190 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



[2»« S. MIL Sept. 3. '69. 



three letters in the character of Junius to the 

 Public Advertiser.'] 



I thought people were chiefly disposed to consider 

 Junius s Letters the production of Sir Philip Fran- 

 cis, K.B., still not so universally but it may be 

 considered a moot point, though time perhaps is 

 advancing to cover the subject with an impene- 

 trable veil. At p. 102. of " N. & Q." there is 

 mention made of a " Classic Commentator," who 

 compared the satire of Henry Flood with the 

 epigrammatic severity of Archilocus. This "Com- 

 mentator" was a man of most transcendent talents, 

 ■whose prose compositions have scarcely any rival, 

 and who was the subject of inquiry under the 

 name of Delta (P' S. x. 134.). He was the 

 Rev. John Robt. Scott, D.D., of Trinity College, 

 Dublin, and was author of a work of 214 pages, en- 

 titled A Review of the Principal Characters of the 

 Irish House of Commons., by Falkland, Dublin, 

 MDCCLXxxix. At pp. 203 — 209. is a character of 

 Henry Flood; and at pp. 177 — 181. of Warden 

 Flood, a kinsman of Henry, who was endeavour- 

 ing to follow in the steps of the latter, but " non 

 passibus sequis." The description of Henry Flood 

 is a fine specimen of elegant composition, and in- 

 clines one to think it not improbable that he 

 might write such a book as Junius. To curtail 

 what Falkland has written for your columns is 

 impracticable; and although the work is ex- 

 tremely scarce, yet, if it can be found, it will well 

 repay the perusal. *• 



SUNDRY BEFLIES. 



The following remarks have been delayed by 

 press of other business, and may conveniently be 

 collected in one article. 



Eliminate (2°^ S. vii. 234.) — Till very re- 

 cently this word was used only by mathematicians, 

 and always in the sense of eliminare, to drive out 

 of doors, to get rid of When it was said that 

 Ohm eliminated the laws of the current, the 

 word was incorrectly used, and made synonymous 

 with extrahere, instead of expellere, by a person 

 who supposed himself outside the house. It is to 

 be hoped that this inverted use will not become 

 common. 



(2"'* S. iii. 272.; vii. 244.)—! attribute the 

 anathema against the nature of things to Person 

 merely because I have seen it so attributed in va- 

 rious places during the last thirty years. The 

 fitness of things requires that the story should be 

 told of a metaphysical drink-hard, which Person 

 was, and Fielding was not. No doubt this kind 

 of anathema suggested itself to many before either 

 of the two was born. 



Dr. Waits (2'^d S. v. 523. ; vii. 279. 362.) — It is 

 useless to prove that Watts was of orthodox pro- 



fession in the bulk of his life and writings. No- 

 body doubts it. What is wanted is, first, the 

 contents of his last pamphlet, which nobody pro- 

 duces, and secondly, the confirmation or refu- 

 tation of a story which I have often read, and 

 which is not, I think, alluded to in the references 

 above. It is that Watts, towards the close of his 

 life, wanted to make some'alteratlons in his well- 

 known hymns, and especially in the doxologies ; 

 but that his publishers, who held copyright, 

 would not consent. The narrators of this story 

 imply that the alterations would have made the 

 hymns heretical. 



It is curious that in the logical example (vii. 

 364.) of induction. Watts has committed a palpa- 

 ble paralogism. He might as well have said that 

 a proposition which cannot |be proved from any 

 one book of Euclid cannot be proved from Euclid, 

 that is, from two or more books together. 



vTroffTcuns (2"* S. vii. 441.) — The words olala 

 and vTr6<TTaffis, so different to metaphysicians and to 

 theologians, have led to a number of things worthy 

 of note. I am reminded by the article referred to 

 of the Precepta Doctrinae Logicce, Ethicce, Physicce, 

 Metapht/sica, Sphericteque of John Stierius, 4to., 

 of which I know only London editions. Of these 

 seven at least were published in the seventeenth 

 century. The work may be strongly recom- 

 mended to any one who wishes to have, in a very 

 small compass, a digest of the mediaeval philoso- 

 phy. In the logic, Stierius gives the Greek of all 

 the technical terms and the great maxims : the 

 pages swarm with quotations from Aristotle. In 

 the metaphysics there is not a word of Greek. It 

 is true that Stierius here depends more on Sua- 

 rez, Mendoza, &c. than on Aristotle : but there 

 is enough of and from Aristotle to make the ab- 

 sence of Greek words remarkable. I conjecture 

 that Stierius thought that o'vaia and inrSffTuffis, used 

 as they must be in a metaphysical work, would 

 offend the theological eye. Perhaps some of your 

 readers may know of other instances ; and these 

 may suggest other reasons. 



Weapon-salve (2°'* S. vii. 445.) — I said that 

 White's translation of 1658 was a second edition, 

 because the title-page of my copy has the words 

 second edition. Probably R. S. Q. and myself 

 have copies of the same impression with different 

 title-pages. The French original, now established, 

 purports to be a lecture given en une celebre assem- 

 hlee : it is commonly supposed that this was the 

 Academy of Montpellier. I should be very glad 

 to know whether the French work mentions this 

 Academy as the one in question. I have, on the 

 whole, some doubts that Digby really wrote this 

 tract : but I cannot make farther investigation at 

 present. 



Natural (2"* S. vii. 475.) — Another use of this 

 word will serve to illustrate. In law books we 



