Chapter II: Part 2

323. _Cabal._--I should like to know the earliest use of this word as signifying "a secret council," and, as a verb, "to plot or intrigue." Pepys applies it to the king's confidential advisers several years before the date (1672) when Burnet remarks that the word was composed of the initials of the five chief ministers; and Dryden uses the verb in the sense I have mentioned. Can any of your correspondents trace either verb or noun to an earlier period, or explain this application of it? The Hebrew verb _kibbal_ signifies "to receive;" and the _Cabbala_ was so called from its being "traditionary," not from its being "secret." A popular error on this point may, however, have given rise to the above-mentioned application of the word.

E. H. D. D.

324. "_Thus said the Ravens black._"--In what modern poem or ballad do the following or similar lines occur?

---- "thus said the ravens black,
We have been to Cordova, and we're just come back."

D. B. J.

325. _Symbols in Painting._--In a painting of the Crucifixion by Guido (?) the following accessories are introduced, the meaning of which I cannot discover: the persons present are four, two of whom are evidently the Virgin and St. John; but the other two, who are both old men, are doubtful. On the ground, at the foot of the cross, is a skull and some bones; and at one side of the picture is a monster, somewhat like a gigantic toad, with his foot on a book; and at the other side lies a bell, with a twisted cord attached to it: the monster and the skull might be symbolical of sin and death, but what can the bell mean? It is a singular object for an artist to have introduced without some particular meaning; but the only instance I know of its use, is in the pictures of St. Anthony (in the fourth century), who is generally represented with a bell in his hand. Perhaps some of your correspondents may be able to explain its meaning in this painting. Can the handbell rung in Roman Catholic churches at the elevation of the host have any connexion with the subject in question?

B. N. C.

Oxford.

326. _Latin Verse on Franklin._--Can you inform me who wrote the line on Franklin:

"Eripuit coelo fulmen, sceptrumque Tyrannis?"

HENRY H. BREEN.

St. Lucia.

327. _General Moyle._--Who was General John Moyle, who died about 1738? He resided, if he did not die, in Bury St. Edmund's, Suffolk.

BURIENSIS.

328. _Musical Compositions of Matthew Dubourg._--I am induced, while preparing for the press a new edition of my _opusculum_ on the _violin_, to seek your kind mediatorial aid in behalf of an object which some one or other of your correspondents, acquainted with Irish matters of the last century, may _possibly_ enable me to attain. I am desirous of learning whether there be _extant_ any of the musical compositions (especially the violin _solos_ and _concertos_) of my progenitor, Matthew Dubourg, who held the post of director and composer to the king's band in Ireland, from 1728 until, I believe, his death in 1767.

As I do not know that any of these compositions (which appear to have been called forth by immediate occasions) were ever _printed_, my hope of now tracing them out is perhaps more lively than rational. If they have existed only in a manuscript state, it is but too possible that the barbarian gripe of the butterman may long ago have suppressed what vitality was in them. I cannot, however, relinquish the idea that a dusty oblivion, and not absolute destruction, may be the amount of what they have undergone; and that they _may_ still exist in such condition as to be, at least, more susceptible of resuscitation than disinterred _mummies_. I have the honour to be, Sir, yours wistfully,

G. DUBOURG.

Brighton.

329. _Collodion, and its Application to Photography._--May I ask for information as to the first discoverer of Collodion, and the origin or derivation of the name? I should also be glad to know by whom it was first applied to photogenic purposes.

A PHOTOGRAPHER.

330. _Engraved Portrait._--Will some of your correspondents who are conversant with the history of engraved English heads, oblige me by naming the original of a copper-plate print in my possession, and also with the conclusion of the verses beneath, the lower part of the plate being mutilated. The verses, as far as I have them, run thus:

"Here you may see an honest face,
Arm'd against envy and disgrace;
Who lives respected still in spite
. . . . . . . . ."

The addition of the names of the painter and engraver will increase the obligation.

HENRY CAMPKIN.

331. _Lines by Lord Chesterfield on Queen Caroline's supposed Refusal to forgive her Son when on her Death-bed._--In Coxe's _Life of Sir Robert Walpole_ (vol. i. p. 549.), we read, in the account of the death of Queen Caroline, as follows:

"The tongue of slander has even reproached her with maintaining
her implacability to the hour of death, and refusing her pardon to
the prince, who had humbly requested to receive her blessing. To
this imputation Chesterfield alludes in a copy of verses
circulated at the time:

"'And unforgiving, unforgiven dies.'"

Can any of your readers refer me to the remainder of this copy of verses?

PROEM.

Minor Queries Answered.

_Kimmeroi, Cimbri, Cymry._--There appears to be a growing belief that the Gomeridæ of the Bible, the Kimmeroi of the Greeks, the Cimbri of the Romans, and the Cymry or Kymry of Wales, belong to the same family; the few words remaining of their language are to all appearance Kymraeg; and recently there was some likelihood of having more light thrown upon this subject. Kohl, the German traveller, visited the remnant of the Cimbri defeated by Marius, and was told that "_sette commune parlano Cimbro_." Is the language of these Lombard Kimbri like that of the Kymry of Wales? M. Kohl states that a professor at Padua was about to publish the remains of their language; but I have not seen any subsequent notice respecting them. The inquiry is highly interesting, and will I trust be taken up by some persons who may be in position to obtain further information; and I hope soon to see a few specimens of their language in "NOTES AND QUERIES."

Ritson, in the notes to his work on the Celts, has these remarks on the language of this Cimbric remnant:

"Their language, which was thought to be a corrupt German, was
found upon closer inquiry to be very pure Danish. Signor Marco
Pezzo has written a very learned dissertation on this
subject."--Page 288.

