of Henry VIII. and his Queen Jane Seymour; the place exactly corresponding to the designation of his burial mentioned in his will. Yours, &c. Mr. URBAN, C. I. April 7. N"A true copy of the Journal of Trial of King Charles I. as it was read in the House of Commons, and attested under the hand of Phelps, clerk to that infamous Court, taken by J. Nalson, LL. D. Jan. 4, 1683," printed in 1684, p. 118, after an account of the execution, the Author says: "Being imbalmed and laid in a coffin of lead, to be seen for some dayes by the people; at length, upon Wednesday the 17th of February, it was delivered to four of his servants, Herbert, Mildmay, Preston, and Joyner, who, with some others in mourning equipage, attended the herse that night to Windsor, and placed it in the room which was formerly the King's bedchamber. Next day it was removed into the Dean's Hall, which was hung with black, and made dark, and lights were set burning round the herse. About three afternoon, the Duke of Richmond, the Marquess of Hartford, the Earls of Salisbury and Lindsey, and the Bishop of London (others, that were sent to, refusing their last service to the best of Princes) came thither with two votes passed that morning, whereby the ordering of the King's burial was committed to the Duke, provided that the expences thereof exceeded not five hundred pounds. This order they shewed to Colonel Whichcot, the Governour of the Castle, desiring the interment might be in St. George's chappel, and according to the form of the Common Prayer. The latter request the Governour denied, saying that it was improbable the Parliament would permit the use of what they had so solemnly abolished, and therein destroy their own Act. The Lords replied, that there was difference betwixt destroying their own Act, and dispensing with it, and that no power so binds its own hands, as to disable itself in some cases. But all preVailed not.-The Governour had caused an ordinary grave to be digged in the body of the church at Windsor for the interment of the corpse; which the Lords disdaining, found means, by the direction of an honest man, one of the old Knights, to use an artifice to discover a vault in the middle of the quire, by the hollow sound they might perceive in knocking with a staff upon that place; that so it might seem to be their own accidental finding out, and no person receive blame for the discovery. This place they caused to be opened; and, entering, saw one large coffin of lead in the middle of the vault, covered with a velvet pall, and a lesser on one side (supposed to be Henry the Eighth and his beloved Queen Jane Saint Maure); on the other side was room another him) where they thought fit to lay the Queen Katherine Parre, who survived King-Hither the herse was borne by the Officers of the Garrison, the four Lords bearing up the corners of the velvet pall, and the Bishop of London following; and in this manner was this great King, upon Fryday the nineteenth of February, about three afternoon, silently and without other solemnity than of sighs and tears, committed to the earth, the velvet pall being thrown into fastened an inscription in lead of these the vault over the coffin, to which was words: 'KING CHARLES, 1648.'" Yours, &c. Mr. URBAN, A COLLECTOR. April 16. WINDSOR has generally been supposed, by our best Histo rians, to have been the place of interment of the Martyred Monarch; but that fact was never completely estab lished until the accidental circum stance which has recently occurred, in consequence of the Duchess of Brunswick's Funeral, although the Royal Remains have been often sought for. But this discovery seems to confirm the account given by Mr. Herbert, one of the Gentlemen of the Bedchamber, and who was the only attendant upon the King from the time of his confinement in Hurst Castle until his execution. Dugdale, then Garter King at Arms, sent to Herbert, who was living at York, to know if the King had ever, in his hearing, spoken as to where his body should be interred. And Herbert's reply contained so many curious particulars, that, at Dugdale's request, they were thrown into a connected form, and published. his posthumous information, recorded by Wood, is, perhaps, the most interesting, as tending to locate the exact spot of Charles's interment. Sir William But rical account of the interment. Echard affords the following histo "It has been made a question, and a wonder by many, why a particular monument was not erected at Windsor for him (King Charles the First) after the Restoration 1813.] Particulars of the Interment of King Charles the First. 