2'><« S. VIII., Sept. 17. '59.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



235 



Bari'ett's pen, and there seems to be a resemblance 

 between such translations and Mb. OwE^'s MS. ; 

 which if Barrett also wrote, being a friend and 

 patron of Chatterton, paper with a similar water- 

 mark in it and a portion of the will would be ac- 

 counted for. Another contemporary, Catcott, has 

 left behind him some modernised poems of Row- 

 ley, composed by Chatterton, but in Catcott's 

 autograph, and possibly Mr. Owen's fragment of 

 j3^lla, may be one of these. 



In answer to the question, " Is there any e^ 1- 

 dence that Chatterton ever exhibited a single 

 scrap said to be found in the RedclifF chest?" I 

 believe there are several such curious and illegi- 

 ble documents : for instance, " The Account of 

 Wm. Canynge." And I am sure Sir Frederic 

 Madden would kindly allow your correspondent 

 to see them, if he wishes to do so, at the British 

 Museum, and at the same time satisfy him Chat- 

 terton never wrote any other than the " stiff at- 

 torney's clerk copying hand," which is the same 

 even in his pocketbook taken with him to London, 

 and now in my possession. 



The fragment referred to as having belonged to 

 the late Mr. Richard Smith was, I think, " La- 

 myngstone " (I have not Grant's edition of Chat- 

 terton's Poems at hand) ; and if so, it was pre- 

 sented by him to the Bristol Subscription Library 

 at the top of Park Street, where it is still to be 

 seen. Bristoliensis. 



JAMES MOORE. 



(2'"i S.viii. 197.) 

 If any one has doubts about the literary and 

 historical value of "N. & Q.," let him look into 

 the history of this obFoure family, which sprung 

 into existence from a footman, about 1700, and 

 was extinct before 1750. Mr. Croker, we may 

 assume, was especially informed on the subject, 

 for Pope had immortalised the Moores ; yet even 

 Mr. Croker was compelled to ask, in 1854, for in- 

 formation ; and already any one of your readers 

 could write a history of the Moores as full of mi- 

 nute details as if he had lived next door to them 

 in Southampton Street, or sat in the same pew at 

 Fetcham. Still there are obscure points which may 

 as well be cleared up. Pope, we know, carried on 

 his battle with his adversaries in the Gi-ub Street 

 Journal, and we learn from the Preface to the 

 collected volumes, that he and his friends generally 

 wrote under the signature "A." It was Pope, 

 therefore, or one of his friends, but Pope no 

 doubt, who addressed a letter in that journal, pro- 

 fessedly from the worm-powder Moore to his ne- 

 phew, James Moore Smythe, and the nephew's 

 penitential reply. Was this pure fiction, or 

 founded on some sort of relationship? It has 

 always struck me as strange that Pope should 

 in the Forest have even heard of or concerned 



himself about the worm-powder Moore; and I 

 have attributed the fact of such knowledge to 

 Lewis the Catholic bookseller, and Pope's first pub- 

 lisher, being himself a seller of worm-powders, 

 or rather worm-lozenge seller. The curious may 

 find his advertisements in the Evening Post for 

 May, 1712, with all the usual trumpetings about 

 wonderful success. But Moore Smythe was a boy 

 at that time, and it is not likely that the Moore 

 family was even known to Pope. I presume, 

 therefore, that Pope's attempt to associate them as 

 blood relations was for the mere purpose of an- 

 noyance. 



We ought, however, to know something about 

 Pope's "Moore of Abchurch Lane." I will ask, 

 therefore, whether he was the same person or the 

 father of James Moore, described as proprietor of 

 extensive plantations of medicinal herbs at Mit- 

 cham, who, subsequent to 1749, bought the 

 manors of Biggin and Tamworth in Surrey ? 

 Was he related to Mrs. Bridget Moore, for whom 

 Woodfall printed labels for Daffy's Elixir (see 

 "N. & Q.," 1" S. xi. 420.), or was Mrs. Bridget 

 the widow of A. Moor, the bookseller, near St. 

 Paul's, or of Moor the "highflyer"-tory, men- 

 tioned by Negus in 1724? J. M. (2.) 



Dr. Shelton Mackenzie s Life of Dr. Maginn 

 (2"* S. viii. 169.) — I have a very short and very 

 decisive answer to make to Philo-Turpin. There 

 is not a word of truth in Dr. Shelton Mackenzie's 

 statement. I have not seen the piece of biography 

 in question, and never heard of it before ; but I 

 take it for granted Philo-Turpin's report is 

 correct. If so, I repeat, the statement* is false in 

 every particular. Dr. Maginn never wrote one 

 line of Rooku'ood, text or ballads. He never saw 

 any portion of the work prior to its publication, 

 and for aught I know to the contrary, he never 

 saw it then. Certain I am that he would have 

 scorned to claim the credit of any production 

 which did not emanate from his own pen, while a 

 proceeding like the present would have filled him 

 with disgust and indignation. In putting forth, 

 this unwarrantable statement. Dr. Shelton Mac- 

 kenzie has committed an act of gross injustice 

 towards the memory of Dr. Maginn as well as 

 towards myself, and is bound to make every repa- 

 ration in his power. W. Harrison Ainsworth. 

 Brighton. 



On Bv7/ing a Bible (2"« S. vii. 434.) — These 

 verses were in existence and in print more than 

 seventy- five years ago. They are to be found, 

 precisely as now printed, in (Dr. Franklin's) 

 Poor Richard's Almanac for the year 1743. 



Uneda. 

 Philadelphia. 



