1325, 22 March. Writ of aid for one year mentioning the appointment, a few years before (14 Edward II.), of collectors in the towns and ports of Oreford, Goseford, Erewell, and Ipswich, all in the county of Suffolk. 66 1326, 18 Feb. and 12 April. Commission of oyer and terminer in the suit against Adam Payne, of Arewell, Richard Love and Roger atte Hide, both of Harwich, and many other men, who have carried away "" cete a great fish called found in the manor of Walton, in Essex. Mr. Marsden mentions Payne, but not the other two men. A document dated 3 Sept., 1326, about the assembly of ships at Erewell, mentions also the port of Herewiz. 1326, 10 Sept. Appointment of three men to select twelve ships in the towns of Harwich and Ipswich and their members, to be at Orfordnesse on a certain day to repel the enemy if they attempt a landing there while the fleet is assembled at Erewell. Mr. Karl Kunze in his 'Hanseakten aus England' (Halle, 1891) has published some documents which bear upon our subject. They are as under : 1314, 24 Sept. Patent Roll containing the king's order about a ship seized "in portu de Herwico." A similar order of same date about goods illegally seized in Orwell Haven. A similar order, dated 20 Sept., 1314, about a ship seized in Harwich harbour. 1403. Complaints of certain merchants of Prussia about the illegal seizure of ships from "Danczik" laden with salt. Navis est apud Orwell." 66 66 1404. Complaint of the consulatus of Hamburg about the seizure of a ship by the brothers Thomas and John Rudde, who took her "in Norwelle," where they divided with others the cargo. The host of the said brothers "in Norwelle," whose name was Cogghendorp,* received as his share of the spoil 10 lasts of beer (" 10 laste cervisiarum "). We are told elsewhere in the same document that in those days quelibet lasta [cervisie] comprehendit 12 vasa et quelibet lasta taxata est in valorem 8 nobl." The last two documents do not mention Harwich, and therefore do not help to any solution, but are of some interest apart from the present controversy. Mr. Wylie quotes also a document of * About 1378 a ship, whose master was Conrad Westfal, "veniens ad portum Orwell, quidam de Herewich, nomine Cockenthorp ipsam navem arrestavit" (Hanserecesse,' vol. iii. p. 192). One of the proofs adduced by Mr. Marsden in support of his contention that the name of Orwell was occasionally used for "Harwich" is that we find sometimes the same ship described indifferently as of Harwich and "of Orwell," and ships owned in Harwich are called "of Orwell." He cites five examples, to test four of which would necessitate a visit to the Public Record Office. The fifth ship, named the Erasmus, is mentioned in one of the documents quoted, but not in the other, amongst the ships of the Iceland fleet then recently returned to England. Moreover, the Erasmus belonged to a period (i.e., Henry VIII.'s reign), when, as we shall presently see, the town of Orwell was no longer in existence. Two ships out of the other four belonged to a still more recent period, and therefore three out of the five ships prove nothing. It has already been pointed out by Mr. Wylie that Harwich is in the county of Essex. Orwell, on the other hand, is as a rule referred to in the documents as being in Suffolk; but there are exceptions to this rule. Thus, e.g., a Patent Roll of 14 Henry III. (1230) conveys an order to seize all " naves in portubus de Erewell et in aliis portubus comitatus Essexie inventas"; and the document is headed "De navibus in comitatu Essexie arrestandis." Old Silas Taylor, alias Domville, who wrote in 1676, also tells us that "the principal officers of his Majesty's Ordinance in the Tower of London do still (according to former precedents) continue the Writing of Landguard-Fort in Essex."-Sam. Dale's History of Harwich and Dovercourt' (London, 1730), p. 15. Some lines lower down, however, the same writer states that south-west of the fort "is the entrance into the Harbour," showing that, as regards the county in which Landguard Fort was situated, he was at variance with the principal officers in the Tower. The order dated 18 Feb., 1351, to the collectors of the twopenny subsidy in the port of Orewell, as to how to deal with a certain ship driven by tempest into that port, does not state the county, and it is only the modern index that assigns the port to Essex (Cal. of Close Rolls Edward III.'). On the other hand, some explanation is required what power the Sheriff of Essex 66 Another ship was arrested by the same sheriff in the port of Harwich, also in 