301 Restoration of his son, especially when the Parliament was well inclined to have given a good sum for that grateful purpose. This has caused several conjectures and reflections; and intimations have been given, as if the Royal Body had never been deposited there, or else had been afterwards removed by the Regicides; and the Lord Clarendon himself (vol. III. p. 200) speaks softly and suspiciously of this matter, as if he believed the body could not be found. But, to remove all imaginations, we shall here insert a memorandum, or certificate, sent by Mr. John Sewell, Register at Windsor, anno 1696, September 21. The same vault in which King Charles the First was buried was opened, to lay in a still-born child of the then Princess of Denmark, now our gracious Queen. On the King's coffin the velvet pall was strong and sound; and there was about the coffin a leaden band, with this inscription cut through it: KING CHARLES, 1648.' « Queen Jane's coffin was whole and entire; but that of King Henry the Eighth was sunk in upon the breast part, and the lead and wood consumed by the heat of the gums he was em balmed with; and when I laid my hand upon it, it was run together and hard, and had no noisome smell."-As a farther memorandum relating to Kg "That Charles's interment, he says, when the body of King Charles the First lay in state in the Dean's Hall, the Duke of Richmond had the coffin opened, and was satisfied that it was the King's body. This several people have declared they knew to be true, who were alive, and then present; as Mr. Randolph of New Windsor, and others." So that he thinks the Lord Clarendon was misled in that matter, and King Charles the Second never sent to inquire after the body, "since it was well known, both to the inhabitants of the castle and town, that it was in that vault." By other Historians it appears that Mr. Fishhorne, gent. of Windsor, ́ a relation of Sir Christopher Wren's, was among those who were present at the interment of the King, went into the vault, and brought away a fragment of King Henry's pall. He observed, the vault was so narrow, -that it was some difficulty to get-in the King's coffin by the side of the - others. In addition to these testimonies the reader may be referred to " A True Relation of the Interment of King Charles the First, in the Chapel of St. George in Windsor Castle; from an antient MS. of unquestionable autho- This fortunate discovery of the actral remains of the unfortunate King, is not only to be appreciated from its determining a circumstance in the History of the Nation before held somewhat in doubt, but the more especially as it completely removes the stigma attempted to be cast by Foreigners upon the character of those who had successfully promoted the RESTORATION; which the Author of a modern Publication of considerable and just celebrity, entitled "Clavis Calendaria*,” (which was reviewed in your last Volume, p. 258, and in p. 47 of the present), tbus expatiates upon; "That Charles was buried atWindsor, seems to be generally admitted; but it is to be remarked, that his remains were never found there, though frequently sought for. This want of confirmation has given rise to much speculation, and has afforded to the Enemies of the Reformation an opportunity of circulating a re port, which, although not noticed by our Historians, on account of the honour of the Nation, is said by Forcigners to have been acceded to by them. It is stated, that when the presumed remains of Cromwell were dug up, dragged through the streets, and exposed on a gallows, the persons who executed that disgraceful and impotent piece of revenge, discovered that the head had been separated from the body, though they never mentioned the circumstance until they had carried into effect the order they had received for its complete intended degradation; and that it was from that cause, and others subsequently brought to light, clearly ascertained, that, instead of Cromwell, all this ill-judged revenge had been exerted on Charles the First, whose body had been removed in a secret man- come through a less respectable channel. As, however, Philo-Junius has addressed me in a manner almost as public as if he had mentioned my name, and as you have sanctioned his enquiry; I will, by your leave, say a few words upon the subject. It is, I believe, very common for those who are the subject of a joke, not to feel the humour of it; and I confess that I neither do nor ever did see the wit of ridiculing my misfortunes. It may be, because, as I have said, I am the subject of the joke; or it may be because I did not think that the dispensations of Providence, with respect either to my health or my family, could be proper subjects of ridicule. However, Sir, I am very glad that the Gentlemen who have done me the honour to notice my circumstances, have been able to make themselves merry with them; and congratulate them upon the numerous sources of entertainment which they must meet with in a world of care and sorrow. You must well know, Sir, the labour requisite to perfecting a large work; and the impediments which the above circumstances, added to the necessity of employing an Amanuensis for every word I write, and the unexpected (and I am proud to say unmerited) withdrawment of patronage, must have been to its completion. How ever, I will only say, that your Correspondent must know I am aware who he is, by the circumstance to which he adverts; and if he will come forward, and say how he obtained his information, I will give all the information in my power. T. E. B. YOUR "Sit mihi fas audita loqui." Mr. URBAN, April 12. OUR Correspondent L. R. I. in your Magazine for February last, gives a Hint for the Bibliomania, by which it appears probable that the Author of Junius might