« April 3. 1685.—This afternoon nine or ten houses were burned or blown up, that looked into S. James's Park, between Webb's and Storie's." Diary of Philip Mador, MS. formerly in the possession of Thorpe the bookseller.

No. 3. Capel Court. -So named from Sir William Capell, draper, Lord Mayor in 1503, whose mansion stood on the site of the present Stock Exchange.- Pennant's Common-place Book.

No. 4. Bloomsbury Market. — This market, built by the Duke of Bedford, was opened in March, 1730. Query, was there a market on the site before? - Ibid.

No. 5. Bartlet's Buildings. — Mackeril's Quaker Coffee-house, frequently mentioned at the beginning of the last century, was in these buildings. — Ibid.

No. 6. St. Olave's, Crutched Friars. Names of various persons who have occupied houses in this parish: Lady Sydney, 1586-Lady Walsingham, 1590-Lady Essex, 1594 Lord Lumley, 1594 -Viscount Sudbury, 1629- Philip Lord Herbert, 1646 - Dr. Gibbon, 1653 - Sir R. Ford, 1653-Lord Brounker, 1673 - Sir Cloudesley Shovel, 1700. Extracts from the Registers made by the Rev. H. H. Goodhall, 1818.

EDWARD F. RIMBAULT.

WIVES OF ECCLESIASTICS.

In reply to your correspondent's query as to the "wives of ecclesiastics," I find amongst my notes one to this effect:

ERROR, to assume in ancient genealogies that a branch is necessarily extinct, simply because the last known representative is described as "Clericus," and ergo, must have died S. P. L.

It will be obvious to many of your readers that Clericus is nomen generale for all such as were learned in the arts of reading and writing, and whom the old law deemed capable of claiming benefit of clergy, a benefit not confined to those in orders, if the ordinary's deputy standing by could say "legit ut clericus."

The title of Clericus, then, in earlier times as now, belonged not only to those in the holy ministry of the Church, and to whom more strictly applied the term Clergy, either regular or secular, but to those as well who by their function or course of life practised their pens in any court or otherwise, as Clerk of the King's Wardrobe, Clerks of the Exchequer, &c. Though in former times clerks of this description were frequently in holy orders and held benefices, it must be evident that they were not all so of necessity; and the instances are so numerous where persons having the title of "Clericus" appear nevertheless to have

been in the married state, and to have discharged functions incompatible with the service of the Church, that the assertion will not be denied that the restrictions as to contracting matrimonial alliances did not extend to clerks not in holy orders or below the grade of subdiaconus. The Registrum Brevium furnishes a precedent of a writ, "De clerico infra sacros ordines constituto non eligendo in officium." This distinction alone would prove that other clerks were not ineligible to office. The various decrees of the Church may be cited to show that the prohibition to marry did not include all clerks generally. Pope Gregory VII., in a synod held in 1074, "interdixit clericis, maxime divino ministerio consecratis uxores habere, vel cum mulieribus habitare, nisi quas Nicena Synodus vel alii canones exceperunt."

The statutes made by Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas, Archbishop elect of York, and all the other bishops of England, in 1108, in presence of King Henry I., and with the assent of his barons, confine the interdiction respecting marriages to Presbyteri, Diaconi et Subdiaconi, and a provision is made by them for those cases where marriages had been contracted since the interdict at the Council of London (that probably in 1103), viz. that such should be precluded thereafter from celebrating mass, if they persisted in retaining their wives. "Illi vero presbyteri, diaconi, subdiaconi, qui post interdictum Londoniensis Concilii fœminas suas tenuerunt vel alias duxerunt, si amplius missam celebrare voluerint, eas a se omnino sic facient alienas, ut nec illæ in domos eorum, nec ipsi in domos earum intrent. . . . Illi autem presbyteri qui divini altaris et sacrorum ordinum contemptores præelegerint cum mulieribus habitare a divino officio remoti, omnique ecclesiastico beneficio privati, extra chorum ponantur, infames pronunciati. Qui vero rebellis et contemptor fœminam non reliquerit, et missam celebrare presumpserit, vocatus ad satisfactionem si neglexerit, viij. die excommunicetur. Eadem sententia archidiaconos et canonicos omnes complectitur, et de mulieribus relinquendis et de vitanda earum conversatione, et de districtione censuræ si statuta transgressi fuerint. . . . Presbyteri vero qui relictis mulieribus, Deo et sacris altaribus servire elegerint, xl. dies ab officio cessantes, pro se interim vicarios habebunt, injuncta eis poenitentia secundum hoc quod episcopis eorum visum fuerit." In 1138 the penalty for priests marrying was deprivation of their benefices, and exclusion from the celebration of divine service :-"Sanctorum patrum vestigiis inhærentes, presbyteros, diaconos, subdiaconos uxoratos, aut concubinarios, ecclesiasticis officiis et beneficiis privamus, ac ne quis eorum missam audire præsumat Apostolica auctoritate prohibemus."