What is the title of this work? I am very desirous to obtain further information on this subject, and invite attention to this people and their Kimbro speech.

T. STEPHENS.

Merthyr Tydfil.

[The title of Pezzo's work is, _Dei Cimbri Veronesi, e Vicentini_,
libri ii. Terza edizione. 8vo. Verona, 1763. This edition is in
the British Museum.]

_Dictionary of Musicians._--I have now before me _A Dictionary of Musicians_, &c., second edition, 2 vols. 8vo., Longman and others, 1827. I should be glad to know whether there is any more recent edition, or anybody engaged in preparing one; or whether there is any more recent and complete work of the kind. This one contains much information, but might be greatly improved by omissions, corrections, and additions.

AN AMATEUR.

[_The Biographical Dictionary of Musicians_ noticed by our
correspondent is very incorrect in its details. There is another
work of the same kind in preparation, but is not expected to be
published for some months. The latest works on the subject are the
German _Lexicon der Tonkunst_ in several 8vo. volumes, and that by
M. Fetis, which appeared about four years since at Brussels, and
pronounced both comprehensive and correct.]

_City of London Charter._--What was the cause of the City charter being forfeited in the year 1683?

In a trial, _The King_ v. _The City of London_, judgment was given against the City, whereby the charter was forfeited.

S. E. G.

[An information brought against the Mayor and citizens of London
was "for usurping of divers franchises and liberties within the
said city, and for assuming to themselves an unlawful power to
levy several great sums of money, as well upon the said citizens
of London as strangers; and in particular upon those which come to
the markets of the said city, by colour of the laws and ordinances
in their Common Council by them in fact ordained and established,
without any other right or authority." The circumstance which gave
occasion for this _quo warranto_ to be brought against the City
charter, was a petition the Court of Aldermen and City made to the
King, upon his prorogation of Parliament, when they were going to
try several noblemen concerned in the Popish plot; but especially
for their printing and publishing the petition, which was
considered seditious. For particulars relating to this celebrated
trial, we must refer our correspondent to the following
tracts:--_The Case of the Charter of London Stated_, fol. 1683.
This is an ingenious treatise against the charter. _A Defence of
the Charter and Municipal Rights of the City of London_, by Thomas
Hunt, 4to.; _The Lawyer Outlawed; or a Brief Answer to Mr. Hunt's
Defence of the Charter_, 4to. 1683; _The Forfeitures of London's
Charter, or an Impartial Account of the several Seisures of the
City Charter_, 4to. 1682; _Reflections on the City Charter, and
Writ of Quo Warranto_, 4to. 1682; _The City of London's Plea to
the Quo Warranto_, (an information) _brought against their Charter
in Michaelmas Term_, 1681, fol. 1682. A summary account of the
whole proceedings will be found in Maitland's _History of London_,
vol. i. pp. 473-484.]

_St. Alkald._--Upon looking over a sheet of the Ordnance Map lately published, on which part of the parish of Giggleswick is laid down, I find that the patron saint, to whom the church is dedicated, is St. Alkald. No calendar that I have access to mentions any such saint. I shall be obliged by any of your correspondents giving me some account of him, or referring me to any book where I may read his history.

F. W. J.

[In _The Calendar of the Anglican Church Illustrated_, published
by Parker of Oxford, p. 181., our querist will find

"_S. Alkald_ or _Alkilda_ was commemorated March 28. The church of
Giggleswick, Yorkshire, is named in honour of this saint, and the
Collegiate Church of Middleham in the same county in the joint
names of SS. Mary and Alkald."]

Replies.

PLAIDS AND TARTANS.

(Vol. iv., p. 107.)

I am not going to enter into the controversy respecting the antiquity of the _Highland_ kilt and tartans, nor when and where they were invented. But in reference to these questions, I beg leave to cite a passage, which may be found in the second book of the _History_ of Tacitus, in which is designated a garb having a very distinct analogy to the _trews_ and tartans of the Highland chiefs.

In lib. ii. sec. xx. the return of Cæcina from Germany into Italy is thus described:--

"At Cæcina, velut relictâ post Alpes sævitiâ ac licentiâ, modesto
agmine per Italiam incessit. Ornatum ipsius, municipia et coloniæ
in superbiam trahebant, quod _versicolore sagulo, bruccas_ tegmen
barbarum, indutus, togatos adloqueretur."

Cæcina and Valens had been the Imperial "Legati" in Upper Germany, and the former is thus described in lib. i. sec. liii.:--

"At in superiore Germaniâ, Cæcina decorâ juventâ, corpore ingens,
animi immodicus, scito sermone, erecto incessu studia militum
inlexerat."

So it seems that this handsome Roman, "great in stature," and "graceful in youth," thought (like many of our modern fine gentlemen when they get among the hills) the partycoloured plaid and barbarian clothing so extremely becoming, that he was determined to set the fashion of wearing it in Italy, and actually was intrepid enough to appear like a male Bloomer before the astonished eyes of the "Togati," and to answer the addresses of the "Municipia" and "Coloniæ" clad in this outlandish costume.

I leave to more learned antiquaries the task of tracing this Celtic habit, "in superiore Germaniâ," into the Scottish Highlands. For myself I have little doubt that from the earliest division of the community into septs or clans, the chiefs assumed the pattern of this "tegmen versicolor" which best pleased them, and in course of time the pattern distinguished the wearers as belonging to such and such chiefs. As to the kilt, in all probability it was the apology for nudity.

The chiefs wore the trews, the humbler vassals or serfs either wore no nether garments at all, or covered their loins with a scanty apron, which gradually comprising more ample folds, has been modernised into the kilt.

But I beg leave to put forward these speculations with all possible modesty, feeling quite inadequate to discuss such momentous matters from being only

A BORDERER.

