law of the land. The amendment was passed to countervail that decision and make any revival of the institution imposBodleian, 42-Chertsey Monumental Inscriptions, 43-sible, as well as to free the still remaining 'Ham House,' by Mrs. Roundell, 44-"The Mahalla". slaves. The fugitive-slave laws were not Coleridge's Dejection' Anglo-Indian Little Jack Horner-The Merchant's Magazine, 45-"The Right" abolished till 28 June, 1864: a useless perand "The Wrong"-Howson's Case, 46"The Old High-formance if there were no slaves to hunt lander "-Carlisle Carlyol, 47. down. A very brief summary of the main landmarks in the abolition of slavery may be permitted ::

QUERIES:-Public Office Police-Office Frederic the

Great's MSS. The Sign of the Cleft, 47-Philip
Wright, c. 1759-Gentleman's Evening Dress - French

On 1 Jan., 1863, President Lincoln by his Emancipation Proclamation set free the slaves in Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana (except thirteen parishes), Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia (except forty-eight counties). His proclamation did not destroy the institution of slavery, but simply set free the then slaves in those States, being the States and portions of States in rebellion. The slaves in the remaining slave territory -Maryland, Delaware, Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri, the forty-eight counties of Virginia, and the thirteen parishes of Louisiana-were still left in slavery, and the institution of slavery was not attempted to be destroyed in any of the States.

The Congress-the Senate on 8 April, 1864, and the House of Representatives on 31 Jan., 1865-proposed an amendment to the States, the first section of which is :— "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist in the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."

This amendment to the Constitution of the United States became a part of the Constitution on 18 Dec., 1865, when Secretary of State Seward announced that it had received the ratifications of the requisite number of States.

By that amendment-on 18 Dec., 1865, and not on 1 Jan., 1863-was slavery abolished throughout the United States, and the slaves who had not been set free by

the Proclamation of Lincoln obtained their freeedom.

The error of MR. MATTHEWS is one that is held by many, and I deem that a clear statement of the facts will be interesting to your readers. Lincoln set free many slaves by the proclamation of 1863, but he made no attempt to abolish slavery. There were many legally held in slavery in the States after his proclamation, and even after his death; for it was not till seven months after his death that on 18 Dec., 1865, slavery was abolished in the States which in 1861 still maintained the institution, and that the many remaining slaves were JOHN G. EWING.

freed.

Chicago.

BRASSES AT THE BODLEIAN. THE late Rev. Herbert Haines, in his wellknown Manual of Monumental Brasses (1861), part ii. p. 232, under a list of brasses in "private possession, museums, &c.,' states that in the Bodleian Library at

66

Oxford there was (in the Gough Collection) A Rose, bearing an inscription c. 1410, from a brass formerly in St. Peter's Church, St. Albans," Herts. This rose is figured in Gough's 'Sepulchral Monuments,' vol. ii. part i. p. 335. Just when and how this. brass got away from St. Peter's Church is not stated, or how it is supposed to have comeinto Gough's possession. It would seem to have passed into the hands of the Bodleian with the rest of "the Gough Collection," which, presumably, included other brasses taken from churches, as there are more brasses recorded by Haines as at the Bodleian.

In vol. i. No. 2 (June, 1897) of The Oxford Journal of Monumental Brasses, at p. 80, appears a query from Mr. William Frampton Andrews, author of Memorial Brasses in Hertfordshire Churches,' as to the then whereabouts of this rose brass. Mr. Andrews

rose.

copper

there states that the brass in question was
forthcoming at the Bodleian in 1864, but
was not there at the date quoted. Replying
to this query, Mr. P. Manning states in the
following issue of the same paper (December,
1897), at pp. 124-5, that he had made
inquiries of Mr. E. W. B. Nicholson, Bodley's
Librarian, who stated that after careful
search among all Gough's copper plates,
he had been unable to discover this "
Search was also made among the
plates in the Rawlinson Collection, with
the same result.
a monumental brass should be classed with
(There is no reason why
copper plates or kept with them.) Mr.
Manning adds: "The oldest members of
the Bodleian staff have no recollection of
the rose." In the same communication
Mr. Manning further states that the mutilated
inscription to Sir John Wyngefeld, dated
1389 (among those returned by Haines as
at the Bodleian), was likewise not to be
found. This is also figured by Gough.