Many such decrees have been made at various

synods and councils holden for reformation of the clergy, but I can find none wherein marriage is interdicted to clerks generally. I will refer to one more only, viz. that made in the Council of London, held at Westminster in 1175. Here it will be seen most distinctly that the prohibition against entering the marriage state was confined expressly to Clerici in sacris ordinibus constituti, and that it was not only lawful for clerks below the grade of subdeacon to marry, but that having once entered the marriage state, and being subsequently desirous ad religionem transire, and to continue in the service of the Church, they could not do so and be separated from their wives unless de communi consensu; if they continued, however, to live with their wives, they could not hold an ecclesiastical benefice: "Si quis sacerdos vel clericus in sacris ordinibus constitutus, ecclesiam vel ecclesiasticum beneficium habens publice fornicariam habeat," &c. . . . "Si qui vero infra subdiaconatum constituti matrimonia contraxerint, ab uxoribus suis nisi de communi consensu ad religionem transire voluerint, et ibi in Dei servitio vigilanter permanere, nullatenus separentur: sed cum uxoribus viventes, ecclesiastica beneficia nullo modo percipiant. Qui autem in subdiaconatu, vel supra, ad matrimonia convolaverint, mulieres etiam invitas et renitentes relinquant."

Thus it will be seen that the title "Clericus,"

under some circumstances, affords no certain in

dication that a lawful marriage may not have been contracted by the person so described, and consequently that he might not have prolem legitimam.

W. H.

It does not follow that William de Bolton was an ecclesiastic because he was called Clericus; that designation being, even in that early time, often used in a lay sense.

I have just come across an instance of a prior date. In the Liberate Roll of 26 Henry III. the king directs a payment to be made to Isabella, the wife of our beloved clerk, Robert of Canterbury, to purchase a robe for our use." Even in the reign of Richard I. it may be doubtful whether the term was not used with both meanings; for in the charter of Walter Mapes, granting certain lands, among the witnesses are Rogero, capellano, Willelmo, capellano, Thoma, clerico meo, Waltero, clerico, Jacobo, clerico, Bricio, fermario meo."

[In addition to the information afforded by the preceding communications, "A SUBSCRIBER" will find much curious illustration of this subject in Beveridge's Discourse on the Thirty-nine Articles, where he treats of the Thirty-second article "On the Marriage of Priests."

He must, however, consult the edition printed at the Oxford University Press in 1840, which contains for the first time Beveridge's Discourses on the last Nine Articles.]

TOWER ROYAL.

Sir,In your second number I find a query by Mr. Cunningham, respecting the origin of the name of Tower Royal; although I cannot satisfactorily explain it, I enclose a few notes relative to the early history of that place, which may, perhaps, afford a clue to its derivation.

In early records it is invariably called "la Real," "la Reole," "la Riole," or "la Ryal or Ryole; and it is described simply as a "tenement ;" I have never found an instance of its being called a it was held by one Thomas Bat, citizen of London, "tower." At the close of the reign of Henry III. who demised it to Master Simon of Beauvais, surgeon to Edward I.; this grant was confirmed Cart. 5 Edw. I. m. 17.- Placita de Quo Warranto, by that sovereign by charter in 1277. (Rot. p. 461.) This Simon of Beauvais figures in Stow and Pennant as Simon de Beawmes. In 1331 Edward III. granted "la Real" to his consort Philippa, for the term of her life, that it might be 4 Edw. III. 2nd part, m. used as a depository for her wardrobe. (Rot. Pat. 15.) By Queen Philipps it was extensively repaired, if not rebuilt, and the particulars of the works executed there by her direction, may be seen in the Wardrobe Account of the sixth year of her reign, preserved in the Cottonian MS. Galba E iii. fo. 177, et seq.; this account is erroneously attributed in the catalogue to Eleanor, consort of Edward I. One Maria de Beauvais, probably a descendant of Master Simon, received compensation for quitting a tenement which she held at the time Philippa's operations commenced. In 1365 Edward III. granted to Robert de Corby, in fee, "one tenement in the street of la Ryole, London," to hold by the accustomed services. Finally in 1370 Edward gave the "inn (hospitium) with its appurtenances called le Reole, in the city of London," to the canons of St. Stephen's, Westminster, as of the yearly value of 201. (Rot. Pat. 43 Edw. III. m. 24.)

and fourteenth centuries this place was not called It is thus sufficiently clear that in the thirteenth Tower Royal; nor does there appear to be any ground for supposing that it was so named in earlier times, or, indeed, that it was ever occupied by royalty before it became Philippa's wardrobe. The question, therefore, is narrowed to this point:

Riole?" I should be glad if any of your corre what is the signification of "la Real, Reole, or spondents would give their opinions on the subject. I may add, that the building was in the parish of St. Thomas Apostle, not in that of St. Michael Pater Noster Church, as Stow wrote. (Rot. Pat. 4 Edw. III. 2nd part, m. 38.) T. H. T.