RELIGIOUS STATISTICS.

(Vol. iv., p. 382.)

I have a memorandum (not dated) which states that M. Pradt, in his work on _Ancient and Modern Jesuitism_, gives curious calculations on the religious statistics of the world. The terrestrial globe, he estimates, contains 670,000,000 inhabitants, who are thus divided:--

Catholics 120,000,000
Protestants and their dependants 40,000,000
Of the Greek Church 36,000,000
Jews 4,000,000
Mahomedans 70,000,000
Idolators 400,000,000

Of these, China alone, according to the most probable accounts, contains 300,000,000.

An elaborate, valuable, and now, I believe, a scarce work, entitled _The Consumption of Public Wealth by the Clergy of every Christian Nation_, &c. (published by Effingham Wilson in 1822), among details, founded on authorities of repute, and which are named, gives for each nation, "France," "Scotland" (its Kirk), "Spain," "Portuguese Church," "Hungarian Churches," "Clergy in Italy," "Clergy in Austria," "Clergy in Prussia," "Clergy in Russia," "England and Wales," "Established Church Property Ireland," &c. &c., the particulars required by Q. E. D. For instance, under the heading "Hungarian Churches," we are preliminarily told that--

"Hungary contains about 8,000,000 people of various religious
persuasions, who live happily together ever since the days of that
excellent Emperor Joseph II. He laboured resolutely and
successfully, in spite of the bigots of his own religion by whom
he was surrounded, to root out the evils of religious discord from
his dominions; and he left, as a glorious legacy to his people,
for which his memory will be ever dear, the blessings of concord
and harmony between his subjects of all denominations."

It is then narrated that there are (in Hungary):

"Catholics, Latin and Greek 4,750,000
Greek Church 1,150,000
Calvinists 1,050,000
Lutherans 650,000
Unitarian Christians 46,000
Various small Christian Sects, and
persons of the Jewish faith 200,000."

But this work contains no summary of the total amounts of its own enumerations.

A HERMIT AT HAMPSTEAD.

ROYAL LIBRARY.

(Vol. iii., p. 427.; Vol. iv., pp. 69. 154.)

Your correspondent J. H. M. remarks (Vol. iv., p. 69.): "In justice to King George IV., the letter which he addressed to the late Earl of Liverpool, on presenting the books to his own subjects, should be printed in your columns." Heartily concurring in this opinion, I have much pleasure in supplying your readers with a transcript of the same. I copied it some years back from the original, then in the possession of a noble friend:

"Dear Lord Liverpool,--The king, my late revered and excellent
father, having formed, during a long period of years, a most
valuable and extensive library, consisting of about one hundred
and twenty thousand volumes, I have resolved to present this
collection to the British nation. Whilst I have the satisfaction
by this means of advancing the literature of my country, I also
feel that I am paying a just tribute to the memory of a parent,
whose life was adorned with every public and private virtue. I
desire to add, that I have great pleasure, my lord, in making this
communication through you. Believe me, with great regard, your
sincere friend,

"G. R.

"Pavilion, Brighton, 15th of January, 1823."

EDWARD F. RIMBAULT.

Your correspondent C. says, "the whole story of the projected sale to Russia is absolutely unfounded." He seems to consider that, because the Princess Lieven never heard a syllable about the matter, the whole story was unfounded--that is, that when a part of a story is untrue the whole must be untrue. What is really the truth I do not positively _know_; but I will give you the story, as I heard it at the time, from one who had good means of information. George IV. disliked the expense of keeping up the Royal Library; he was also occasionally out of temper at the claims made or insinuated by some members of the family, that as the library had not been bequeathed, they had all an equal property in it. To get rid of the expense and the claims he resolved to dispose of it, and said something about this wish at his own dinner-table. This was, perhaps, in the presence of the Russian ambassador, or some distinguished Russian, or at least came to his ears; and he spoke to Lord Liverpool upon the subject, expressing a desire to purchase. Lord L. immediately waited upon the king, and remonstrated in the strongest terms against allowing such a library collected by a king of England to be sent out of the country; and went so far as to say that he would resign his office if the measure was persisted in. The king then resolved to relieve himself from all annoyance about the matter by presenting it to the nation. Such I believe to be the outline of the truth: the minute details I did not "make a Note" of at the time, and will not trust my memory to relate them.

GRIFFIN.

DAMASKED LINEN.

(Vol. ii., p. 199.; Vol. iii., pp. 13. 229.)

In the subjoined account of some old patterns, I have, for the sake of brevity, enclosed in brackets the descriptions of the several objects represented, beginning with the highest and most distant. The words enclosed within inverted commas are the inscriptions.

No. I.
[Two horsemen, with steel-caps, riding away at speed.]
[Crown.]
"PVRSV'D BY MEN. PRESERV'D BY GOD."
[Crown.] [Crown.]
[Oak branches surrounding a head surmounted
with a low-crowned hat and flowing wig.]

I may mention that this bears the mark of an ancestor of its present possessor, who was about forty years of age at the time of the Restoration, and died in 1707.

No. II.
"SISTE SOL IN GIBEON ET LVNA IN VALLE IAALON."
[Sun] "RIS" [Moon] "SEL."
[Fortified town.]
[Mortars throwing shells into the town.]
[Tents and cannon.]
[Trophy] "EGENIVS." [Trophy.]
[Equestrian figure holding a baton.]

Can any of your readers be so good as to explain the allusion of the above ungainly and somewhat profane compliment to Prince Eugene?

No. III.
"STAD ANT
WERPEN."
[City gate.]
[Water with ships.]
"DER HERTZOG VON MARLBORVK."
[Equestrian figure in the proper costume, holding a baton.]