1345 (ibidem, pp. 512 and 551). had to arrest a ship at Orwell, as mentioned vol. i. 57 and 58, both undated, but unin the order, dated 11 Feb., 1345, to questionably of the time of Henry VIII.; dearrest the ship in question (ibidem, and a third of the same series, dated 28 p. 549). Henry VIII. (1537), which shows somefortifications projected by Henry Lee, one on the Essex and the other on the Suffolk side of the entrance from the "Mayne Sea.' All three plans are drawn to a large scale, and agree upon the point that Orwell Haven was in Henry VIII.'s time the name of the short estuary formed by the confluence of the two rivers called the Stour and the Orwell to-day, the former river being called "the creek going to Mannetre on one, and "the water to Mannetre " on the other chart, and the latter "the creek going to Ippswiche on one, and "the water to Gipswiche on the other chart. Again, in 1339 there was a fracas about a foreign ship in the port of Orewell, between some men from Great Yarmouth and the men of Herewicz, and the bailiffs of both places received instructions in this matter, but not those of Orewell. Both cases can be explained by the fact that Orwell Haven stretched right across to the Essex shore, although the town itself stood in Suffolk. Thus Silas Taylor quotes (p. 14) from " a deed with seals " of a grant 66 of a messuage in Harwich uno capite abut. [sic] super stratum ducentem usque ad portum Orwell," in 1 Edw. IV. (1461). Mr. Marsden himself mentions the case of a ship arrested on the water at Orwell, in the county of Essex, a place adjacent to Ipswich." No date is given, and I must therefore refrain from all comment. 66 In the same collection we find "in portu de Goseford by Baldresea in Suffolk" (1323). Another German, Johann Rover, dates his letter from Herwycht in Norwelle on St. John's Day, 1437 ('Hanserecesse,' vol. ii.). There are in the same volume several letters, some written "in dem schepe in der haven von Norwel" and others at Iebeswyk" (Ipswich) in 1436. As regards the evidence derived from old maps and charts, Mr. Marsden is quite right that no map shows distinctly an Orwell town. One, said to be of the thirteenth | century (Cotton MS. Julius D. vii.), has the following names between Colchester and æstuarium Orford": Hippell (? Harwich or Ipswich), Anwelle (Orwell), Angulus Anglie, and "Coleford" (? Goseford). There are no rivers or indentations of the coast shown, and the names are all on the land. I cannot, however, agree with Mr. Marsden on the point that all maps of the sixteenth century are so rude and imperfect that they afford no assistance. There are some exceptions, as, e.g., Cotton MSS. Augustus I. The same estuary is again clearly marked as "Orwell hauen on Christofer Saxton's map of 1575, and also on Blaew's map of the county of Essex of about 1636. On the special chart in The Mariner's Mirrour,' by Luke Wagenaer, of Enkhuisen, however, the name of Orwell Haven occurs on the land, on the sea side of Landguard Point, and there is a small indentation of the coast. The author's 'Admonition to the Reader' is dated 1586, and the Preface of the English editor, Anthony Ashley, 1588. On Capt. Grenville Collins's chart, on the other hand, the name of Orwell Haven, though still on the land, is transferred to the harbour side of the Point, and is placed against the mouth of a creek. The date of this chart is 1686, and it is included in the second part of the captain's Coasting Pilot," which was published in 1693. 66 66 While on the subject of charts and maps, I may mention that on one Cotton MS. Landguard Point is named "Lunger Pointe, on another (No. 58) Langer Point," and The Poll Head" is shown as an island on the latter. On Saxton's map the name is 'Langerston." I have read the statement that I maps of the date of 1700 showed Landguard Fort as detached from the mainland and considerably northward of its present site," but they, no doubt, showed the more ancient fort mentioned by Silas Taylor and Dale, and not the present structure. 1325, 22 March. Writ of aid for one year mentioning the appointment, a few years before (14 Edward II.), of collectors in the towns and ports of Oreford, Goseford, Erewell, and Ipswich, all in the county of Suffolk. 66 1326, 18 Feb. and 12 April. Commission of oyer and terminer in the suit against Adam Payne, of Arewell, Richard Love and Roger atte Hide, both of Harwich, and many other men, who have carried away "" cete found in the a great fish called manor of Walton, in Essex. Mr. Marsden mentions Payne, but not the other two men. A document dated 3 Sept., 1326, about the assembly of ships at Erewell, mentions also the port of Herewiz. 