THE GENTLEMAN'S MAGAZINE, For JULY, 1814. Mr. URBAN, Company of Stationers, I have now appendage to a new Edition of the "Progresses of Queen Elizabeth." It is an original document, fairly written on four sides of a strong foolscap sheet of paper, folded lengthways; and is thus titled, "Hugh Morgan, her Maties Apothe carie, askith alowance for thes parcelles following; viz. for her Matiesowne person; from the 24th day of June 1588, beying Mydsomer day, unto the xxixth day off Septembr 1588, beying Mychaelmas day, to be payd by the Treasurer of her Highness Chambr." A very few of the Items shall be here transcribed: "Confectio in forma manus Christi cum lapide bezohardi & cornú monoceratis, ex mandato Reginæ, pro D'na Skipwith, xis. "Thragea regal' cum rhabarbaro inscisso, ex mandato Reginæ, pro Domina Scudamore, xvid. "Aqua rosarum, pro Legato Regis Navarræ, xiid. "Cons' berber', pruna damascen^ condit', ac cum aliis pro D'no Ralegh, ex mandato Reginæ, vis. “Suffitus odoriferos, in die quo baptizatus est filius D'ni Richardi Knightly militis, iis. vid." Gargles occur frequently, and now and then hysteric and diuretic medicides; but I forbear to look too minately into the prescriptions for a Virgin Queen. Articles of perfumery alsa are numerous, particularly "Suf. fitus odoriferus" and "Aqua rosarum;" the latter of which seems to have been used abundantly, in the Chapel, in the Royal chamber, in the Dressing-room, in the Supper-room (pro nuculo), in the Wardrobe, in the Laundry, and for Richmond Palace, pro dome Richemount." Mr. URBAN, July 5. addition the late learned AntiNaddition to the Biographical ac quary, Sir John Fenn, given in the 8th Vol. of Nichols's "Literary Anecdotes," p. 139, I send the inscription on his Monument, on the North side of the Chancel of Finningham Church, in Suffolk. This elegant Monument is from the chisel of the celebrated Bacon; and, it is almost needless to add, beautifully sculptured. It exhibits a female figure, in bas relief, kneeling, with her head reclining on her right hand, and bending over an altar inonument, the front of which is divided into three compartments; on the centre one are sculptured the arms of Fenn, impaling those of Freres the other two are ornamented with quatrefoils. It is unfortunately placed in a bad light, and a damp situation. W. L. Dereham, in the County of NORFOLK, "In memory of Sir JOHN FENN of East Knight; whose worth as a son, a husband, a neighbour, and a friend, will be re membered, and his loss lamented, till relations shall cease to exist,—As a Mathose to whom he stood in these several gistrate, his acuteness of discernment, and integrity of decision, rendered bim respected by all around him. And when called upon (in 1791) to serve the office of High Sheriff of the County of NonFOLK, be paid a very laudable attention to the dignity and decorum of the station. Having made deep researches into the darkest and most turbulent period of our History, he was strongly impressed with government, and saw but too plainly a sense of the blessing of good order and how much the present neglect of externals tended to weaken and overturn them.-On the 1st of January, 1766, he was united in marriage to ELLENOR, the daughter of SHEPPARD FRERE, Esq. and SUSANNA Mrs. Serres and her abettors. You "We feel it our duty, before we enter surely, Sir, must be possessed of an enviable degree of patience, to bear with them so long. But she has fairly acknowledged her aim at last, in her Letter to you on the 20th of June; and as it is now apparent that her object is to be fed, and not to be famous, let her but beg henceforth with humility, and the publick may be disposed to forgive her. I agree with you in dissenting from the opinions of those who advocate the claims of Horne Tooke, Dr. Francis, General Lee, Dr. Wilmot, and Mr. Glover. I have read all their pamphlets, excepting that of the Niece of Junius, with pleasure; but certamly without a single atom of conviction. -The first pamphlet respecting Mr. Glover ("Memoirs of a celebrated Literary and Political Character," was puffed about as glaringly as he Life of Dr. Wilmot was; and yet, after all, it did not contain a single tittle of evidence to prove that Glover was Junius. But, not content with one abortion, before the labour of the first was over, out limps another to get a Sale for its elder Brother. The last work, which I have read respecting this long agitated question, and which it is probable I should not bave seen so early but for your account of it in your LXXXIIIa Volume (Part II. p. 357.) is Mr. Roche's Inquiry concerning the Author of the Letters of Junius, &c. proving them to be written by Mr. Burke. Your having declared, that “ this intelligent Investigator had made out a stronger case than any preceding writer on the subject," made me send for his work; and I will own to you, after having read it most attentively, that