The above probably commemorates the surrender of Antwerp to the allied armies soon after the battle of Ramillies, May 27, 1706.

No. IV.
"CAROLVS KÖNIG IN SPANIGEN."
[Equestrian figure.]
[Trophy of arms and banners.]
"MADRIED."
[City and gates.]
[Batteries with cannon planted.]

I presume this must refer to the short-lived triumph of Charles (afterwards Emperor of Germany), who was crowned King of Spain at Vienna in 1703, and entered Madrid in 1706.

No. V.
[City.]
[River with boats.]
[Cannon and mortars.]
[Tents and halberdiers, and arms strewn about on the ground.]
"KÖNIG GEORGE."
[Crown.] [Crown.]
[Harp.] [Harp.]
[Equestrian figure holding a sceptre.]

Will some one be so kind as to explain the meaning of this design?

I may mention that there is little doubt that this cloth, as well as the others, belonged to the son of the gentleman before mentioned, and that it is very unlikely that it ever belonged to the royal household. This may perhaps affect the inference of your correspondent H. W. D. from the inscription "Der König Georg II." (Vol. iii., p. 229.).

No. VI.
[A group of figures:--On the right an eastern
monarch standing, and in an attitude of command
towards a female figure on the left, who
is stooping down to put something into the
gaping mouth of a dragon, while with her left
hand she points towards the king. Behind the
woman are three men turning towards the king
in attitudes of entreaty.]
"BABYLON."
[A man and woman kneeling down, with hands
raised as in supplication or astonishment.]
"DANIEL, XIIII."
[A tree with two birds in it. In front of the tree
an angel flying downwards; and underneath, a
man in the same attitude, holding a vessel
shaped like a pitch-kettle in the left hand, and
what appears to be a small loaf or cake in the
right.]

All the above figures are in oriental costume. The date of this cloth _cannot_ be later than about 1720. In each case the pattern is repeated in rows; the alternate rows being reversed so that on whichever side the cloth is turned, half of the patterns have the inscriptions legible.

W. S. T.

VERMIN, PAYMENTS FOR DESTRUCTION OF.

(Vol. iv., pp. 208. 389.)

The authority by which churchwardens paid for the destruction of vermin, is by acts of parliament (8 Eliz. cap. 15. and 14 Eliz. cap. 11.), but _not AS churchwardens_; and the payment for vermin out of the _church-rate_ is illegal: but they are _ex officio_ appointed by the statutes quoted, "with six other parishioners," as shown by FRANCISCUS, Vol. iv., p. 389.

There can be no doubt, that in course of time this assessment got into desuetude; that churchwardens, being the "distributors," they charged it on the _church-rate_ by way of simplifying the machinery. This, and other duties of churchwardens and other parish officers, many of which have become obsolete, may be seen in Lambard's _Eirenarcha, or Office of the Justice of the Peace_, first published in 1581, which passed through many editions from that date to 1637. The work is commended by Blackstone as deserving the perusal of students.

With regard to the old names of vermin, _Glead_ and _Ringteal_ are described by Osbaldiston, in his _Dictionary of Recreation_, as a sort of kite; the latter with whitish feathers about the tail. _Greas'-head_ and _Baggar_ he does not notice. May they not be provincialisms?

H. T. ELLACOMBE

Clyst St. George.

In further illustration of this Query, and of J. EASTWOOD'S reply (p. 389.), may be quoted:--

"That the distributers of the provision for the destruction of
noysome foule and vermine being chosen, and having money [as
before shown by me, Vol. iv., p. 389.], shall give and pay the
same money so to them delivered, to every person that shall bring
to them any heades of old crowes, choughes, pies, or rookes, taken
within the several parishes, for the heads of every three of them
a peny; and for the heads of every sixe young crowes, choughes,
pyes, or rookes, taken, as is aforesaid, a peny; and for every
sixe egges of any of them unbroken, a peny; and likewise for every
twelve stares heades, a peny. All which said heads and egges, the
said distributers in some convenient place shall keep, and shall
every moneth at the least bring foorth the same before the said
churchwardens and taxors, or three of them, and then and there to
them shall make a true account in writing, what money they have
laid forth and paid for such heads and egges, and for the heads of
such other raveinous birds and vermine, as are hereafter
mentioned, that is to say:

"For everie head of merton, haukes, fursekite,
moldkite, bussard, scag, carmerant, or ringtaile iid
For every two egges of them id
For every iron or ospraies heads iiiid
For the head of every woodwall, pie, jay, raven,
or kite id
For the head of every bird which is called the
kingsfisher id
For the head of every bulfinsh, or other birde
that devoureth the blouth of fruit id
For the heads of every foxe or gray xiid
For the head of every fichewe, polcat, wesell,
stote, faire, badger, or wildecat id
For the heads of every otter or hedghog iid
For the heads of every three rats or twelve mice id
For the heads of every moldwarpe or want, an
halfe-penie.

"All which sayd heads and egges shall be foorthwith, after such
account made in the presence of the sayd churchwardens and taxors,
or of three of them, burned, consumed, or cut in sunder."--Vid. 8
Eliz. c. 15.; 14 Eliz. c 11.; and 39 Eliz. c. 18.

FRANCISCUS.

WAS RALEIGH IN VIRGINIA?

(Vol. iv., pp. 190. 241.)

Raleigh never visited Virginia. The numerous expeditions thither, set on foot by him, and in which he had so large a concern as to cause them to be called _his_ voyages, no doubt gave rise to the popular error.