1326, 10 Sept. Appointment of three men to select twelve ships in the towns of Harwich and Ipswich and their members, to be at Orfordnesse on a certain day to repel the enemy if they attempt a landing there while the fleet is assembled at Erewell. Mr. Karl Kunze in his 'Hanseakten aus England' (Halle, 1891) has published some documents which bear upon our subject. They are as under : 1314, 24 Sept. Patent Roll containing the king's order about a ship seized "in A similar order of portu de Herwico." same date about goods illegally seized in Orwell Haven. A similar order, dated 20 Sept., 1314, about a ship seized in Harwich harbour. 66 1403. Complaints of certain merchants of Prussia about the illegal seizure of ships "Navis " laden with salt. from Danczik est apud Orwell." "consulatus" 1404. Complaint of the of Hamburg about the seizure of a ship by the brothers Thomas and John Rudde, who took her "in Norwelle," where they The host of divided with others the cargo. the said brothers "in Norwelle," whose name was Cogghendorp, received as his share of the spoil 10 lasts of beer (" 10 laste cervisiarum "). We are told elsewhere in the same document that in those days quelibet lasta [cervisie] comprehendit 12 vasa et quelibet lasta taxata est in valorem 8 nobl." 66 The last two documents do not mention Harwich, and therefore do not help to any solution, but are of some interest apart from the present controversy. Mr. Wylie quotes also a document of * About 1378 a ship, whose master was Conrad veniens ad portum Orwell, quidam de Westfal, Herewich, nomine Cockenthorp ipsam arrestavit" (Hanserecesse,' vol. iii. p. 192). 66 navem 1355 mentioning a vicar of Orwell, but, the county not being mentioned, it is quite possible that it refers to the place of the same name which belonged to the diocese of Ely, and was situated in the county of Cambridge, where the Gilbertian canons had a monastery. One of the proofs adduced by Mr. Marsden in support of his contention that the name "Orwell " was occasionally used for of "Harwich" is that we find sometimes the "of same ship described indifferently as and "of Orwell, and ships Harwich " owned in Harwich are called "of Orwell." He cites five examples, to test four of which would necessitate a visit to the Public Record Office. The fifth ship, named the Erasmus, is mentioned in one of the documents quoted, but not in the other, amongst the ships of the Iceland fleet then recently returned to England. Moreover, the Erasmus belonged to a period (i.e., Henry VIII.'s reign), when, as we shall presently see, the town of Orwell was no longer in existence. Two ships out of the other four belonged to a still more recent period, and therefore three out of the five ships prove nothing. It has already been pointed out by Mr. Wylie that Harwich is in the county of Essex. Orwell, on the other hand, is as a rule referred to in the documents as being in Suffolk; but there are exceptions to this a Patent Roll of 14 rule. Thus, e.g., an order to Henry III. (1230) conveys naves in portubus de Erewell et seize all " in aliis portubus comitatus Essexie inventas"; and the document is headed "De navibus in comitatu Essexie arrestandis." Old Silas Taylor, alias Domville, who wrote in 1676, also tells us that "the principal officers of his Majesty's Ordinance in the Tower of London do still (according to former precedents) continue the Writing of Landguard-Fort in Essex."-Sam. Dale's 'History of Harwich and Dovercourt' (London, 1730), p. 15. Some lines lower down, however, the same writer states that south-west of the fort 66 is the entrance into the Harbour," showing that, as regards the county in which Landguard Fort was situated, he was at variance with the principal officers in the Tower. The order dated 18 Feb., 1351, to the collectors of the twopenny subsidy in the port of Orewell, as to how to deal with a certain ship driven by tempest into that port, does not state the county, and it is only the modern index that assigns the port to Essex (Cal. of Close Rolls Edward III.'). On the other hand, some explanation is required what power the Sheriff of Essex 25 e all the forms. and English achini. Is it t of the source seems to me Dossible. How ived from the s the evidence older than the entury? But ian borzacchini iginal of all the to find an etyrd. Certainly, Il not do. He diminutive of urse, Gr. βύρση, e? There is no Italian. Prof. the diminutive be explained? ot be explained n soil. It is far rowing from one These all point nish source; cp. For the relathe Arabic origin to refer the eager zes of Dozy. See pagnols et Portu(1869), 8.8. BorA. L. MAYHEW. ELAND.'