers quoted by your correspondent lived in places too far removed to the north or west (as is my own case) ever to have heard the nightingale, and are, in consequence, not competent authorities as to a song they can only have described at second hand; but that Shelley was not far wrong in styling it voluptuous, and placing it amidst the luxurious bowers of Daphne, may receive some confirmation from an anecdote told by Nimrod ("Life and Times," _Fraser's Magazine_, vol. xxv. p. 301.) of the sad effects produced both on morals and parish rates by the visit of a nightingale one summer to the groves of Erthig, near Wrexham.

J. S. WARDEN.

I accidently met with a scrap of evidence on this point lately, as I was driving at midnight on a sudden call to visit a dying man. The nightingales were singing in full choir, when my servant, an intelligent young man from the country, remarked, "A cheerful little bird the nightingale, Sir. It is beautiful to hear them singing when one is walking alone on a dark night."

Unsophisticated judgment of this sort, when met with unsought, seems to be of real value in a question depending for its decision so much upon the faithful record of impressions.

OXONIENSIS.

Walthamstow.

MR. CUTHBERT BEDE gives, in his list of epithets of the nightingale, "solemn," as used by Milton, Otway, Graingle. How the last two employ the term I do not know, perhaps they {113} copied from Milton; but he uses it, not as an epithet exactly, but to express the frequency of the bird's appearance. "Night, her _solemn_ bird," means the _customary_ attendant of the night: _solemn_ being used in the classical sense, and derived front _soles_. So Virgil, "Solemnes tum forte dapes et tristia dona ante urbem in luco," &c.

The word _solemn_ probably acquired its present signification from the staid manner in which Englishmen go through their customary ceremonies. "They took their pleasure _sadly_," as Froissart has it.

SYDNEY GEDGE, B.A.

_Mysterious Personage_ (Vol. viii., p. 34.).--There is no mystery about the legitimate claimant of the British throne. He is the Duke of Modena, lineally descended from Henrietta of England, youngest daughter of Charles I.: she married Philip Duke of Orleans, son of Louis XIII. and Anne of Austria, and had two daughters; Louisa married to Charles II. of Spain (she died without issue), and Anna Maria, married to Victor Amadeus, Duke of Savoy and King of Sardinia. Their son Charles Emanuel III. succeeded in 1730, and was succeeded by his son Victor Amadeus III. He was succeeded by his eldest son Charles Emanuel IV., who died without issue, and was succeeded by his brother Victor Emanuel, who left twin daughters, the elder of whom, Mary Beatrice, married Francis Duke of Modena, while the crown of Sardinia passed to her father's heirs male. The Duchess Mary Beatrice of Modena has left two sons, the elder of whom (born June 14, 1819) is the direct, undoubted heir of the House of Stuart.