Let me refer Mr. P. Cunningham to "Stow's Survey, p. 27. 92. Thoms' Edition," for a full answer to his query. The passages are too long to cite, but Mr. C. will there find sufficient proof of

the part of a royal residence having once stood in this obscure lane, now almost demolished in the sweeping city improvements, which threaten in time to leave us hardly a fragment of the London of the old chronicler.

The Tower was also called the Queen's Wardrobe, and it was there, Froissart tells us, that Joan of Kent, the mother of Richard II., took refuge during Wat Tyler's rebellion, when forced to fly from the Tower of London. The old historian writes, that after the defeat of the rebels "pour le premier chemin que le Roy fit, il vint deuers sa Dame de mère, la Princesse, qui estoit en un chastel de la Riolle (que l'on dit la Garderobbe la Reyne) et là s'estoit tenue deux jours et deux Baits, moult ébahie; et avoit bien raison. Quand elle vit le Roy son fils, elle fut toute rejouye, et luy dit, Ha ha beau fils, comment j'ay eu aujourd'huy grand peine et angoisse pour vous.' Dont respondit le Roy, et dit, Certes, Madame, je le say bien. Or vous rejouissez et louez Dieu, car il est heure de le louer. J'ay aujourd'huy recouvré mon heritage et le royaume d'Angleterre, que j'avoye perdu. Ainsi se tint le Roy ce jour delez sa mère." (Froissart, ii. 132. Par. 1573.)

In Stow's time this interesting locality had been degraded into stables for the king's horses, and let out in divers tenements.

E. V. [We are indebted to J. E., R. T. S., and other correspondents, for replies to Mr. Cunningham's Query; but as their answers contain only general references to works which it is reasonable to suppose that gentleman must have consulted during the preparation of his Handbook for London, we have not thought it necessary to insert them.]

ANCIENT INSCRIBED DISH.

Mr. Editor,- The subject of inscribed dishes of latten, of which so many varieties have recently been imported, appears to be regarded with interest by several of your readers. I am indebted to the Rev. William Drake, of Coventry, for a rubbing from one of these mysterious inscriptions, upon an "alms-plate" in his possession. In the centre is represented the Temptation. There are two inscribed circles; on the inner and broader one appear letters, which have been read, -RAHEWISHINBY. They are several times repeated. On the exterior circle is the legend -ICH. SART. GELUK. ALZEIT. This likewise is repeated, so as to fill the entire circle. I have never before met with these inscriptions in the large number of dishes of this kind which I have examined. They have been termed alms-dishes, and are used still in parochial collections in France, as doubtless they have been in England. They were also used in ancient times in the ceremony of baptism, and they are called baptismal basons,

by some foreign writers. This use is well illustrated by the very curious early Flemish painting in the Antwerp Gallery, representing the seven sacraments. The acolyte, standing near the font, bears such a dish, and a napkin. The proper use of these latten dishes was, as I believe, to serve as a laver, carried round at the close of the banquet in old times, as now at civic festivities. They often bear devices of a sacred character; but it is probable that they were only occasionally used for any sacred purpose, and are more properly to be regarded as part of the domestic appliances of former times. ALBERT WAY.

BARNACLES.

66

a

In Brand's Popular Antiquities, vol. iii. pp. 361, 362., there is an account given of the barnacle, well-known kind of shell-fish, which is found sticking on the bottoms of ships," and with regard to which the author observes, that "it seems hardly credible in this enlightened age, that so gross an error in natural history should so long have prevailed," as that this shell-fish should become changed into "a species of goose." The author then quotes Holinshed, Hall, Virgidemiarum, Marston, and Gerard; but he does not make the slightest reference to Giraldus Cambrensis, who in his Topographia Hiberniæ first gave the account of the barnacle, and of that account the writers referred to by Brand were manifestly but the copyists.

