Sayfadaki görseller
PDF
ePub
[blocks in formation]

Dec. 21.

MR. URBAN. IN Vol. LXXI. of the Gent. Mag. a Correspondent remarks, that the date of the following paragraph, inserted by Hearne at the end of Fordun's Scotichronicon, relative to the imprisonment of Mary Queen of Scots in Coventry, must be erroneous:

"1567. This year the Queen of Scots was brought prisoner to Coventry, and was kept in the mayoress's parlour (in St. Mary's Hall); from thence she went to Tutbury."

Another Correspondent, in reply to the above, states that the date was placed one year too early, and that

she was confined a second time in Coventry. Now, as I have every reason to believe that Mary was only confined once in Coventry, and that the date of 1567 ought to be 1569, (occasioned probably by an error of the transcriber,) I have sent the following details for your inspection, and insertion in a future number.

Mary was in Scotland in the years 1566 and 1567, but, in consequence of disturbances in that country, she determined to put herself under the protection of Queen Elizabeth, and with that intent went to Workington, in Cumberland, on Sunday, May 16, 1568. She then was taken to Carlisle Castle, where she was confined by Lowther, a deputy captain of the place. From thence she was removed, on July 16, to Boston Castle, Yorkshire, which belonged to Lord Scrope. On January 26, 1569, she left this castle with her attendants on horseback, and arrived at Tutbury Castle,

Staffordshire, (the property of the Earl of Shrewsbury,) on February 3, being a place further in the realm, and more secure. It is not likely that she was brought to Coventry at this time, Coventry not being in their line of travelling.

On the 16th of November, 1569, the Earls of Northumberland and Westmoreland raised their banner in Yorkshire, and with 7000 men intended to march to Tutbury, to liberate Mary; but they were eventually obliged to retreat towards the Scotish borders in consequence of a strong force having been sent against them by Queen Elizabeth, and by which they were soon signally defeated. Mary at that time was confined in Tutbury Castle, but, for greater security, Queen Elizabeth directed the Earls of Shrews

bury and Huntingdon to take her instantly to Coventry, with all the force they could possibly collect, and there to see her safely guarded and kept. The letters are dated Windsor, Nov. 22, 1569, and one of them is copied in the "Huntingdon Peerage." The Queen also sent a letter from Windsor, dated Nov. 26, to the Mayor and Aldermen of Coventry, directing them to be obedient to the orders of the Earls of Shrewsbury and Huntingdon, during the time that Mary was confined in that city.

Mary was accordingly conveyed to Coventry, by the Earls above-mentioned, on Nov. 25, where they arrived at night; and she was placed in confinement in the Black Bull Inn, in Smithford street, where the barracks now stand. In the room was subsequently painted an inscription, stating the circumstance. She remained in Coventry until New Year's-day, (another account says Candlemas-day,) and was then taken to Tutbury again, no further apprehensions being entertained of any rebellion in the North.

During Mary's confinement in the Black Bull Inn, Elizabeth sent a letter to the two Earls, dated Nov. 30, 1569, and which is now in the British Museum. She states that she found they had brought the Scotish Queen safely to Coventry, on the 25th of Nov. for which she returned them thanks; and that they had found the citizens very loyal and dutiful; but, as there was not then any apprehension

[graphic]

of danger from the rebels in the North, as they had then with them about 400 persons, she directed that a portion of them should be discharged as unnecessary. She then remonstrates with them as to their confining Mary in an inn, which, she says, "is very inconvenient, even for name's sake,' " and directs them to remove her to the Whitefriars, or some other convenient house; that they should also lodge in the same house with her, and not suffer her to be seen abroad by any person, under any pretence; and that, especially, they should "not bring her on this side hitherward."

In consequence of this letter, it is highly probable that the Earls of Shrewsbury and Huntingdon removed Mary from the Black Bull Inn to the mayoress's parlour, in St. Mary's Hall. During this time, the citizens kept watch and ward, night and day, at every gate, that none might pass without examination. A marshalsea was made in the Greyfriars Gate, the postern gates were stopped up, and a part of the town wall was repaired.

During Mary's stay in Coventry, she wrote a letter in cypher, supposed to be intended for the Duke of Norfolk, expressive of affection, and desiring him not to mistrust her. This is in the British Museum.

Mary was afterwards removed from Tutbury to Chatsworth, Sheffield Castle, and other places, until at last she was taken to Fotheringhay Castle, in Northamptonshire, where she was beheaded. This castle was subsequently taken down, by order of her son, James I.

[ocr errors][merged small]

On hearing of the execution of Mary, the citizens of Coventry were so loyal and dutiful," that for joy they rung the bells, and made numerous bonfires, &c.

Yours, &c. W. READER.

Dec. 22.