I am fully persuaded, that he has made out a stronger case than any body else hitherto. I will go even farther, aud own, although I was previously bostile to the supposition of Mr. Burke being Junius, that Mr. Roche has, in my mind, put this question beyond the reach of controversy. Nor am I singular in this opinion; for I find the following words in a respectable contemporary journal, which has devoted several pages to its Review of Mr. Roche's work. The journal to which I allude is the Anti-Jacobin Review for September 1813, in which, at p. 209, the Authors begin their Article as follows: into any particulars respecting this work, to declare, that it has fully convinced us of the truth, which it is intended to estab lish-that the Letters of Junius were written by the Right Hon. Edmund Burke. Mr. Roche has, indeed, brought nal, direct, and circumstantial, as must together such a body of evidence, intereventually settle this interesting and long-disputed question.” Before I quit this topick, allow me Roche's work, your Reviewer (vol. to suggest, that in reviewing Mr. LXXXIII. Part 1. p. 357.) has fallen into mistake* when he says, that "the Writings of Mr. Burke, on which Mr. Roche more especially founds his hypothesis, appeared many years after the Letters of Junius had been in every body's hands." Among these he then instances the Tract called"Thoughts on the Cause of the Presevt Discontents," which most certainly was published, "not many years after the Lellers of Junius were in every body's hands," but in 1770; exactly at the time that Junius was writing. Your Correspondent Honestus (vol. LXXXIII. Part 11. p. 414.) who writes tation, as if from the writings of Mr. from Chelsea, puts the following quoBurke, at the head of his Letter:"The Style of Junius was imbued with the corrosive sublimate of Mercury.' (Burke.) Pewit me to request Honestus, or Mr. Roche, who seems quite intimate with Mr. Burke's writings, to inform us in what part of his works this sentence is to be found? " Another of your numerous Correspondents (I mean the gentleman who signs G. L. S. in vol. LXXXIII. Part 11. p. 415.) gives us an extract, on the subject of Junius, from a Pamphlet, which he says was published by Mr. Burke in 1796; and of which the title is as follows: "A General Reply to the several Answerers, &c. of a Letter written to a Noble Lord, by the Right Hon. Edmund Burke." Mr. G. L. S. is of opinion, though this Reply is written in the third person, that there is *We are perfectly ready to acknowledge this mistake; which supersedes the necessity of inserting a long Letter on the subject from Mr. Reche.-The and whether at the distance of twenty technical circumstance we again repeat; years or of twenty weeks, the argument will equally apply. Mr. R. mistakes in supposing that the articles in pp. 357 and 416, are by the same Writer. EDIT. no question but Mr. Burke was the author. Now, Mr. Urban, I am very much disposed to question this fact, which he so readily takes for granted: and it is certain, that the Bishop of Rochester has not, nor does he intend to include this Tract in the authentic collection of Mr. Burke's Works. The extract which he gives from this General Reply is the following: "It is no less remarkable than true, (says the Author) that, with very few exceptions, these sagacious, heart-reading observers have not attributed to Mr. Burke a single mode of abuse, with which they have not loaded their own pages; and in their endeavours to soar a little beyond the visible diurnal sphere of their vapid declamation, one may well say of them, as the incomparable Dunning, in his Letters of Junius, said of Sir William Draper, that they possess the melancholy madness of Poetry without the inspiration.” In requesting G. L. S. to furnish us with some better proof than his mere assertion, I may also request him to mention the name of the Bookseller by whom this pamphlet was published. As the Gentleman's Magazine goes, no doubt, to the town of Hungerford, may I hope that some of its Readers there will gratify us, by informing you, Mr. Urban, whether there is any truth in the fact of a Mr. Greatrakes being buried in the Church-yard of Hungerford. If the fact be as stated in your LXXXIIId Vol. Part II. p. 547, it will be an additional obligation, if they send you a correct copy of the inscription on his grave, toge ther with any other particulars they may happen to learn about Mr. Greatrakes. I have heard,that the Bishop of Rochester, in his forthcoming Life of Mr. Burke, intends not to take any notice of the Junius controversy. I can hardly think this to be the case. -After the proofs that have been brought forward, it will not satisfy the publick to have the question slurred over in this manner. Dr. King's Biographical Memoir was expected before this time:- Can any of your Readers inform me, why it has been delayed, and when it will