be discovered; and perhaps this would be sufficient for your Readers in America, where I am positively informed, upon authority I have no reason to doubt, "Jnnius's own copy of his Letters, bound in vellum with gilt leaves," certainly was before his death, and in all probability is at present, although the possessor-who received it from the hands of Junius-is altogether ignorant, that, when the volumes were presented to him, with a sett of Black stone's Commentaries, some other Books, and several Prints, &c. he accepted them from an Author who had excited so great an interest in the Political and Literary world. You will undoubtedly be desirous to be informed from what source I received this intelligence, and what induces me to rely upon it. This fact was communicated to me by Mrs. Wilmot Serres (a lady whose endowments are worthy of the patro nymic she bears), a niece of the late Dr. James Wilmot, of Trinity College, Oxford, who has in her possession some MSS. in the Doctor's hand-writing, proving, to demonstration, that he and no other was the Author of the Letters of Junius.-One of these is a Common Place Book, in which are scraps of Essays and numerous quotations, which correspond so perfectly in the character of hand-writing with the fac-similes of that of Junius, published by Mr. Woodfall, that they must instantly convince the most incredulous, that they were all written by the same hand. In one place, 15 or 20 leaves have been torn out; and on the next page is the conclusion (a few lines only) of one of the letters of Junius to the Duke of Grafton. In another part is a memorandum, in the Doctor's hand, that on such a day he had finished a letter of Junius," and sent it to Lord S- -ne." This is presumed to be Lord Shelburne, with whom he was in habits of intimacy. This memorandum is partly obliterated by a pen. The Doctor's situation and connexions enabled him to obtain, with facility, that intimate and early knowledge of State affairs, which is so strikingly displayed throughout Junius's Letters, he being almost constantly living in Town, on terms of the greatest intimacy and confidence with the leading political characters of the day; some of whom are now living, and must be aware, that Dr. Wilmot's opportunities of obtaining the most interesting and important intelligence, were much greater than was necessary for the Author of Junius's public Letters, and quite sufficient to account for his almost immediate knowledge of Garrick's visit to Richmond, which he mentions in one of his private communications. I could enter much further into this subject, but am not, at present, inclined inclined to elucidate, more than I have already, the proofs to be produced of the identity of Junius; and which will put to rest for ever the vague conjectures of those who amuse themselves with "guessing at Junius." I shall therefore only further remark, that the MSS. with aa inspection of which I have been favoured, have very recently been perused by Mr. Woodfall, who declared his surprize at this discovery, equally accidental and satisfactory; and, although he expressed no decided opinion on the subject, observed, that they are written upon paper of the same size, with the same water-mark, as that used by Junius. An intention is, I believe, entertained of publishing these papers, with a chain of circumstances, forming a mass of evidence; than which, in my opinion, nothing can be desired or conceived more satisfactory or conclusive, that Dr. Wilmot was the real Author of the Letters of Junius*. Yours, &c. METELLUS. Mr. URBAN, M April 14. RS. WILMOT SERRES has announced her intention of publish ing "The Life of the Author of the Letters of Junius,” compiled from certain MSS. which incontestibly prove that the Letters of Junius were written by Dr. Wilmot; and has annexed to her "Prospectus," the following recommendatory Letter: "(Copy.) 36, Green Street, March 13. "I have known the late Dr. Wilmot a great many years. I am authorized to certify that Mrs. O. W. Serres is his Niece; and that she resided at the Rectory of Barton on the Heath, under Dr. Wilmot's care, until her marriage. CONV (Signed) WARWICK," Mr. URBAN, April 6. YONVINCED by the unanswerable arguments of your intelligent Correspondent Junior, in p. 4. of the present Volume; I have no hesitation in retracting the supposition which (in your last volume, p. *499)1 had formed on conjecture, arising from a va riety of circumstances there enumerated. I now firmly believe that the Earl of Shelburne was NOT the Writer of Junius. But I still am of opiuion that every argument which I adduced continues in full force-Qui facit per alium, facit per se.