We first find Raleigh's name, in connexion with discovery in North America, in 1579. In that year Sir Humphrey Gilbert, his stepbrother, prevailed upon him to join in a projected voyage. The accounts of this voyage are very scanty: all, I believe, that is known on the subject is to be found in Hakluyt, vol. iii. p. 146., in the following words:

"Others failed of their promises contracted, and the greater
number were dispersed, leaving the Generall with few of his
assured friends, with whom he adventured to sea; where having
tasted of no lesse misfortune, he was shortly driven to retire
home with the losse of a tall ship, and (more to his grief) of a
valiant gentleman, Miles Morgan."

It will be observed that Raleigh's name is not mentioned, the "Generall" being Gilbert. It appears, however, to be generally assumed by his biographers that he did accompany this expedition in person. It may, at all events, be predicated with tolerable certainty, that Raleigh was not amongst those who deserted Sir Humphrey. Tytler adds the following particulars, in his _Life of Raleigh_ (Edinburgh, 1833), p. 27., on the authority of Oldys's _Life of Raleigh_, pp. 28, 29.:

"On its homeward passage the small squadron of Gilbert was
dispersed and disabled by a Spanish fleet, and many of the company
were slain; but, perhaps owing to the disastrous issue of the
fight, it has been slightly noticed by the English historians."

Schomburgk adds, in the Introduction to his reprint of Raleigh's _Guiana_, published for the Hakluyt Society in 1848, also on the authority of Oldys, that during the engagement "Raleigh was exposed to great danger."

We may therefore assume that he did sail with Gilbert on this occasion. There is no appearance, however, of the expedition having reached America at all; and most certainly Virginia was not then visited.

The next voyage undertaken by Gilbert was in 1583. Raleigh took a great interest in this expedition, and fitted out a barque of two hundred tons, which bore his name; and although the "most puissant" vessel in the fleet, it only ranked as "Vice-admirall." The "Delight, _alias_ the George, of burthen 120 tunnes, was Admirall, in which went the Generall." They "began their voyage upon Tuesday, the eleventh day of June, in the yere of our Lord 1583;" but "about midnight" of the 13th June, "the Vice-admirall forsooke us, notwithstanding that we had the winde east, faire, and good. But it was after credibly reported that they were infected with a contagious sickness, and arrived greatly distressed at Plimmouth.... Sure I am no cost was spared by their owner, Master Raleigh, in setting them forth." So writes worthy Master Hayes, who commanded the Golden Hinde, the "Rear-admirall" of the expedition. It may be easily believed that Raleigh was not on board of the vessel which belonged to him. Sir H. Gilbert, who was ignorant of the cause of desertion, wrote thus to Sir George Peckham, after his arrival in Newfoundland:--"On the 13th the bark Raleigh ran from me, in fair and clear weather, having a large wind. I pray you solicit my brother Raleigh to make them an example to all knaves." The subsequent history of this disastrous expedition need not be dwelt upon. Gilbert reached Newfoundland, but was lost in returning on board the Squirrel of ten tons!

On the 25th March, 1584, Raleigh obtained letters patent from Queen Elizabeth authorising him to establish a colony in North America, south of Newfoundland. "The first voyage made" under this patent "to the coasts of America" was "with two barks, wherein were Captains M. Philip Amadas, and M. Arthur Barlowe, who _discovered_ part of the countrey now called Virginia, anno 1584:" the account of which voyage is stated to have been "written by one of the said Captaines, and _sent_ to Sir Walter Raleigh, knight, at whose charge and direction the said voyage was set forty"--_Hak._ vol. iii. p. 246.

The next voyage is called (p. 251.) "The voyage made by Sir Richard Grenvill _for_ Sir Walter Raleigh to Virginia, in the yeere 1585." Sir Richard left a colony under the government of Master Ralph Lane. A list of all the colonists, to the number of 107, "as well gentlemen as others, that remained one whole yeere in Virginia," is given in Hakluyt, at p. 254. The first name is Master Philip Amadas, Admirall of the countrey;" the second is "Master Hariot." On the 10th June of next year the colony was visited by Sir Francis Drake, with no less than twenty-three sail of vessels, "in his prosperous returne from the sacking of Saint Domingo." Sir Francis gave the colonists, who had suffered severely from "scarsity," the means of returning to England, which they did, leaving Virginia on the 18th of June, and arriving at Portsmouth on the 28th of July, 1586. Governor Lane was greatly blamed for his precipitate desertion of the colony. Hariot wrote a description of the country, which occupies fifteen folio pages of Hakluyt. Hallam (in the passage quoted by MR. BREEN) is correct in describing Hariot as the companion of Raleigh; for that he was, and very much esteemed by him: but he is wrong in making it appear that they were together in Virginia.

In the meantime Raleigh at home was far from being forgetful of his colonists, although they seemed so little inclined to depend upon him. He got ready no less than four vessels: various delays, however, occurred to retard their sailing; and Raleigh at last getting anxious started off one of them as a "bark of aviso," or despatch boat, as it is called in one of the old accounts. It arrived at the site of the colony "immediately after the departing of our English colony out of this paradise of the world;" and "after some time spent in seeking our colony up in the countrey, and not [of course] finding them, it returned with all the aforesaid provision into England." Thus Hakluyt, page 265., who also states that it was "sent and set forth at the charges of Sir Walter Raleigh and his direction;" expressions surely inconsistent with any supposition that he was on board of this bark of aviso; and yet it would appear, from the Introduction of Sir Robert Schomburgk, already referred to, that _this_ was the identical occasion on which Raleigh was erroneously supposed to have visited Virginia. As what Sir Robert says is very important, and bears very directly on the question, I quote his words:

"It has been asserted by Theobald and others, that Sir Walter
Raleigh himself accompanied this vessel, which he sent for the
relief of the young colony; such may have been his intention, as
Captain Smith states in the first book of his _General History of
Virginia_; but we have so many proofs that Sir Walter did not
leave England in that year, that we are surprised that such an
erroneous statement has found credence up to the present day."