The passage referring to "the barnacle" will be found in the Topog. Hiber. lib. i. c. xi. I annex a translation of it, as it may be considered interesting, when compared with the passages quoted in Brand:

"There are," says Giraldus, "in this country (Ireland) a great number of birds called barnacles (Bernacre), and which nature produces in a manner that is contrary to the laws of nature. These birds are not unlike to ducks, but they are somewhat smaller in size. They make their first appearance as drops of gum upon the branches of firs that are immersed in running waters; and then they are next seen hanging like sea-weed from the wood, becoming encased in shells, which at last assume in their growth the outward form of birds, and so hang on by their beaks until they are completely covered with feathers within their shells, and when they arrive at maturity, they either drop into the waters, or take their flight at once into the air. Thus from the juice of this tree, combined with the water, are they generated and receive their nutriment until they are formed and fledged. I have many times with my own eyes seen several thousands of minute little bodies of these birds attached to pieces of wood immersed in the sea, encased in their shells, and already formed. These, then, are birds that never lay eggs, and are never hatched from eggs; and the consequence is, that in some parts of Ireland, and at those seasons of fasting when meat is forbidden, bishops and other religious persons feed on these birds, because they are not fish, nor to be regarded

“Come, then, Urania, aid my pen,

-

The latent cause assign,
All other kings are mortal men,

But GEORGE, 'tis plain, 's divine."

The next month produced this address: "To the Author of the Epigram on the new Irish pence.

"While you behold th' imperfect coin
Receiv'd without the grace of God,
All honest men with you must join,
And even Britons think it odd.
"The grace of God was well left out,
And I applaud the politician;
For when an evil's done, no doubt,

John Hopkins, the Psalmist.

'Tis not by God's grace, but permission."

Grace's Card, the Six of Hearts.

As a note to the communications which have lately amused your readers, respecting the nine of diamonds and the curse of Scotland, allow me to remind you of another card which has a peculiar name, the origin of which is better ascertained.

At the Revolution of 1688 one of the family of Grace, of Courtstown, in Ireland, raised and equipped a regiment of foot and a troop of horse, at his own expense, for the service of King James, whom he further assisted with money and plate, amounting, it is said, to 14,000l. He was tempted with splendid promises of royal favour, to join the party of King William. A written proposal to that effect was sent to him by one of the Duke of Schomberg's emissaries. Indignant at the insulting proposal, the Baron of Courtstown seized a card, which was accidentally lying near him, and wrote upon it this answer: "Go, tell your master I despise his offer! Tell him that honour and conscience are dearer to a gentleman than all the wealth and titles a prince can bestow!" The card happened to be the "six of hearts," and to this day that card is generally known by the name of "Grace's card," in the city of Kilkenny.

I derive these particulars principally from the Memoirs of the Family of Grace, by Sheffield Grace, Esq. 4to. London, 1823, p. 42. W. L.

Florins.

The following extract from the Issue Roll of Easter, 1 Edward III. 1327, may interest the inquirers into the antiquity of the FLORIN, lately introduced into our coinage:

"To Robert de Wodehouse, keeper of the King's Wardrobe, for the price of 174 florins from Florence, price each florin as purchased, 39 d. paid to the same keeper by the hands of John de Houton, his clerk, for one pound and one mark of gold, to make oblations on the day of the coronation ffor the Lord the King: -and in like manner was delivered 104 florins and a mark of 70s, by the king's command, under the privy seal, which was used before he received the government of this kingdom, — £28. 12. 6.”

what parish of that county he was beneficed. It is highly probable that the following notes refer to this person, and if so, the deficiency will have been supplied by them.

In Tanner's List of the Rectors of Great Waldingfield in Suffolk, taken from the Institution Book at Norwich, there is this entry: :

"Reg. xix. 55. 12 Aug. 1561.

Joh. Chetham, ad præs. Willi Spring, Arm.
Jo. Hopkins.

Sir,

NOTES IN ANSWER TO MINOR QUERIES.

Genealogy of European Sovereigns.

D.

Perhaps the following books will be of service to your correspondent Q. X. Z., viz. :— "A Genealogical History of the present Royal Families of Europe, the Stadtholders of the United States, and the Succession of the Popes from the 15th century, &c. &c., by the Rev. Mark Noble." London, 1781.

"Historical and Genealogical, Chronological, and Geographical Atlas, exhibiting all the Royal Families in Europe, their Origin, Descent, &c., by M. Le Sage." London, 1813.

"Complete Genealogical, Historical, Chronological, and Geographical Atlas, &c., by C. V. W. J. B. Lavoisne." Philadelphia, 1821. Countess of Pembroke's Letter · Drayton's Poems A Flemish Account - Bishop Burnet. Your correspondent, at p. 28., asks whether there is any contemporary copy of the celebrated letter, said to have been written by Anne, Countess of Pembroke, to Sir Joseph Williamson? I would refer him to Mr. Hartley Coleridge's Lives of Distinguished Northerns, 1833, p. 290. His arguments for considering the letter spurious, if not conclusive, are very forcible, but they are too copious for this paper.

Your readers, who may not be conversant with that undeservedly neglected volume, will confess their obligation, when they have consulted its pages, in having been directed to so valuable and so original a work. It may be observed, that those letters of the Countess which are authentic, are certainly written in a very different style to the