I PRESUME that the following extract from the Hundred Rolls of Henry the Third's reign, and the subjoined form of granting the Stewardship of the manor of the three Chiltern Hundreds, are satisfactory replies to the several inquiries in your former volumes respecting its locality, antiquity, &c.; and sufficiently demon

strative that it was once a lucrative domain of the Crown, though now so totally unproductive of profit, that government has not only remitted the customary inauguration fee of 147. 158. but even pays the 21. stamp duty on the writ of appointment to its stewardship.

"Dicunt" (jurati de Falle in com. Buk.) " quod tria hundreda CTILE sunt in manu domini regis, scilicet, DOSTEBERGE, STOKES, et BURNHAM, et DOSTEBERGE respondet domino regi de c et viij solidis et ij denariis de redditu assiso.'

[ocr errors]

This manor has but one steward, and, unless the crown, when it lately sold the manor of East Hendred in Berkshire, reserved to itself the right of nominating to the stewardship of this lastnamed manor (to which the annual wages of 20 shillings are assigned), some difficulty may hereafter arise, should two members of the House of Commons wish to vacate their seats on the same day.

According to Hatsell, the members who first retired from parliament by accepting one of these (at present nominal) offices, were Mr. John Pitt in 1750, and Mr. Lascelles in 1752.

The following is the present form of admission to the stewardship of the Chiltern Hundreds :

To all to whom these presents shall come, the right honourable [Francis Baring,] chancellor and under-treasurer of Her Majesty's Exchequer, sendeth greeting. Know ye, that I the said [Francis Baring] reposing especial trust and confidence in the care and fidelity of [A. B. Esq.] Have constituted and appointed, and by these presents do Esq.] to be steward and bailiff of the constitute and appoint the said [A. B. three hundreds of Chiltern, in the county of Buckingham, that is to say, Stoke, Desborough, and Bonenham, with the returns of all writs, warrants, and executions of the same, (in the room and place of [C. D. Esq.] whose constitution to the said offices I do hereby revoke and determine,) together with all wages, fees, allowances, and other privileges and pre-eminences whatsoever to the said offices of steward and bailiff belonging, or in any wise appertaining, with full power and authority to hold and keep courts, and to do all and every other act and acts, thing and things, which to the said offices of steward and bailiff of the three hundreds aforesaid, or either

[ocr errors]

of them, do belong, or in any wise appertain, in as full and ample manner as any former steward or bailiff of the said three hundreds hath lawfully had, received or enjoyed the same, to have and to hold the said offices of steward and bailiff of the said three hundreds, together with all wages, fees, allowances, and other privileges and pre-eminences whatsoever to the said [A. B.] during Her Majesty's pleasure. And I do hereby authorize and empower the said [A. B.] to demand and receive for Her Majesty's use, all court rolls and other writings, relating to the said three hundreds from any person or persons having the same in their hands or custody. And all and every such person and persons having the same in their hands or custody are hereby required to deliver up the same to the said [A. B.] Provided nevertheless, that the said [A. B.] shall enter these presents in the office of the proper auditor, within forty days next after the date hereof, and shall yearly return the court rolls of the said three hundreds into the said office of the said auditor, and account with the said auditor for all such sum and sums of money as he the said [A. B.] shall receive for and to Her Majesty's use, within forty days next after the feast day of Saint Michael the Archangel which shall happen in every

year, or else these presents and every thing herein contained to be void. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal, the

day of in the year of the reign of Her Majesty Queen Victoria, and in the year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and

Sealed and delivered, (being first duly stampt) in the presence of

Hoping that I may thus elicit from your learned correspondent at Oxford, who, a few years ago, proposed to favour us with a history of the Chiltern Hundreds, which he stated were four hundreds and a half in Oxfordshire, -some further documentary authorities for such statement than the patent of Henry the Sixth, giving the seneschalship of them conjointly, to William (de la Pole) Marquess of Suffolk, Alicia (Chaucer) his wife, and their son John (brother-in-law to Edw.IV.), -or that this communication may arrest the attention of gentlemen who have conceived the Chiltern Hundreds to be in other counties than Buckinghamshire or Oxfordshire, I am,

Yours, &c. Plantagenet.

SONNET

ON DR. ROUTH'S ENTERING HIS FIFTIETH YEAR OF OFFICE AS
PRESIDENT OF MAGDALEN COLLEGE, OXFORD.

WAYNFLETE!* if aught of care for those below
Can souls in Heav'n with bliss or sadness move,
How joy'd thy sainted shade, enthroned above,
When HORNE adorn'd thy classic halls, and HOUGH!
Not less rejoice, illustrious Spirit, now,

Nor think that Piety and Learning fade;
Behold them nobly both in RoUTH display'd,
With Kindness join'd, and Pity's gen'rous glow:
Be thanks to Heav'n who gave so rich a boon-
So fair a pattern of the Saint and Sage!
Be praise to Him who guards his rev'rend age,
For half a century ours, and still our own!
O oft may Heav'n renew his well-spent years,
Ere Isis' sons bedew his grave with tears!
Magd. Coll. 1840.

* Founder of Magdalen College.