-Lord Shelburne, possessed of that extent of political sagacity which is universally allowed him, soon contrived to dis cover, and to silence, the Writer of Corregio and Atticus, by attaching him to his own immediate interest; and, the Noble Peer supplying the materials, his Opponent became his Amanuensis, All this, however, is submitted to consideration as an improvement on the former conjecture of, Yours, &c. N. S. Mr. URBAN, April 19. AD your caviling Correspondent in p. 411. of the second part of your last year's Volume, taken the trouble to make any inquiries, when he travelled post-haste through Worcester Cathedral, he would have learnt that no antient screen, nor any works of art whatever, have been recently destroyed. On the contrary, an antient and very elegant screen has been repaired and set up at the altar, in lieu of a plain wall erected by the Puritans, which was a disgrace to the Church. He would have learnt also, that what he is pleased to call “ glazed door with a green canvass blind" (i. e. some yards of green baize attached to a temporary gallery) was a mere accommodation for company, placed there for the charitable purpose of the Music meeting, which (you have told us in p. 285.) produced 8127. 18s. 4d. And if he is really one of your "Constant Readers," he might have seen, in the First Part of your last year, pp. 414, 524, that his censure of the judicious Architectural Improvements in the Cathedral were equally unfounded. CARADOC. Captain LAYMAN's Precursor, &c. a Abe enabled to fight guns in every direction, for which purpose the square exposed and overhanging stern should be done away, and in future formed (See pages 21, 229.) COMPLETE ship of war should into a circular battery; for, although ships of war, as at present, are extremely formidable from a broadside battery, they are very vulnerable, indeed almost defenceless, at the extremities; and effective force should be considered the most essential quality in a floating fortress*. To construct good ships of war, the number and nature of the guns, men, provisions, and stores, must be ascertained, from which a floating fortress should be formed so as to combine strength and duration with velocity in sailing, celerity in working, capacity for stowage of men and provision, and stability to carry sail with the ports such a height above the water as to be able to use the guns in any weather. To unite these qualities on scientific principles, and to remove the evils so long and justly complained of, it appears the most effectual remedy would be to render the department of construction entirely distinct from any other branch of the naval service, at the head of which should be placed the Admiral of the Fleet, or some person of high rank aud authority, with active talent, and sound judgment, as director general, with the following officers: An Inspector of Construction, who, with competent assistants, should seJect Timber as to its growth, and prepare it for use, which, with all other inaterials, should be proved by the test of experiment, as to strength, specific gravity, and duration, as well as the component parts of ligneous bodies, and the action of fluids upon the metals used in combination. A Naval Architect, to whom should be allotted the formation of ships as depending on the resistance of fluids, the floatation of bodies at rest and in motion, with a just combination of the parts to produce a complete whole, and from the centre of gravity and metecenter, to ascertain the position and proportion for masts and yards. A Surveyor of workmanship in fitting and uniting the materials for the building of ships, which cannot any where be better or so well selected as from the persons bred in an English Dock-yard. A Superintendant of Equipment for rigging and sails, as well as placing the machinery, for which the British Navy affords persons peculiarly well qualified. A Master of the Ordnance, who should not only have the guns, pow der, and magazines, under his direction, but be acquainted with the nature and effect of military projectiles, the force of ignited gunpowder, and the resistance of solids. To which should be added, A Civil Engineer, to have the construction of docks, storehouses, and all other buildings. These members to form a body on particular occasions, but to be individually responsible for every act done in the sepa rate branches. A Mr. URBAN, Southampton, Mar.13. S a Correspondent (in your last Supplement, p. 607.) calls upon you for information on one subject it is but doing you justice to refer him to your valuable pages for what he may therein find on another, which has occasioned some indignation, be says, and apparently some suspicion in his mind of unfair dealing with respect to the character of one whom he greatly admires. I have myself had no opportunity of reading Bishop Taylor's "Liberty of Prophesying" through and through; but in your volume LXI. p. 313, he may find one who has, and with very different success from what has attended his own search; and who gives the extract, compared with Dr. Franklin's Parable against Persecution, as occurring "at the close" of the Bishop's work alluded to. This letter also refers to other communications on the subject in some preceding volumes, which will probably afford Dr. Hodgson, if not proofs of any "pitiful political manœuvre to blacken his character," some pretty strong evidence that (as your Correspondent in 1791 observes) " Dr. Franklin cannot reasonably be supposed to claim, in this case, the merit of au Original Compositor." Yours, &c. THOMAS MEARS *See a communication on this subject from another Correspondent in our last, page 213; and see also in this month, p. 317. EDIT, Mr. |