2>"« S. NO 116., Mar. 20. '68.] NOTES AND QUERIES. 



237 



deatb, see Peck's Annals of Stanfbrd, fol, 1727, lib. xii. 

 § 10. Her will is given in extenso in Nichols's Collection 

 of Royal Wills, 1780, pp. 78—81. We cannot find any 

 account of her funeral.] 



Stationers' Company. — 1. Wanted an account 

 of the various Charters of this Company, with any 

 particulars relating to its history. 2. Are copies 

 of works registered at Stationers' Hall kept there 

 for reference ? 3. Do the words " Entered at 

 Stationers' Hall" mean that the titles only are 

 entered ? Or, in case of dispute, can a copy so 

 entered be seen at the Hall ? A Liveryman. 



[The first Charter was granted by Philip and Mary on 

 May 4, 1556, and its object is thus set forth in its pre- 

 amijle : " Know ye, that we considering, and manifestly 

 perceiving, that several seditious and heretical books, 

 both in verse and prose, are daily published, stamped, and 

 printed, by divers scandalous, schismatical, and heretical 

 persons, not only exciting our subjects and liegemen to 

 sedition and disobedience against us, our crown and dig- 

 nity ; but also to the renewal and propagating very great 

 and detestable heresies against the faith and sound Ca- 

 tholick doctrine of Holy Mother the Church : and being 

 willing to provide a proper remedy in this case," &c. This 

 Charter, printed in Ames's Typographical Antiquities, was 

 confirmed by Elizabeth in 1588. On Oct. 29, 1603, the 

 Company obtained the King's Letters Patent for the sole 

 printing of Primers, Psalms, Almanacks, &c. in English. 

 Again, on March 8, 1615-16, it obtained a renewal of their 

 Charter for the sole printing of Primers, Psalters, both in 

 metre and prose, with or without musical notes, Alma- 

 nacks, &c. in the English tongue ; and the A. B. C. with 

 the Little Catechism, and the Catechism in English and 

 Latin, &c. by Alex. Nowell. Although the entries of 

 copies at Stationers' Hall commenced as early as 1558, it 

 appears that the first legislative Act in which these regis- 

 ters is mentioned is in an Ordinance passed by the Par- 

 liament, 1643, entitled "Disorders in Printing Redressed." 

 It states in the preamble, that many persons, not free of 

 the Stationers' Company, have taken upon them to set 

 up sundry private printing presses in corners : It is there- 

 fore ordered. That no order of either House shall be 

 printed but by order of the House ; nor any book, pam- 

 phlet, or paper, shall be printed or put to sale, unless it be 

 licensed and entered in the register book of the Company 

 of Stationers, according to ancient custom, and the prin- 

 ter thereof to put his name thereto. The Master and 

 Wardens of the Stationers' Company, and several others 

 specified, are authorised to search for unlicensed presses 

 and books, and to seize them, with the authors, printers, 

 and others employed upon them. (Scobell's Acts, 1643, 

 c. 12.) Another Ordinance, in 1662, directs that the 

 government and regulation of the mystery of printing 

 shall remain in the Council of State for the time being. 

 (Scobell's Acts, 1652, c. 33.) To these Ordinances suc- 

 ceeded the celebrated Licensing Act of 1662, 13 & 14 Car. 

 11. c. 33., which prohibited the publication of any book 

 unless licensed by the Lord Chamberlain and entered in 

 the Stationers' Registers. The delivery of books was first 

 made compulsory by this Act, but then the number was 

 only three copies. In 1684, a new charter was granted to 

 the Company, partly for the purpose of securing the pro- 

 perty of books, but more with the view of interposing the 

 Royal interdict on any publication at variance with the 

 government of Charles II. ; but this was repealed by 2nd 

 of William & Mary, c. 8. This last Charter is curious, 

 for giving in one of its recitals the origin of the entry, 

 and for showing at that period copyright was unlimited 

 in its duration. But whilst the liberty of the press was 



restored by the Act of William & Mary, the door wag 

 unluckily thrown open to infractions of literary property 

 by clandestine editions of books. This led to applications 

 to parliament in 1703 and 1706 ; but no Act was passed 

 until the memorable one of Queen Anne in 1709, which 

 protected the property of copyright for fourteen years. 

 It seems to have been the prevailing opinion from the 

 passing of this Act (8 Ann. c. 19.) until the commence- 

 ment of the present century, that only those books were to 

 be delivered which had been registered. Tonson and Lin- 

 tot, Curll and Cave, Ben Tooke and Ben Motte, Dodsley 

 and Andrew Millar, Bowyer and Richardson, all lived 

 and died under the impression that the practical construc- 

 tion and operation of this Act was, that copies of those 

 books only. were to be delivered which the proprietors 

 chose to enter in the Hall books. This accounts for the 

 paucity of the numbers registered in the last centurv as 

 stated in « N. & Q.," 2nd S. ii. 322, 3. The curators of 

 Cambridge not feeling quite satisfied that the popular 

 construction of the Act of Queen Anne was the legal one^ 

 determined to have it settled in a court of law. Accord- 

 ingly, Henry Bryer, the printer of Haywood's Vindica- 

 tion of Fox's Life of James II., resisting the demands of 

 the University to a copy of the work (on the ground of 

 its not having been entered at Stationers' Hall), they 

 brought an action against the printer. The cause was 

 tried befcre Lord Ellenborough and a special jury at 

 Guildhall at the sitting after Michaelmas term, 1811, 

 when a verdict was found for the plaintifl^s, subject 

 to the opinion of the Court of King's Bench on a 

 case made and submitted. The case was argued at 

 Michaelmas, 1812, and the judges confirmed the verdict 

 of the jury. This decision, as might be expected, was 

 felt by the booksellers as an infringement of their pro- 

 perty ; for it must be borne in mind, that the number of 

 copies to be delivered had gradually increased from three 

 to eleven, and if we add the one allowed to the printer by 

 the 39th George III. c. 79. sect. 27. 29, it would make 

 twelve copies to be subtracted from every publication. 

 By the Act of 1842 (5 & 6 Vict. c. 45.), this number has 

 been reduced to five. From what we have stated our 

 correspondent will perceive that the registration of a 

 book, which now costs 5s., is one affair ; and that the de- 

 livery of the enacted copies for the five libraries is quite 

 another. See " N. & Q.," 2nd S. ii. 332., and v. 71.] 



Thomas Dogget. — When and where was this 

 worthy, of "coat and badge" notoriety, born? 

 His clever performance of Solon, in Durfey's co- 

 medy of The Marriage-Hater MatcKd, acted in 

 1692, first brought him into notice. 



Edwabd F. Rimbault. 



[Thomas Dogget was born in Castle Street, Dublin ; 

 but the date of his birth must remain a query. Gibber's 

 Apology has many particulars respecting him as actor 

 and manager previous to the last seven years of his life. 

 He died on Sept. 22, 1721, and was buried at Eltham, in 

 Kent. George Daniel {Merrie England, ii. 18.) states, 

 that "the only portrait of Dogget known is a small print 

 (which is copied in his work), representing him dancing 

 the Cheshire Round, with the motto, Ne sutor ultra cre- 

 pidam."'] 



The Maiden Name of Frances Countess of War^ 

 wich, 1618. — I am desirous to learn the maiden 

 name of Frances, widow of Sir George St. Paul, 

 of Snarfordf in the county of Lincoln, who after- 

 wards married Robert Baron Rich of Leeze, and 

 became Countess of Warwick in 1618, the same 

 year in which her second husband died. She ap- 