E. MILLARD.

RETROSPECTIVE REVIEW.

The Works of Christopher Marlowe. 3 vols. London, 1826.

THE editor of this work was a gentleman of the name of Robinson: how far he was qualified for the task, by his knowledge of the Old Drama, it is not for the present writer to say; but in his perusal of the edition, he has had occasion to notice many errors and corruptions of the text; the most important of which he has mentioned, as they may be of some assistance to a future editor, and may enable him to give the true reading of the original, in a somewhat purer form than that in which it stands at present.*

Vol. I. p. 36. Tamberlaine, 1st part, act iii. sc. 1.

The editor says,

"As many circumcised Turks we have,

And warlike bands of Christian's renied."

"renied-denied. Christians who had denied their faith;' but read, "Christians renegadens," or "Christian renegades."

P. 48. Read,

P. 48.

"Brave horses bred o'er the white Tartarian hills.”
"Brave horses bred on the Tartarian hills."

"Disdainful Turkess, and unreverend Boss.'

The editor says, "Boss," a contemptous epithet, expressive of the inflated pride of the Turkish Empress "a tumour, and excrescence. Read, "Disdainful Turkess and unreverend Bassa.

On the word "Boss,' p. 9.

P. 56.

Read,

"

[ocr errors]

(a reservoir of water), see Gifford's Jonson, vol. viii.

"To suck up poison from the Moorish fens."

"moorish fens."

P. 75, act v. sc. 2. In a long speech of Tamberlaine's, towards the end, the verses are much out of order. I will give them just as they stand in Mr. Robinson's edition, and then as I have endeavoured to restore them to their proper places.

"But how unseemly is it for my sex,
My discipline of arms and chivalry,
My nature, and the terror of my name,
To harbour thoughts effeminate and faint,
Save only that in beauty's just applause,

With whose instinct the soul of man is touch'd;
And every warrior that is wrapt with love
Of fame, of valor, and of victory,

Must needs have beauty bent on his conceits.
I, thus conceiving, and subduing both,
That which hath stopt the tempest of the Gods,
Even from the fiery-spangled veil of Heaven,
To feel the lovely warmth of shepherd's flames,
And march in cottages of strowed weeds,
Shall give the world to note for all my birth,
That virtue solely is the sun of glory,
And fashions men with true nobility."

* The errors in the paging of this edition, and the printing the Elegies twice over in the third volume, certainly strengthen our belief that this edition was got up with haste unbecoming the value of the work.

I would read as follows:

The editor says,

"Save only that in beauty's just applause,

With whose instinct the soul of man is touch'd,
That which hath stopt the tempest of the Gods,
Even from the fiery-spangled veil of Heaven.
To feel the lovely warmth of shepherd's flames,
And march in cottages of strowed weeds,
And every warrior that is wrapt with love
Of fame, of valor, and of victory,

Must needs have beauty bent on his conceits.
I, thus conceiving, and subduing both,
Shall give the world to note for all my birth,
That virtue solely is the sun of glory," &c.

"A line appears to have been omitted in both the old copies after the word 'Gods.' The reader will easily supply the sense." If my reading is right, there appears to be no omission of lines, or defect in the sense. "Then after all these solemn exequies,

P. 88.

We will our rites of marriage solemnize."

But the old editions have

"We will our celebrated rites of marriage solemnize."

I think this word (superfluous both as to metre and sense,) got into the text from either the author or printer, who was perhaps the editor, doubting whether to use solemnize or celebrate; and it slipt from the margin, where it was probably placed, into the verse itself.

P. 150. "Vein or artier." Is this word used for " writers? I think not.

Vol. II.

Edward the Second. Gaveston says, p. 6.

"As for the multitude, they are but sparks
Raked up in embers of their poverty.

Tanti; I'll fawn first on the wind."

artery," by the old

That here is some great corruption of the text, is certain, but I confess my inability to set it right.

P. 125.

"Then haste thou to some solitary grove

And bear wise Bacon's and Albanus' works."

Read, "Albertus.”

P. 338.

Ganymede says,

"Sweet Jupiter! if e'er I pleased their eye
Or seemed fair, wall'd in with eagle's wings."

An unusual and quaint expression, but probably right; for in Lust's Dominion the poet has,

[ocr errors]

-I'll lay aside

My cardinal's hat, and in a wall of steel,

The glorious livery of a soldier,

Fight for my late-lost honour."

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

P. 341.

The walls of thy dear honour."

"To taint his tresses in the Tyrrhene main."

This word is used in an unusual sense in Tamberlaine, part ii. act i. sc. 3.

P. 343.

"Not long ago bestrod a Scythian steed,

Trotting the ring and tilting at a glove,

Which, when he tainted with his slender rod,
He rein'd him straight," &c.

"Yet shall the aged sun shed forth his air
To make us live unto our former heat," &c.

Should it not be hair?

P. 353.

"And therewithal he called false Sinon forth,
A man compact of craft and perjury."

« ÖncekiDevam »