Dr. Johnson, Mr. Pettigrew, and Mr. Dyce. There might have been less scope for criticism, if he had read those biographers of Akenside; and, especially, the Rev. Alexander Dyce whose classical attainments, conscientions spirit of research, and discriminative taste, have on various occasions been very successfully exercised in the illustration of our national literature.

In lieu of specimens of the slipshod style of this part of the work, I shall briefly advert to dates. The account of Giovanni ALDINI has no date. To Art. Jacques AIMAR-Vernai, there is no date: M. Biot gives the date of one of his adventures, viz. 1692.-In Art. Giovanni degli AGOSTINI, the dates of birth and decease are omitted: M. Weiss records both dates, viz. 1701 and 1755.-The dates affixed to AKBAR are 1543-1604; but he is afterwards stated to have died in his 64th year. The dates affixed to AKBEH Ben Hejadi are 736-741: the youth is described as a reformist-an extirpator of robbers-a founder of mosques and schools!-William ALABASTER IS said to have been incorporated M.A. at Oxford 7 June 1792: it should be the 11 July 1592!

I have had so much occasion to censure this work (the anticipated masterpiece of Metropolitan literature) that it would be superfluous in me to sum up its character. I conclude, rather, with a remark of the learned Chardon de la Rochette, the proper application of which presents no diffi. culty: "Les compilateurs de dictionnaires historiques sont incorrigibles; ils semblent prendre plaisir à perpétuer les erreurs.' Yours, &c.

MR. URBAN,

BOLTON CORney.

I VENTURE to suggest the following interpretation of the two singular Latin lines, inscribed on the tomb of John Wiles, in Lavenham Churchyard. I think a clue to their meaning is found in the tenor or general purport of the two quotations from Holy Writ, which accompany them.

I propose the following punctua

tion:

Quod fuit esse, quod est? quod non fuit esse quod esse,

Esse, quod est? Non esse quod est non est, erit esse.

"What hath been to be, what is it? To be, what hath not been to be what it is to be, what is it? Not to be what is is not, will be to be."

And I would thus paraphraze them, in explanation of the above translation :

"What hath been to be, what is it?" What is it to have been, or existed? or, What is past mortal life? ("To be," signifies life; "what hath been to be," life past, or gone)

"To be what hath not been to be what it is to be, what is it?" What is it to be in a new and future state of being? or, What is a coming future life? ("To be what it is to be," signifies a coming state of existence; "What hath not been to be," that it is new and untried. The expression, "What hath not been [hitherto] to be what it is to be," is the contrary, or opposite to the previous description of past mortal life: This last is expressed, as "What hath been to be.' Future life is expressed, as "What hath not been to be what it is to be.")

The last clause, "Not to be, what is is not, will be to be," I paraphraze thus :

To live for ever, will be the future state or a future state will be never to cease to be, or to exist. ("Will be to be," is equivalent to futurity is: "not to be what is is not,' that is, to live for ever; or, to die no more; or, no more to be, not being.)

In this suggested translation, there is no transposition of any word: only the insertion of two interrogatives and some stops. However quaint and fanciful the Latin lines may be, they must be allowed to contain a very intelligible sense, and one very appropriate to their situation-on a tombstone; as well as according with the rest of the inscription.

* The first " esse," in the second line, I have, in the literal translation, placed at the beginning of the second interrogatory; but this is not essential, for that second question might quite as properly be thus translated: What hath not been to be what it is to be, To be (i. e. to be this), what is it?"

IN slang language, a dashing person is often called a kid, or a kiddy. It is, in fact, a synonym for a knowing one. To kyd, is given in Johnson's Dictionary, as implying to know.

In Johnson's Dictionary, and also in Mr. Todd's enlarged edition, the word obverse, relating to medals, is omitted.

I have sometimes heard patriotic Welshmen make a complaint that Sir William Jones turned his back on his native language, and regret that he did not leave a single sentence in com

mendation of its study. But, in point of fact, the complaint is unjust. In his letter to R. Morris, Esq. dated Calcutta, Oct. 30, 1790, Sir William says-" As one of the Cymro-dorians, I am warmly interested in British antiquities and literature." In a letter to Lord Althorpe, Dec. 28, 1777, he says "I prefer Evans's harp to the Theban lyre, as much as I prefer Wales to ancient or modern Egypt.'