Now what can have become of thesevaluable treasures? So far as I am aware, the above is the only time the query has been made in print, and I thought it of sufficient interest to archæologists to repeat it in 'N. & Q.,' as the wider circulation and publication might possibly lead to the rediscovery of the missing brasses. This

66

type of rose is all but unique, two only

one

being known to Haines-this, and
other, which he figures (Introd., p. 110)-
though there are examples of other uses of
the rose on monumental brasses.

It is surely worth some organized effort to recover or find these, and while it is bad enough that brasses should be taken from

churches under any plea, it does seem inconceivable that such things could possibly disappear from such custody as the Bodleian Library at Oxford, unless by deliberate theft, which, one would suppose, would be immediately detected, though it might not lead to the recovery of the article purloined. I do not wish to be taken as casting the least imputation upon the authorities of this great library, but I believe the matter to be of enough importance to justify a thorough. investigation, as far as it may now be possible.

CHERTSEY MONUMENTAL

INSCRIPTIONS.

Is it not more than possible that these plates have accidentally become hidden or KNOWING how valuable inscriptions are to put away in some place to which they do not the genealogist, and how apt they are in the belong? It is true that England possesses course of time to get removed or destroyed, untold wealth in archæological treasures I send copies of some that they may be denied to the New World; and while all preserved in the pages of N. & Q.' I may Americans are, by our English cousins, point out that Manning and Bray in their popularly credited with being especially History of Surrey,' published in 1814, desirous of procuring any of these, even i. 234, give copies of thirty-five inscriptions at the sacrifice of personal honour and originally in the parish church. Most of the integrity, I think England does not realize tablets and stones, however, from which the amazement with which Americans these were taken were probably destroyed regard the apparent supineness and indiffer- when the church was rebuilt in 1806; for ence of the English public to the loss of although the church now contains thirtytreasures which can never be replaced. three inscriptions, only twelve (Nos. 1, 4, Something disappears, but unless it be of 5, 6, 7, 8, 14, 15, 17, 18, 26, and 28 of the especial value or almost of national import- present list) of those mentioned by Manning ance (like a Gainsborough portrait), its and Bray exist to-day. Two (Nos. 9 and loss would not seem to provoke more than 27), however, of the remaining twenty-one, a few passing remarks, and the incident is dated 1736, and 1805 respectively, must relegated to oblivion, and so losses go on, have existed in their time, but were appasmall perhaps in themselves, but in the rently overlooked. aggregate of inestimable value.

So far as brasses are concerned, there would seem to be a decided opinion in England, among those interested in this subject, that any American would gladly barter his soul to possess one, no matter how obtained; and I have in my possession a printed statement from England (which emanates from a source where certainly calmer judgment should have prevailed) to the effect that there is a regular market for such things here, and they readily command fabulous prices. May I, therefore, as one knowing whereof I write, be permitted to state that I am ignorant of any brass in this country, either in public or private possession, nor do I know of one ever having been offered for sale; and I am fairly confident that an ordinary curio dealer would look on one (if offered to him) somewhat dubiously, as he would be at a loss how to dispose of it, and at the most, it would not bring more than a few dollars. If any fellow-disciple of N. & Q.' can tell me of any brasses in the United States, I shall welcome the information, and I would certainly use every

1. In a vault near this place | Is deposited all that was mortal of Pratt Mawbey, son of Sir Joseph Mawbey, Bart, of Botleys in this Parish, By Dame Elizabeth his wife, Daughter and Heiress of Richard Pratt, Esq', of Vaux Hall in the County standing and Memory | Surpassed the Usual En of Surrey, whose amiable Disposition, Underdowments of Infancy, And afforded his Parents the most flattering Hopes of future Honour and Comfort. But the Almighty, who knows and dispenses that which is Best, and whose ways are Life To the Enjoyment of eternal Felicity in unsearchable, Removed him from this transitory another On the 31st Day of October, 1770, | In the 8th Year of his Age. Had Fate permitted longer stay, Nor snatch'd thee from thy Friends away, | Thou shouldst have fill'd some nobler Place, Thy dear departed Shade, | This Tribute to thy Mem'ry Country's Ornament and Grace. Receive, thou Paid, And may it while it speaks thy Fame | Tell how we love revere thy Name. Here also are deposited the Bodies of the following other children of the said Parents: | Elizabeth Mawbey, who died September 6, 1761, aged 12 Days. Onslow Mawbey, Sophia Mawbey, who died on April 16, 1775, in the a son, who died December 20, 1766, aged 6 months. 4th Year of her Age. Emma Mawbey, who died on April 2, 1785, in the 10th Year of her Age.