be published? M. A. JONES. Mr. URBAN, your Magazine for Nov. 1768, p. 499. H. criticises a paper of Mr. John Caverhill in the Transac tions of the Royal Society, intituled, "Some attempts to ascertain the ut most extent of the knowledge of the Antients in the East Indies." After falling foul on the Society for the declaration they make, that they will not answer for the certainty of facts, or propriety of reasoning, in the pa pers they publish, he comes to Mr. Caverhill; whom he accuses of grossly mistaking and mistranslating almost all his quotations from the Greek Geographers. I shall not examine · the three first of his objections; but in his 4th, he says, We are told [by amass exactly agrees with Ptolemy's Mr. C.] the Country beyond Ponte description of that beyond Cattigara, a marshy country, which producer reeds of such a size, that when THEY were joined and tied together, THEY were enabled to pass from one side to the other. Ptolemy's words 'are, γη λίμνας έχουσα ελωδείς εν αις καλαμοι μεγάλοι φυονίας και συνέχεις αυτως ως το εχομενως αυτών ποιείσθαι τας διαπεραιώσεις. A country having swampy lakes, in which grow large reeds, and so close together, that on them the neighbour ing inhabitants cross [the lakes].". 66 In p. 547, Mr. Caverhill replies to the anonymous Critick, and in his turn objects to the translation given by H, as totally omitting the word ouvexus, and then gives a translation word by word, as follows; country having fenny lakes, in which great reeds grow,and ouvexus* by shortening them, and so joining us to fabri cate ferries or transports of them." He goes on: "these reeds or bamboes grow in England 20 feet high in five weeks, and are as thick as the wristt; but in hot countries, they grow more than double that height [40 feet), and commonly equal the diameter of the leg and thigh, and even to a greater size; so that of these the inhabitants in some parts of India, at this day, make of them masts to ships. The inhabitants of Sinæ, according to Ptolemy, shortened, or cut down, these bamboes, and fastened them together, to form floats to cross the lakes in that country. It is a prevailing custom in many parts of India, to this day, to join three rough pieces of timber to SUSANNA his Wife; and, that her union with him might not separate her from the rest of her Friends, he most kindly directed his own remains to be interred in the Vault beneath, destined to the reception of her Family. He died Feb. 14, 1794, in the 55th year of his age." Mr. URBAN, July 5. HE Author of the "Literary Tanecdotes" will permit me to correct a single word in his vol. VIII. p. 88. The avowed Author of "TheJyphthora" was the Rev. Martyn Madan, Chaplain to the Lock Hospital; elder brother to the late venerable Bishop of Peterborough, who (as his surviving eldest son, the Chancellor and Prebendary of Peterborough, does) bore the name of Spencer. Allow me farther to observe, that, in the brief Memoir of Dr. John Warren (successively Bishop of St. David's and Bangor) p. 431, it is mentioned that "his first preferment was Archdeacon of Worcester 1775, by favour of Bp. Johnson, who was his Nephew." This statement is certainly erroneous. Doctor John Warren, Bishop of St. David's, never was Archdeacon of Worcester; nor was he a relation of Bp. Johnson's.-The fact is, that The Dr. John Warren, Archdeacon of Worcester, was a nephew of Bp. Johnson -not Bp. Johnson a nephew of Dr. Warren; and Dr. Warren, Archdeacon of Worcester, was of a very dif ferent family from that of Dr. Warren, Bp. of St. David's which the Rev. Dawson Warren, Vicar of Edmonton, who is a nephew of the late Archdeacon of Worcester, can more particuJarly explain. M. GREEN. +++ We are greatly obliged by the above corrections; and return our best thanks also to E. J. the Reverend J. HUNTER, and Mr. D. YONGE, for their several valuable observations. Inscription on a Tablet to the Memory of Dr. J. JOWETT, of Cambridge.The annexed Inscription was designed for a private Tablet, as a tribute of respect and affection to the Memory of the late Professor of Civil Law. (From VALPY'S CLASSICAL JOURNAL.) In eo inerant ingenii acvmen, literae diligentia, vitae modestia, comitas morvm, animi constantia, et incorrupta probitas. Pvblicvm svvm mvnvs per xxxi annos omnivm praeter svi plavsv Nihil avt honoris avt emolvmenti merendo ea qvam ferendo insignior. ceterarvm decvs et fvndamentvm, Fidei Evangelicae, qvalem Ecclesia Anglicana semper exhibverit, propvgnator fvit acerrimvs, in literarvm stvdiis vel excolendis vel commendandis, optime famvlari et possit et debeat sibi nec immatvra nec infelix, ' cvi scilicet Το Ζην Χριστος και το Αποθανειν Κέρδος. Ecclesiae Academiae amicis desiderivin svi reliqvit acerbissimvm. Obiit Id. Nov. MDCCCXII. annvm agens LXIII. vir integerrime et carissime, cvjvs colloqvio, consilio, benevolentia, brevi nobis frvi licvit: Ita tva in terris vestigia