8 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



[July 7. 1855. 



Thirdly. While it was common, though not in- 

 variable, in the minutes of 1680, 81, and 82, when 

 the duke was present, to commence the deliver- 

 ances of the council, " His Royal Highness his 

 Majesty's High Commissioner and the Lords ot 

 the Privy Council, having considered," &c., we find 

 in all the four meetings of the latter half of July, 

 where the duke's style is placed at the head of 

 the sederunt, the ordinary formula of _" Lords of 

 Privy Council having considered," &c. is adopted. 

 On the other hand, it is remarkable that the 

 duke had certainly, in the early part of this year, 

 contemplated a visit to Scotland, In a letter of 

 his duchess, printed in the Spalding Club Miscel- 

 lany, vol. iii., dated only " Jan. 7," but which we 

 know from allusions to have been of 1684, she 

 tells her correspondent, the Marchioness of Huntly, 

 " We must be contented only with writing to one 

 another, for we are not likely to meet, the duke's 

 journey being for so short a time that I shall not 

 go with him into Scotland." 



If the matter had stood at this point, there might 

 have been room for doubt about it. But the debate 

 has been in a great measure set at rest by the dis- 

 covery amongst the papers of the Lord Treasurer 

 the Duke of Queensbury, now in the possession of 

 his representative the Duke of Buccleuch, of two 

 letters holograph of the Duke of York, addressed 

 to the said Lord Treasurer, and dated at Tun- 

 bridae and Windsor, respectively on the 22nd and 

 and 25th of July, 1684. In the first he tells the 

 Lord Treasurer that he is " glad to find that most 

 of the loyal men are pleased at Lord Perth's 

 being made chancellor." In the second, he ac- 

 knowledges receipt of a letter from the Lord 

 Treasurer, dated the 17th, and two from the 

 Secret Committee, and makes special allusion to 

 matters then under the attention of the Privy 

 Council of Scotland. It is of course evident that 

 he could not both be in Tunbridge and in Edin- 

 burgh on the 22nd of July, or at Windsor and 

 Edinburgh on the 25th. The allusions also to 

 business "make it clear that no suggestion as to 

 difference of style will avail to render it possible 

 that the duke was in Edinburgh at the time of 

 the four sederunts. 



It will remain for those who may be conversant 

 with such business, to surmise reasons for intro- 

 ducing the name of an absent member into^ the 

 record of Privy Council on those four occasions. 

 I have not as yet heard a single plausible con- 

 jecture on the subject. 



If none such can be presented, the facts thus 



elicited must certainly be held as reflecting strongly 



on the value of documentary evidence of this 



class. R- Chambebs. 



Edinburgh. 



No. 297.] 



UNPRINTED LETTER TO SIB FRANCIS BACON. 



There are two points of interest In the follow- 

 ing undated letter among Ayscough's MSS. in the 

 British Museum (No. 4108.), regarding which 1 

 am desirous of Information. In the first place it 

 is addressed to Sir Francis Bacon, who was not 

 created Lord Verulam until July, 1618, so that it 

 was evidently anterior to that year. I have no 

 very good authorities at hand, but I have had the 

 copy by me for some time, and I have not ob- 

 served that the original Is mentioned In any of 

 the various accounts of Bacon; although It affords 

 proof of a trait in the character of that great- 

 little man for which he has not usually had much 

 credit. The writer appealed to him to lend his 

 aid in silencing aspersions, regarding which even 

 the severities of the law had been threatened.^ Is 

 anything known of the nature of these aspersions, 

 or of the person against whom they were circu- 

 lated ? This brings me to my second question : 

 Who was Edmond Anderson, the writer of the 

 letter? There was a chief justice of the Common 

 Pleas of both those names, but he died in 1605, 

 and he left behind him no son of the name of 

 Edmond : his male issue were respectively Ed- 

 ward, Francis, and William. The last of these 

 three sons had a son named Edmond, grandson of 

 the chief justice, who was created a baronet by 

 Charles II., and he was perhaps not born at the 

 date when the letter in question was written. It 

 is a biographical matter of some interest, upon 

 which it" Is very possible that Mb. Foss may be 

 able to throw light : If he can do so, I shall be 

 much obliged to him. My Queries are. Has the 

 following letter been noticed in any of the Me- 

 moirs of Lord Bacon ? and who, and what, was 

 Edmond Anderson, the writer of it ? 

 « Mr. Edmond Anderson's Letter to Sir Francis Bacon. 

 " Noble S', — There is ever certaine presumption to be 

 had of the favor of great men, soe there be a reason added 

 to accompany their justice : myne that gives boldnes to 

 call upon your succour is, that I am fallen more under 

 the malignity of rumour than severity of lawes, though 

 that hath oversett myne offence at the blackest marke. 

 To force this latter cloud away none can, but the breath 

 of a kinge : the other, which threatneth and oppresseth 

 more, everv good spirit may helpe to disperse. In this 

 name (HoW" Sir) I beseech vour goodnes to spend some 

 few words to the puttinge of false fame to flight, which 

 hath soe often endangered even the innocent. And it the 

 savinge of a poore penitent man may come to be parte ot 

 your care, let it ever be reconed to your vertue, that you 

 have not onelv assisted to preserve, but create a person so 

 corrected by necessity as the example of his repentance 

 was not worthy to be lost, whoe will live and dye thank- 

 fully yours. " Edmond Andekson. 



Whatever were the offences Imputed to Lord 

 Bacon's correspondent (a matter of comparatively 

 little moment), the tone and expressions of the 

 above communication read almost like a confes- 

 sion of guilt. J. Payne Collier. 

 Maidenhead. 