-In Mrs. · Godfrey Leland,' 46 he are told that var almost to tears Teremtete. k this is a wort of any of her readers experiments with ound to point out ath, such as I am olled her pages if Readers of e prominent part of Spain, owing nit la derived the Le Spantat apa Borrow edigy ex ra of Magyar, to I have exers card is, bra never And shall Trelawny die, and shall Trelawny die? Then thirty thousand Cornishmen will know the reason why, is very much older, and is usually associated with the arrest by James II. of Sir Jonathan Trelawny, Bishop of Bristol, one of "the Seven Bishops," in 1688. As sung at dinners of Cornishmen to-day-whether held in or out of the "delectable Duchy "-the number is accustomed to be given as twenty thousand; but a curious piece of evidence has come to light which indicates that the idea of thirty thousand Cornishmen (the number adopted by Macaulay) being ready for some political fight or other was prevalent at the period of the Revolution. In Michaelmas Term of 1693 an information was exhibited in the Crown Office against Richard Edgecombe for speaking and publishing divers dangerous and seditious words against the Government of William and Mary in the October of that year, he saying that he would fight for King James and endeavour to restore him, and that thirty thousand men were ready. For this he was bound to appear at the next assizes for Cornwall in 1694, holden at Launceston; and, being thoroughly frightened, he petitioned their Majesties, in February, 1694, for a stay of proceedings. The matter was referred to the Attorney-General for report; and that law officer had before him not only Edgecombe's original allegation that the prosecution appeared to be malicious, of which there seems no evidence, but a certificate from the accused attesting his loyalty, and alleging that he was greatly distempered by drink at the time. This combination of pleas weighed with the Attorney-General, who recommended the issue of a warrant for a cessat processus (Domestic State Papers, William and Mary, 1694-5,' pp. 26, 191); and thus a trial was prevented which must have thrown some light upon the Jacobite movement then seething in Cornwall. Who was this Richard Edgecombe, however, is not obvious. He could scarcely have been Richard Edgcumbe, of Cotehele, 1st Baron Mount Edgcumbe, and only son of Sir Richard Edgcumbe, of Cotehele and Mount Edgcumbe, one of Charles II.'s Knights of the Bath (made so previously to the coronation in order to attend that ceremony), who had sat for Launceston in the Pensionary Parliament, elected in 1661, and had been returned for Cornwall in March, 1679, October, 1679, and 1681, dying in 1688. This Richard was baptized on 23 April, 1680, and therefore was no more KING'S CLASSICAL AND (See 10 S. ii. 281, 351; iii. 447.) UNDER 1558, "Misericordia Domini inter pontem et fontem," Mr. King refers to the 1636 (fifth) edition of Camden's ‘Remaines,' where these words are ascribed to St. Augustine. The passage in the first edition (1605) is on p. 55 of 'Certaine Poemes,' &c., printed, with separate pagination, at the end of the book. The quotation, apparently, is not to be found in Augustine (see 8 S. viii. 518; ix. 258). "The mercy of God is never to be despayred of, but still to be expected, even inter pontem et fontem, jugulum et gladium."- Diary of John Manningham, 1602-3,' Camden Soc., 1868, p. 9. This seems to belong to the year 1602, and is among some brief notes of a sermon by a Mr. Phillips. The interesting thing is that the fuller form of the quotation in the Diary' corresponds with that used by Robert Burton (Anatomy of Melancholy,' near the end of Part I., p. 277 in the first edition, 1621): : "Thus of their goods and bodies we can dispose, but what shall become of their soules, God alone can tell, his mercy may come inter pontem et fontem, inter gladium et iugulum." 66 As to Mr. Phillips the editor of the Diary' makes no suggestion, but one may conjecture that he was Edward Philips, certaine Godly and learned" sermons of whom, delivered in St. Saviour's, Southwark, were taken down and afterwards published (1605) by Henry Yelverton, the future Judge. See Foster's 'Alumni Oxon.,' vol. iii. p. 1156 (Edward Philipps), and Bliss's edition of Wood's Athenæ Oxonienses,' vol. i. col. 739 (Edward Philips, who died, says Wood, as I guess, in 1603, or thereabouts "). 66 I have looked through the sermons, but |