Arms: Quarterly, 1 and 4, Or, a cross gules, fretty of the first between four eagles

3. Committed to the grave of his kindred, in humble hope of God's mercy through Christ, Here rests the Mortal Body of Sir Joseph Mawbey,* Bart., whose Spirit returned to the Lord who gave it on the 27th of August, 1817, in the forty-private vmbratilisqve, jvev'ditate annos viginti fifth year of his age: Here also rest the Earthly Remains of Dame Charlotte Caroline Maria, his Widow, who died the 11th of August, 1832, aged 57 years; and of Joseph their infant son | Watch therefore, for ye know not | What Hour your Lord doth come. | Matt. c. 24, v. 42.

Indies for manslaughter, when he was Coleridge; and it is in this edition of 1834 branded on the hand, and yet within two that the comma first appears. Having years had a commission and was made been once adopted, it has continued to captain of the Jersey. stand, I believe, in all subsequent editions, including that of 1905 by Mr. Dykes Campbell. So far as I know, the only modern. version of the poem with the original punctuation occurs, not in an edition of Coleridge's poems, but in Ward's 'Selections. from the English Poets.'

Another point is that she says the date of the Duchess's death is not known. It is given, however, in Luttrell's 'Diary.' W. BALL WRIGHT.

Osbaldwick Vicarage, York.

"THE MAHALLA."-" The troops of the Mahalla, after pillaging the place [Raisuli's stronghold], set it on fire." So we are told in a telegram to the Matin from Tangier, copied into The Morning Post (8 Jan.). A telegram from Morocco to Le Figaro (6 Jan.) says, "La mahalla a attaqué Zinat."

As the word mahalla is not to be found in French or English dictionaries, it may be of use to explain the meaning of this foreign technical term. It is an Arabic word meaning an army or a corps d'armée.

The word mahalla is cognate with hilla, gens quæ aliquo loco subsistit tentoria.” Both these Moorish words lingered on in Spanish, as we may see in Dozy's Glossaire,' pp. 54, 172. A. L. MAYHEW.

COLERIDGE'S 'DEJECTION': A MISPUNCTUATION.-It is, I think, desirable that attention should be drawn to a mispunctuation which has long disfigured a prominent passage in Coleridge's poem 'Dejection.' In the fifth stanza of the poem, which embodies its central thought, the question,

What, and wherein it doth consist

This beautiful and beauty-making power?
(the power, that is, in the soul, through
which alone nature appears beautiful) is
answered in the following lines :-

Joy, virtuous Lady! Joy, that ne'er was given,
Save to the pure, and in their purest hour,
Life, and Life's effluence, cloud at once and shower,
Joy, Lady! is the spirit and the power,
Which wedding Nature to us gives in dower,
A new Earth and new Heaven.

The mispunctuation consists in the insertion
of a comma at the end of the last line but

one.

The history of this comma is curious. 'Dejection' was first published in The Morning Post for 4 Oct., 1802; and in this version the last two lines of the above passage have no stop, except a note of exclamation at the end. This punctuation was adhered to in all versions of the poem which received the author's personal supervision. In 1834, however, Coleridge, being too ill to attend to the new edition of his poems, entrusted it to his nephew H. N.

The fact that the inserted comma gives an impossible sense to these lines (while it renders its original adoption a mystery) may explain why it has been ignored by readers to whom the meaning of the wholepoem was never a matter of doubt. But for the sake of less fortunate students of the poem it would perhaps be well, not but that the passage should be fully puncmerely that the comma should be deleted, tuated. There are two ways of punctuating sense of the passage; but one of them has it, either of which is consistent with the true obvious advantages over the other. Wemay either read

Which, wedding Nature, to us gives in dower
A new Earth and new Heaven,

or

Which, wedding Nature to us, gives in dower
A new Earth and new Heaven;
but of these two readings it is clearly the
second which the rhythm and the metaphor
alike demand.
J. SHAWCROSS..

ANGLO-INDIAN LITTLE JACK HORNER.' -The following linguistic curiosity seems worth preserving here. It is a macaronicversion of Little Jack Horner,' partly in English, partly in Urdu, which has been found in use among ayahs and Anglo-Indian children. Folk-lorists may like to compare it with the Anglo-Chinese version in Leland's. 'Pigeon English Sing-song,' 1876.

Chhota Jack Horner baitha in a corner
Khātā his Christmas pie;

Ungli pa dalta, kishmish nikāltā,
Bulwa, "Kaisā acchā larkā ham hai."
JAS. PLATT, Jun.