This is a strong opinion of Sir Robert, and if borne out by evidence, would be conclusive; but in the first place, his reference to Smith's _Virginia_ is incorrect; and besides, Smith, for anything he relates prior to 1606, is only secondary evidence. His book was published in 1624, and is reprinted in Pinkerton's _Voyages_ (1812). On reference to it there I can find no such _intention_ attributed to Raleigh; and in fact Smith's account is manifestly taken from Hakluyt (1599), who, it is well known, had his information on these voyages chiefly from Raleigh himself[1]. In the second place, it would have been well if Sir Robert had mentioned some distinct proof that Raleigh was in England on some one day that the vessel was absent, rather than generally stating that he did not leave England during 1586. Unfortunately, there is a want of precision as to the exact dates when the vessel left and returned to England; enough is said, however, to fix upon the two months _at least_ from the 20th of May to the 20th of July as being embraced in the period during which she was on her voyage. In Hakluyt it is stated that she did not sail until "after Easter:" in 1586 Easter Sunday was, by my calculation, on the 3rd April. The 20th of May is therefore a liberal meaning to attach to the expression "after Easter." She arrived in Virginia "immediately after" Drake sailed, on the 18th of June. Say then that she even arrived on the 19th June; only spent one day in searching for the colony; and took thirty days to go home; this would bring us to the 20th July. It will be noticed that I narrow the time as much as possible, to strengthen the evidence that would be gained by proving an _alibi_ for Sir Walter. If it can be shown that he was in England on any day between the 20th May and the 20th July, the supposition that he went on this occasion to Virginia must be given up as untenable. I have therefore directed my inquiries to this point. In the sketch of the life of George Clifford, Earl of Cumberland, given in Lodge's _Portraits_, a work certainly not of indisputable authority, but tolerably correct notwithstanding, I find the following statement:

"His [Cumberland's] fleet consisted of three ships, and a pinnace,
_the latter commanded by Sir Walter Raleigh_.... It sailed from
Gravesend on the 26th of June, 1586; but was repeatedly driven
back by contrary winds, and could not finally leave England till
the end of August."

[Footnote 1: What Smith really says is, speaking generally of
_all_ the voyages, that Raleigh's occasions and employments were
such that he could not go himself; but he says nothing about his
intentions specially as to this particular voyage.]

Now, if this were quite correct, it would be conclusive, that if Sir Walter Raleigh sailed from Gravesend on the 26th June, he could not have started from Virginia to return to England on the 20th of the same month. I thought it well, however, to verify this statement of Mr. Lodge, and had recourse to my old friend Hakluyt as usual. I there found (vol. iii. pp. 769. et seq.) that on starting from Gravesend, there were only two vessels called respectively the Red Dragon and the Clifford; these vessels arrived at Plymouth on the 24th of July, and were there detained by westerly winds until the 17th of August, when they--

"Then departed with another ship, also for our Rear-admirall,
called the Roe, whereof W. Hawes was Captaine; and a fine pinnesse
also, called the Dorothie, _which was Sir Walter Raleigh's_."

It therefore follows, that the pinnace might have joined them immediately before the 17th of August, a date too late for our purpose. Nay more, the only authority for Mr. Lodge's statement, that the vessel was commanded by Sir Walter, rests upon the words which I have put in Italics; his name is not mentioned in the subsequent account of the expedition, although, on the 7th of February, 1587, it was found necessary to hold a council of war, at which no less than eighteen officers assisted, all of whom, beginning with the admiral, are named. Raleigh's name does not occur; and is it conceivable that he, if present in the fleet, would have been absent on such an occasion? This therefore affords one additional instance in which Raleigh was presumed to be present merely because he fitted out a vessel. Being inconclusive as a positive piece of evidence on the main question, my chief reason for referring to it was to show how hastily some writers make assertions, and how probable it is that "Theobald and others" went upon similar grounds in their statement as to Raleigh's having visited Virginia. In justice to Mr. Lodge, I must mention that the error into which he fell with respect to Raleigh, in his sketch of the life of the Earl of Cumberland, is not repeated in his biography of Raleigh, in which it may be supposed he was more careful. Raleigh's having concerned himself sometime in July or August in fitting out a vessel for Cumberland's expedition, undoubtedly forms part of that chain of evidence alluded to by Schomburgk, tending to prove his continued residence in England in 1586. I feel inclined, however, to search for positive evidence on the point. In the very valuable collection of letters entitled the _Leicester Correspondence_, published for the Camden Society in 1844, I find his name occurring several times. On the 29th of March, 1586, Raleigh writes "from the court" to the Earl of Leicester, at that time in the Low Countries: he states that he had moved the Queen to send Leicester some pioneers, and found her very willing; but that since, the matter had been stayed, he knew not for what cause. He then goes on to protest against certain rumours which had been afloat as to his having been acting a treacherous part with the Queen against the Earl. Leicester had been in some disgrace with her Majesty, and Raleigh in a postscript says:

"The Queen is in very good tearms with yow, and, thanks be to God,
well pacified, and yow are agayne her 'sweet Robyn.'"

