2''^S. N° 114,, Mar. 6. '58.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



183 



in hoc accipias argumentum illius intima?, ac prorsus Pa- 

 temse, qua Te in Domino complectimur, et semper am- 

 plexi fuimus, Charitatis. Apostolicam Benedictionem 

 Majestati Tuae amantissime impertimur. 



" Datum Romae apud S. Mariam Majorem, sub Annulo 

 Piscatoris, die xxx. Novembris mdcclix., Pontificatus 

 Nostri Anno Secundo." 



II. 



" Jacobo III., MagncB Brittannt<e Regi significat provi- 

 sionem EcclesicR Alladen. factum favore nominati a Ma- 

 jestate Sua, rationesgue exprimit cur de nominatione ipsa 

 mentio minime occurrat in Literis expeditis favore 

 provisi. 



" Carissimo, etc. 



"Clemens Papa XIII. 



*' Clarissime, etc. 



Philippnm 

 ut ex hac 



" Cum . . . Ecclesise Alladen. . 

 Philips, . . . Ecclesiae Alladen. . 

 prffiteritione," . . . (etc., ut supra"). 



" Datum Eomoe, apud S. Mariam Majorem, sub An- 

 nulo Piscatoris, die xxiv. Novembr,, mdccuc., Pontifi- 

 catus Nostri Anno Tertio." 



The above is taken, verbatim et literatim, from 

 the " BuUarium Pontificiura Sacrae Congregationis 

 De Propaganda Fida;" (Romce, Typis Coll. Ur- 

 lani, Sup. Perm., 1841, torn. iv. pp. 23, 24. 45.). 

 I have not copied the latter brief in extenso, as it 

 is exactly the same as the other, with the excep- 

 tion of the name of the Bishop and See, and other 

 expressions, above given. There are no other 

 documents of the same kind in the five volumes of 

 the BuUarium ; and as the matter appeared of an 

 interesting character, and probably not generally 

 known, it seemed to me worthy of insertion in the 

 pages of " N. & Q." The subject is undoubtedly 

 deserving of examination, as it shows that the See 

 of Rome consulted, nominally at least, though 

 probably merely pro forma, the representative of 

 the House of Stuart (commonly called " The Old 

 Pretender ") in the disposal of the bishoprics of 

 the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland. Whether 

 this was done in every case, it is not in my power 

 to say, though it would appear so from the tenor of 

 these Bulls; and that the rights of "King James III. 

 of Great Britain" were not to be considered as 

 compromised by any omission or want of forms on 

 his part, with reference to the vacant Irish Sees. 

 However, I leave this for your numerous learned 

 correspondents to enlarge upon, if they deem the 

 subject of sufficient importance ; and in conclu- 

 sion, I shall merely add a few brief notitia of the 

 two prelates whose names are mentioned in these 

 Bulls. 



" Daniel Kerney" or Kearney, Bishop of Lime- 

 rich, appointed, as above, by Brief of Nov. 30, 

 1759, died in the year 1775, having been conse- 

 crated in 1760. 



"Philip Philips," or Phillips, Bishop of Killala, 

 from Nov. 24, 1760, was still there in the year 

 1776. He was probably the same ecclesiastic who 

 became Archbishop of Tuam about 1780, and died 

 in 1791. In the meagre lists, however, which are 



given of the succession of the Roman Catholic 

 hierarchy in Ireland, during the seventeenth and 

 eighteenth centuries, " Philip Philips, Bishop of 

 Achonry, from 1759 to 1780," is stated to have 

 been translated to Tuam in the latter year. And 

 his predecessor there, Mark Skerrett, had also 

 been previously Bishop of Achonry ; while his 

 successor, Boetius Egan, was previously Bishop of 

 Killala. There may have been two contemporary 

 Irish prelates of the same name, Philip Philips ; 

 but the matter is exceedingly obscure, as there 

 are no correct lists of these Irish bishops in any 

 work I have ever heard of, though a little research 

 on the subject is surely desirable. " Alladen " is, 

 however, undoubtedly the bishopric of Killala, in 

 the county of Mayo, and province of Connaught — 

 Episcopatus Alladensis ; and " Limgricen " is, of 

 course, the bishopric of Limerick. A. S. A. 



Hindustan. 



Pope, Editions of 1735 and 1736. — Your cor- 

 respondent F. E. (2"'* S. iv. 446.) raises questions 

 well worth considering, but which I certainly 

 cannot solve ; though I hope to direct attention 

 to some small facts which may aid better judg- 

 ments to conclusions. 



Your correspondent tells us that "Vol. III." of 

 Lintot, 1736, was " obviously intended to follow 

 Vol. II. of Pope's Works published in the pre- 

 ceding year by L. Gilliver." This I believe to be 

 true ; and he might have added that Vol. II. of 

 Gilliver was obviously intended to follow Vol. I. 

 of Lintot. So disjointed a publication of an 

 author's Works seems strange, and deserves in- 

 quiry in " N. & Q." — first as to the fact, and then 

 as to motives. 



I have many copies of Pope's Works, all pub- 

 lished between 1735 and 1748, all agreeing in size 

 and character, all in contemporary binding ; some 

 bound in separate volumes, others with the four 

 volumes bound in two — a strange and curious 

 example of inharmonious harmony. 



I have two editions of " Vol. I." of The Works 

 of Alexander Pope, which were, as set forth in the 

 title-page, "printed for B, Lintot, 1736." 



I have four copies of "Vol. II. ;" two of which 

 were " printed for L. Gilliver, 1735," as described 

 by your correspondent, and with different title- 

 pages. These are reprints from the quarto of 

 1735, with some additions. Neither contain The 

 Dunciad, and only one announces its speedy pub- 

 lication. I have also two copies of a separate 

 volume, called "Vol. 11. Part II.," "printed for 

 Dodsley, and sold by T. Cooper, 1738;" which 

 professes to contain " all such pieces of the author 

 as were written since the former volumes, and 

 never before published in octavo." I have also a 

 copy of "Vol. 11." bound up with "Vol. I." of B . 