It would hardly be supposed that the Beth-Gellert legend is to be found in Hindostan. Yet such is actually the case. It occurs in the Hitopadesa, and is given in some extracts made from it by Sir W. Jones. (See his Life by Lord Teignmouth, edited by the Rev. S. C. Wilkes, in the editor's supplement.) The moral is this -"He who knows not the first principle, and first cause,-who is, besides, in subjection to wrath,-is tormented like a fool, as the Brahmin was who killed the ichneumon." The story is this, that the Brahmin, having occasion to go from home, committed his infant daughter to the care of an ichneumon, whom he had long cherished. "Soon after which, the ichneumon, seeing a black serpent near the child, killed him and cut him in pieces; and

then, seeing the Brahmin returning, went hastily, his mouth and paws being smeared with blood, and fell at the feet of his master; who, seeing him in that condition, and saying to himself 'He has devoured my child!' stamped on him and killed him. Afterwards, going into his house, he saw his child asleep, and the dead snake lying by him; at looking, therefore, at the ichneumon, his benefactor, he was greatly afflicted." The Hitopadesa (i. e. Friendly Instructions) is considered by Sir W. Jones to be the most splendid collection of Fables in the world. It was written, about eleven centuries ago, by a Brahmin named Vishnu Sarma. It is the basis of the work known in Europe by the name of Pilpay.

ancient Latines, caiat signified a kind Bryant mentions that, among the of whip or thong. I wonder that, in his rage for etymology, he did not derive the cat-of-nine tails from this source.

Anecdotal literature finds materials

"Constan

for its history even in Turkey. The following paragraph appeared in the papers in January 1836. tinople, Dec. 3.-Abdi Bey, the Sultan's favourite jester, died last week. He held his post under different Sultans for forty years, and in the early part of his career his profession was no sinecure, as the jokes were then practical and at his expense, such as mounting him on a giraffe, immersing him in cold water, &c. &c. But Sul. tan Mahmoud having no relish for such amusements, he was principally employed to keep him in good spirits, -by smart sayings and diverting stories. That his wit served him to some purpose, is proved by the circumstance of his leaving behind him 150,000l. the fruits of it."

THE Castle, as the view has shewn, is now a picturesque ruin, profusely overgrown with ivy. The foss by which it was formerly surrounded was probably a dry one; its site is still indicated by a slight depression of the ground. The approach to it is by an ancient gateway, that of the outer precinct. The inner inclosure only can, however, be reckoned a fortress, or rather fortalice, surrounding a courtyard of about thirty-five yards in length from east to west, eighteen in breadth from north to south.

Sir John Perrot made considerable additions to the building, which gave it more of the air of a baronial house than a military stronghold. Adjoining the principal tower of the northwest angle he threw out a large projecting gateway, over which were spacious apartments enlightened by bay windows, flanked by two round towers, between which still arises a pointed gable, a very unmilitary feature; these towers are seen in the extreme left of the view of the south or seaward front of the castle, represented in the engraving.

The fire of the parliament forces was directed against the eastern face of the building, and especially on a circular tower at the north-east angle, in themassive walls of which it made a huge breach -from that tower to the south-west angle the curtain wall has been entirely levelled and rased, so that the fortress was rendered quite untenable at any future time; and the destruction of its spacious lodging rooms and hall was moreover effected by fire. These are strong indications of revenge for a gallant resistance. The battery of the Parliamentarians, of a semicircular form, was established on a rising ground about seven hundred yards north-east of the Castle, as its remains still testify. Many of the cannon balls striking against the compact red stone of the walls split in half, and are from time to time turned up by the gardener

of Mrs. Starke when digging in the site of the moat.

Sir

I have said of Sir J. Perrot, the possessor of Laugharne Castle in the sixteenth century, that he was reputed a natural son of Henry VIII. and consequently half-brother of Queen Elizabeth. He was distinguished by considerable talents, alloyed by a certain bluntness or roughness of manner. Both in his person and deportment he strongly resembled Henry. He was employed as Lord Deputy of Ireland, and became popular in the administration of that office. Christopher Hatton conceived a jealousy against him, and he was impeached of treason on very doubtful and insufficient grounds. Burleigh was greatly averse to his prosecution. Lord Hunsdon, Sir Thomas Buckhurst, Sir Robert Cecil, Sir John Fortescue, Sir John Wolley, &c. were constituted commissioners for his trial at Westminster, and the constitution of a court was generally in those days equal to the condemnation of the accused. He was charged with using disrespectful words against the Queen, with relieving known traitors, Romish priests, &c. with holding communication with the Prince of Parma, encouraging the rebellion of O'Rourke, and other Irish malcontents. He defended his expressions relative to the Queen as merely proceeding from impatience, not from a malicious or disloyal heart. He denied that he had given any criminal patronage to papists, being most averse to their pernicious doctrines; or that he had held any correspondence with the enemies of the Queen. The arguments of Popham the Attorney-general against this gallant Cambrian were too effectual: he was found guilty, and condemned to death.