premamvs, vt aeternam in coelis felicitatem tecvm in Christo asseqvamvr! Mr. URBAN, Islington, July 24. EING an old reader of the GentleBEING man's Magazine, and very fond of all kinds of literary anecdotes and controversy, I take the liberty of sending you a few remarks on the subject of Junius. Since the publication of Woodfall's new edition of those Letters, I think I have read almost every thing that has been published relative to their Author. The remarks, which I send you at present, have all a reference to the communications and Reviews, which you have published since the new edition came out. It is my One of your anonymousCorrespond euis, who pretends to set at rest the controversy about the Man in the Iron Mask, is of opinion, that the real JuDius has not as yet been pointed out; and tells us, that " perhaps if he were to give himself a little paias, he should be equally fortunate as to the person of Junius."It is rather cruel of this very acute gentleman to tantalize us by putting the cup in this manner to our lips without allowing us to taste it. Pray beg of him, Mr. Urbán, in the name of all the seekers after Junius, to take a little pains, and satisfy dur longings. To an Englishman the discovery of Junius is surely more interesting than that of the Man in the Iron Mask. (Vol. LXXXIII. Part II. page 310.) As a clue to Junius, another Correspondent, who sigus L. R. I. (vol. LXXXII. Part I. p. 101.) suggested a search after the copy of the Elder Woodfall's duodecimo edition, concerning the binding, &c. of which, for himself, Juuius gives such particular directions in one of his private Letters to Mr. Woodfall. This hint called forth another of your Correspondents, Philo-Junius, who asks(vol. LXXXIII. Part I. p. 199.) whether this copy "was not intended for and placed in a library not accessible to all bookcollectors? and whether it has not been known to be there as lately as the year 1786?"-He then bints, that one of your Correspondents, whom "an asthma and a numerous family have excluded from society for several years, may be able to throw some light upon this question."-The gentleman thus alluded to, Mr. Urban, must be known to you, as he intimates in his answer to Mr. Philo-Junius, with whom he is very angry for point. ing at him so openly. He, however, does not deny, that Philo-Junius was right in his conjecture respecting the copy in question, and says" if he (Philo-Junius) will come forward and say how he obtained his information, 4 will give all the information in my power."Now, as Mr. Philo-Junius first threw down the gauntlet, I think you will agree with me, Sir, that he is bound to reveal all he knows ou this subject, so as to enable his friend T. E. B. to give all the information in his power." (Ibid. p. 301.) Surely, if the secret of the latter requires only the previous declaration of Philo-Junius, in order to be made public with propriety, T. E. B. can have but very poor reasons for keeping it to himself. After all, it is not improbable, that the knowledge of both respecting Junius may be as trifling as that of several others who have lately given themselves many airs on the subject. Many deal in mysteries to give themselves a mistakeu importance; and prudently remain silent, lest, in the end, the mighty labour of the mountain should terminate in the production of a mouse... The West of England Member of Parliament, who informed your Correspondent Mr. Farquhar (vol. LXXXIV. Part I. p. 36.) that the name of Junius was no secret among the members of the Whig Club, could hardly be serious; as nothing is more certain, than that the members of that Club are exactly as ignorant of the real Junius, as the accomplished members of the Four-in-hand Club. In a paragraph, which your readers will find (vol. LXXXIII. Part II, p. 416.) we are told, that a circumstance, which occurred early in the year 1772, immediately after Junius ceased writ ing, and which, the writer of the paragraph says, was within his own knowledge, had strongly impressed his mind, at that time, with a belief, that a clergyman of the name of Rosenhagen, then in Lord Shelburne's family, was possessed of the secret of Junius.-Now, Mr. Urban, I cannot for the life of me conceive, what was the writer's object in sending you this paragraph. Why did he not communicate this importaut circumstance, upon which his unshaken belief of Mr. Rosenhagen's secret was founded?— We are told, that obscurity is a source of the sublime; but I never heard that it was a source of evidence. This is not a specimen of darkness visible, but of solemn trifling. It is no better than "this is the dog that worried the cat, that killed the rat, that ate the malt, that lay in the house that Jack built." If the writer knows what he means, let him speak out, instead of imitating the example of Mr. T. E. B, and his friend Philo-Junius. I am sick, Mr. Urban, quite sick, of M |