On the 1st of April the Queen herself writes to Leicester a letter, which will repay perusal. And on the same day, Walsingham, at the express instance of the Queen, signifies to Leicester that Rawley, "upon her honor," had done Leicester good offices; and that, during the time of her displeasure, he dealt as earnestly for him as any other of his friends. All this shows Raleigh in high favour and standing at the court; and it is most improbable that he could, at such a moment, absent himself no less than three months from it. These letters appear to have been unusually long in reaching Leicester; in the early part of April he complains of not getting letters from the Queen, and on the 27th a great many reached him all at once. On the 31st of May, Leicester writes to Walsingham, and speaks of Rawley's pioneers; saying that he had written to him saying that they were ready to come. This could not refer to Raleigh's letter of 29th of March, because in it he states that the matter had been stayed; it must refer to one of a later date, which does not appear, but which was written, in all probability, some time on in May; it could not have been in Leicester's possession on the 29th of May, because on that day he writes to Walsingham, and mentions the same subject; namely, his wish for a reinforcement of 1000 men, which led him to speak of Rawley's pioneers on the 31st. With regard to the time it took to communicate with Leicester, he was at the Hague on the 30th of July, and on that day he knew of Drake's arrival at Portsmouth, stated in Hakluyt's account of Drake's voyage to have taken place on the 28th; although it is true, Governor Lane, who came home in the fleet, says the 27th of the same month. This was very speedy communication; but the arrival of Drake, and the results of his enterprise, were looked for with the utmost anxiety by the English ministry; and, no doubt, their satisfaction on the subject was communicated to Leicester by a rapid express. On the 9th of July we find Walsingham writing to Leicester:

"And lastly, that yt shall in no sorte be fyt for her Majestye to
take any resolutyon in the cause until Sir Francis Drake's
returne, at lest untyll the successe of his vyage be seene;
wheruppon, in verry trothe, dependethe the lyfe and death of the
cause according to man's judgment."

In a letter from Burleigh to Leicester, dated 20th of June, 1586, occurs the following:

"In Irland all thynges are quiet, and a nombre of gentilmen of
Somersett, Devon, Dorcet, Cheshyre, and Lancashyre, are making
themselves to go to Monster, to plant two or three thousand
people, mere English, there this year."

In a note to this, Mr. Bruce, the editor, states, that Stow records the names of the honourable and worshipful gentlemen who made the attempt to colonise Munster, and names, amongst others, Sir Walter Raleigh. It was on this occasion that the poet Spenser got his grant of 3,028 acres in the county of Cork, which "is said to be dated June 27, 1586." So the Rev. Mr. Mitford, in his life of Spenser, prefixed to the Aldine edition of his poems (1839); and although he seems uncertain as to the date, there can be no doubt but that it is correct. Now I think that most people will agree with me in thinking that the whole of this, Raleigh's movements so far as they can be traced, his position at court, and the busy and stirring nature of the time, make it altogether improbable that Raleigh was absent in the month of June, 1586, on a voyage to Virginia. Hakluyt's not mentioning that he was in the vessel, would of itself be convincing to my mind, knowing the extent of his information on all subjects connected with Raleigh, and his minute and painstaking accuracy. Knowing, however, that _this_ was the voyage in which Raleigh was stated to have visited Virginia, I have thought it worth while to search for more positive evidence. How far I have succeeded may be seen, but it is open to others to fix the fact of Raleigh's having been in England within the time I have limited. As a hint to go upon, I may mention that Babington's conspiracy was known to the English ministry on the 9th of July, although the conspirators were not apprehended until a month after; if Raleigh could be shown to have had any share in the discovery of the plot, his presence in England in the beginning of July, 1586, would be established beyond all doubt.

I have already been more than sufficiently tedious on the subject of the voyage of this little bark; what I have brought forward however bears more or less upon the question as to Raleigh having visited Virginia: I am clearly of opinion that on this occasion he did not. I cannot refrain, however, from adding a word or two of purely speculative conjecture. There is something rather suspicious in Drake visiting Virginia with the whole of his armament, and losing time in doing so, when the whole nation, from the queen downwards, was on the very tenter-hooks of anxiety for intelligence of him and of his success. The question arises, was it a rendezvous? and did the "bark of aviso" bear other and more important despatches than those addressed to Master Ralph Lane? Might not its arrival a day or two earlier have directed Drake to strike a blow at some defenceless but important part of the Spanish empire, deadly in proportion to its being unexpected? These are questions which I can in no wise answer, but they have arisen in my mind; and if it were so, we might be fain to believe, in spite of everything that I have been able to bring forward, that Raleigh was indeed on board his gallant little bark, but that, the mark not having been hit, the attempt was kept secret. It must not be forgotten that at that time, with the exception of this little colony, England had not a rood of land in the New World. However, I must remember that history ought not to deal in conjecture.

About fourteen or fifteen days after the departure of the bark, Grenvill made his appearance with the other three vessels. After making every search he returned home, leaving fifteen men on the Island of Roanoke. Subsequent expeditions found no traces of these men excepting the bones of one of them. No one has ever asserted that Raleigh was on board of this fleet.

Nothing daunted by these failures--

"In the yeere of our Lord 1587, Sir Walter Raleigh, intending to
persevere in the planting of his countrey of Virginia, prepared a
newe colonie of one hundred and fiftie men to be sent thither,
under the charge of John White, whom hee appointed Governour, and
also appointed unto him twelve assistants, unto whom he gave a
charter, and incorporated them by the name of the Governour and
Assistants of the Citie of Raleigh in Virginia."--_Hak._ Vol. iii.
p. 280.

This colony, owing to contentions with the natives and other causes, did not thrive; and in August of the same year White was, much against his wish, induced to return to England for assistance. He failed in his first attempt to go back with aid. In 1593 he gives, at Hakluyt's request, an account of a voyage he made thither in 1590, but which quite failed in its object. The men with whom he embarked showed a greater disposition towards buccaneering, than to assist him in his search for the unfortunate colonists. He found traces of their having gone to the Island of Croatan; but his associates would not prosecute the search, and poor White, with a sad heart, was obliged to leave them, if they even then survived, to their fate. From that day to this no intelligence has ever been got as to what became of them. This voyage was made, if not under Raleigh's auspices, at all events with his assistance. It has been supposed by some that this voyage of White in 1590 was the _last_ attempt made by Raleigh to succour his colonists--he has even been reproached with it. This, however, was not the case. At p. 1653. vol. iv. of Purchas, a very brief account is given of a ship having been purchased by Raleigh and sent out under the command of--

"Samuell Mace (a sufficient marriner who had been twice before at
Virginia), to fynd out those people which he had sent last thither
by Captain White in 1587."