On quitting the tribunal he exclaimed "God's death! will the Queen suffer her brother to be offered up a sacrifice to the envy of his frisking * adver

in fashion at the court.

GENT. MAG. VOL. XII.

2 Z

saries!" Burleigh shed tears at the sentence, and the Queen herself now frequently praised the quality of mercy and quoted that decree of the Emperor Theodosius, Should any one have spoken evil of the Emperor, if through levity it ought to be despised, if through insanity pitied, if through malice forgiven." The Queen's mercy, if intended, was too long delayed to take effect, and Perrot expired in the Tower in September 1592, six months after his conviction. His lands, which he had alienated previous to his trial, were suffered to descend to his son, who had espoused the sister of the Earl of Essex.*

Sir John Perrot, when resident in Wales, was frequently engaged in the prosecution of the daring and atrocious pirates who at that time infested the Severn sea, and in amercing the inhabitants of the counties of Pembroke and Caermarthen, who furnished them with provisions or purchased of them commodities which they had captured from trading vessels or carried off from lands bordering on the sea-coast. These articles consisted chiefly of corn, beeves, sheep, and salt. An original document, of which an extract is subjoined, gives particulars of some of these "water thieves."

"Presentment by the oaths of the persons undernamed, taken 12th December 1573, before Sir John Perrot, Knight, John Wogan of Boulston, and John Barlow, Esqrs. by virtue of a commission under the great seal to them directed; as also by letters from the Lords of Her Majesty's Privy Council, for and concerning all such persons as have bargained and contracted with the late pirate Robert Hexte, and been victuallers of the now pirate Thomas Clerke; together with the value of their lands and goods, so near as the said Commissioners could learn, as particularly upon the oaths of the said contractors and victuallers doth appear."

Here follow the names of the jurors, twenty-three in number. Of the presentments the following are speci

mens :

"David Allan of Laughern and Richard Hamon of Tynbie had their bark, being of the burthen of twelve tons or

therabouts, laden with salt from the said Hext, by whom we know not. Valent in bonis, viz. Allyn 37. and Hamon 31.-John Butler of Laughern had from the said Hexte one bark of fifteen tons or ther

abouts, laden with salt, &c. &c.-James ap Rodds, Robert Elliot, and George White, with divers others, at the commandement of Sir John Perrot, Knight, took two pynnaces of one Roger ap Richard, alias Parry, of Aberystith in the county of Cardigan, from the said Hext his ship side. The one having in her thirty-eight barrels of salt, the other

bushels of corne-which corne was by them restored to one Harman Rancke and Bernard Jordane, being the true owners therof, from whence the said Hexte took it; and they had given unto them by the said owners for their paynes, the one moytie with an acquittance under the owners hands and seales, which acquittance was seene by us the jury. John Humfry sold the said Clarke one carcase of a beef, and one mutton. Thomas Hexte of the Nangle went on board the said Clerke in a payer of velvet breeches, layde on with gold lace, a dublett of satten and a velvett cap, and brought Clerke as much tallow as drest his ship."

By this it would appear that as much attention to personal attire was used by these Welshmen in boarding a pirate's vessel as others might observe in going to court. But the depredations of Hexte or Clerke, or the state they might affect when on board their roving vessels, sink into insignificance when compared with the deeds of the redoubtable pirate Captain Thomas Salkeld, as may be gathered from a deposition made 17th April 1610, before William Wogan and John Wogan, knights, and Alban Stepneth, Esq. William Young, of Pembroke, stated that Captain Salkeld captured him and his bark (laden with coals, goods, and passengers, from Tredarth, and bound for Ireland,) in Milford Haven, on the 8th March 1609, carried them afterwards to Lundy Island, where he set the vessel adrift on the rocks, and she was totally lost!

On the same day he went ashore at Milford Haven, and killed eight beeves, thirty young lambs, and many wethers, conveying them all on board his ship. On the 13th of the same month he