S^d S. N» 94., Oct. 17. '57.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



303 



now any such) as have made the old municipal laws of 

 Ireland their study, and the comments are now grown so 

 obscure by age and time as to need other comments to 

 explain themselves." 



Mr. Wanley, who gave this notice, is said — 

 from his having been for many years conversant 

 with ancient MSS. — to have been perfectly able 

 to distinguish and ascertain the age {sic) of every 

 amanuensis. If so this MS. is as old as about 

 439, in which year the " Great Law Digest " 

 which it contains was adopted. Mr. Wanley also 

 adds, "that the account which he gives of this 

 MS. is the sum of that given by Mr. Thomas 

 O'SuUevane, a very learned gentleman, and the 

 best skilled in Irish antiquities of any man he ever 

 saw." Now Mr. Wanley commenced the compi- 

 lation of the liarleian Catalogue in 1708 and died 

 July 6, 1726. Professor Curry in his Catalogue 

 thus describes it : " Written in an unknown hand, 

 apparently of the sixteenth century." In my last 

 (see " N. & Q.," 2"'' S. iv. 225.) I had to point 

 out a serious discrepancy between him and Dr. 

 O'Donovan. Here is another of a more startling 

 character, and I am obliged to say that I strongly 

 opine the Professor is mistaken — seriously mis- 

 taken. The verification of the former statement 

 would make this one of the oldest — perhaps the 

 oldest — manuscript in Europe, in one of its living 

 languages : the latter would give it an existence, 

 which would render it comparatively worthless. 

 At the close of the seventeenth century, more than 

 half way back to the date assigned by Professor 

 Curry, a very remote antiquity, it has been shown, 

 was assigned to it by Mr. Wanley, a scholar of 

 vast experience, not likely to be deceived in this 

 matter, and who was sceptical about the antiquity 

 of alleged early Irish MSS., as the testimony I 

 am about to quote proves, — of Avhom Edward 

 Llhuyd, the celebrated antiquary, in a letter dated 

 Jan. 6, 1702, says : 



" ' I find by your censure of Columkill's Gospel that 

 you have acquired a more critical skill in distinguishing 

 the date of our oldest MSS. than I thought attainable.' 

 The MS., 1 must say, from personal observation, is ap- 

 parently of' far older date than the sixteenth century. 

 It were well if the Professor were to state his grounds of 

 belief. In his favour, it must be said, whatever may be 

 his qualifications in identifying the age of MSS., as an 

 Irish scholar he is far superior to the Mr. O'SuUivan 

 mentioned by Mr. Wanley, and was able to read, under- 

 stand, and translate what the other thought obsolete." 



The sooner these doubts are settled the better. 

 The MSS. in question, particularly the one under 

 present consideration, are of the highest value. 

 The rapidity with which the mission of Saint 

 Patrick was crowned by the conversion of the 

 princes and people of Ireland was extraordinary, 

 and has been the subject of wonder and admira- 

 tion to churchmen ; as has been the tenacity with 

 which their posterity have clung to the faith, 

 which they believe was then planted. Seven 

 years after the arrival of St. Patrick, the Apostle 



of Ireland, in 432, such was the predominance of 

 true believers, that it was generally felt that the 

 new order of things demanded a new organisation 

 of the juridical system of their druidical prede- 

 cessors. Nine personages, the most distinguished 

 in their grades, were selected for this important 

 duty : — three kings, Leary, Core, and Fergus ; 

 three bishops, Saints Patrick, Benignius, and Cor- 

 neucle ; and three sages, Dubhthach (Doovach), 

 Daire, and Rosse. The result of the labours of 

 this distinguished commission was The Great Law 

 Digest^ or as sometimes named. The Digest of the 

 Nine. It is undoubtedly a work of great antiquity. 

 And if this volume be not the original, Is there an 

 older, and where ? Professor Curry owes to the 

 British Museum, himself, and the literary public, 

 a correction of his mistakes, or a confirmation of 

 his statements. J. E. O'C. 



CORRUPT ENGLISH. 



Controversies on this subject are so often met 

 with both in the columns of " N. & Q." and of 

 its contemporaries, that I may, perhaps, be per- 

 mitted to offer a few remarks upon the method on 

 which they are ordinarily conducted. I would 

 suggest, in the first place, that all time and 

 trouble must be thrown away in a discussion 

 where the standard by which the matter in dispute 

 is to be tested is not agreed on and rigidly ap- 

 plied ; and farther, that this standard must be as- 

 certainable, and not merely a standard which it is 

 alleged exists somewhere, but which cannot be 

 found; for in this case discussion must sink into 

 a mere bandying of " yea and nay." A contro- 

 versy of this kind in the columns of one of your 

 contemporaries the other day, terminated by one 

 of the parties declaring that if his adversary's 

 " perceptions of style were sufficiently obtuse to 

 induce him to defend so flagrant a vulgarity, &c., 

 one could only regret that so clever a writer 

 should be wanting in a kind of knowledge only 

 obtained by habitual intercourse with refined 

 society." On the other side the reply would of 

 course be that if the critic's perceptions, &c., be 

 sufficiently obtuse to Induce him to find fault wita 

 so elegant a phrase, &c., and so on ad infinitum. 



It is clear that if such disputants could count 

 on the lifetime of Methusalem, they must still 

 agree upon some standard, if they would ever 

 bring their disputes to an end. Until they have 

 done this, It Is useless to attempt a step farther. 

 A disciple of Bentham and a disciple of Mr. Whe- 

 well, for instance, cannot discuss whether a certain 

 alleged rule of morals be true or false, because they 

 have not yet agreed upon their test. All discus- 

 sions, therefore, between them at present must be 

 solely as to what is the standard. It is unfor- 

 tunately true that this standard may be vague. If 

 ever men should agree upon the true end and touch- 