The ill success of the previous attempts to communicate with the colony seems to have been ascribed to the practice which prevailed in that day of engaging seamen for the voyage with a share in the profits; this Raleigh attempted to remedy by hiring "all the cumpanye for wages by the month." I quote from Strachey's _Virginia_, printed by the Hakluyt Society from an original MS., whose statement bears undoubted marks of being the original from which Purchas took his account, and somewhat abridged it. In spite of Raleigh's precautions as to the hiring, the people behaved ill, and--

"They returned, and brought no comfort or new accesse of hope
concerning the lives and safety of the unfortunate English people,
for which only they were sett forth, and the charg of this
employment was undertaken."

Here ends the history of Sir Walter Raleigh's connexion with Virginian discovery and colonisation. A new company was at the moment in contemplation, and it even despatched its first pioneer vessel in the same month of 1602 as Raleigh did. Raleigh may have had, to a certain extent, a selfish object in view. His patent of 1584 was conditional, as regarded its continuance, on his planting a colony within six years; and had he been able to have discovered any remains, however small, of the colony of '87, he could have prevented interlopers. The nature of his position also in England in March, 1602, may perhaps afford a clue to his designs. At that moment his royal mistress lay on the bed of sickness, dying by inches. The clouds were beginning to gather around Raleigh's head. His star, which had been in the ascendant for more than twenty years, was getting nigh its setting. Raleigh, a man of wisdom and foresight, as well as conduct and action, knew all this. He knew what he had to expect, and what he afterwards in fact experienced, from the new king, to whom all eyes were turned. Is it not most likely that he looked to Virginia as his haven of refuge, where, if he could maintain his patent rights, he might have set his enemies at defiance? Had this dream, if he entertained it, been realised, the twelve years' imprisonment and the bloody scaffold on which his head fell, might have been averted. This, however, was not to be;--the search, as already mentioned, was fruitless, and the new company went on; and, finally, under a fresh charter from James I., Virginia was again colonised in 1606, since which time its history and existence have been uninterrupted. On Raleigh's return from his last expedition to Guiana in 1618, only a few months before his murder, he touched at Newfoundland, being, as I verily believe, the only occasion on which he set his foot in North America.

It may cause your readers to smile, and perhaps be a surprise to some of them, when I conclude this long paper, written on the subject of Raleigh's connexion with Virginia, by asserting that he never had any connexion, direct or indirect, with it! All the colonies with which he had to do were planted in North Carolina and the islands thereto belonging. To have laid any stress upon this, or to have mentioned it earlier than now, would have amounted to nothing but a play upon names. The country called Virginia in Queen Elizabeth's reign, embraced not only the state now so called, but also Maryland and the Carolinas. Virginia Proper was in reality first planted by the company of 1606, who fixed their settlement on the Chesapeake.

T. N.

Demerary, Oct. 1851.

Replies to Minor Queries.

_Bunting's Irish Melodies._--On p. 167. of the third volume of "NOTES AND QUERIES," MR. STEPHENS, of Stockholm asks a question concerning the _Irish Airs_ of this distinguished musician. As a member of the Royal Academy of Music in Stockholm, I feel more than ordinary pleasure in answering the Query of your esteemed correspondent.

Edward Bunting was born at Armagh in 1773. He claimed descent from Patrick Gruama O'Quin, who as killed in arms in July, 1642; and it was to this origin that Bunting attributed his musical talents, as well as certain strong Irish predilections, for which he was through life remarkable. His first collection of _Irish Airs_ was published in 1796; his second in 1809; and his third, and last, in 1840. The first work contains sixty-six native Irish airs never before published. The second added seventy-five tunes to the original stock. This volume, like the first, afforded a copious fund of new melodies, of which the song-writers of the day eagerly and largely availed themselves. The third and final collection consists of upwards of 150 melodies; "Of these," the editor remarks in his Preface, "considerably more than 120 are now for the first time published, the remainder being sets much superior to those already known." Bunting did not live to carry out his plan of republishing his first two collections uniform with the third. He died December 21, 1843, aged seventy. A copious memoir of him, accompanied with a portrait, may be found in the _Dublin University Magazine_, No. XLI., January, 1847.

EDWARD F. RIMBAULT.

_Colonies in England_ (Vol. iv., pp. 272. 370.).--In Vol. iv., p. 207. inquiry is made about the existence of colonies of Moors and others in different parts of England: I was not aware of there being any such as those he mentions, but as your correspondent wishes to know of any others which may still exist, I can inform him that colonies of Spaniards are known of in Mount's Bay and Torbay. The latter, from having intermingled with the surrounding population, have not now, I believe, much more than a traditionary Spanish descent; whilst the former, on the contrary, have kept aloof, and are easily distinguished from their marked Spanish features. This colony is planted at Mousehole; and, according to their account, they have been settled there upwards of three centuries. Another account declares the original settlers to have formed part of the Spanish Armada; and that after its defeat, they made a descent on this part of the Cornish coast, drove out or killed the former inhabitants and have ever since remained unmolested, and in great measure distinct from the surrounding inhabitants. The nature of the country in which they settled has, no doubt, proved favourable to them in this respect, as the soil is barren and rocky, with thinly scattered villages inhabited by a hardy race of fishermen.

H. L.