120 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



[No. 197. 



materials I have to select from ; but I cannot wind 

 up without a definition ; so here are two : 



" Mr, Thehvall says that he told a pious old lady, 

 ■who asked him the difference between High Church and 

 Loio Church, * The High Church place the Church 

 above Christ, the Low Church place Christ above the 

 Church.' About a hundred years ago, that very same 

 question was asked of the famous South: — 'Why,' 

 said he, ' the High Church are those who think highly 

 of the Church, and lowly of themselves; the Low 

 Cluircb are those who think highly of themselves, and 

 lowly of the Church." — Rev. H. Newland's Lecture on 

 Tractarianism, Lond. 1852, p. 68. 



The most celebrated High Churchmen who lived 

 in the last century, are Dr. South, Dr. Samuel 

 Johnson, Rev. Wm. Jones of Nayland, Bp. Home, 

 Bp. Wilson, and Bp. Horsley. See a long passage 

 on " High Churchmen" in a charge of the hitter to 

 the clergy of St. David's in the year 1799, pp. 34. 

 37. See also a charge of Bp. Atterbui-y (then 

 Archdeacon of Totnes) to his clergy in 1703. 



Jarltzberg. 



CONCLUDING NOTES ON SEVERAL MISUNDERSTOOD 

 WORDS. 



(Continued from Vol. vii., p. 568.) 



Xot being minded to broach any fresh matter 

 in "JT. & Q.," I shall now only crave room to 

 clear off an old score, lest I should leave myself 

 open to the imputation of having cast that in the 

 teeth of a numerous body of men which might, for 

 aught they would know to the contrary, be as 

 truly laid in my own dish. In No. 189., p. 567., 

 I affirmed that the handling of a passage in 

 Cymbeline, there quoted, had betrayed an amount 

 of obtuseness in the connnentators which would 

 be discreditable in a third-form schoolboy. To 

 substantiate that assertion, and rescue the dis- 

 puted word " Britaine " henceforth for ever from 

 the rash tampering of the meddlesome sciolist, I 

 beg to advertise the ingenuous reader that the 

 clause, — 



" For being now a favourer to the Britaine," 

 is in apposition with Death, not with Posthumus 

 Leonatus. In a note appended to tliis censure, 

 referring to another passage from L. L. L., I 

 averred that Mr. Collier had corrupted it by 

 changing the singular verb dies into the plural 

 die (this too done, under plea of editorial li- 

 cence, without warning to the reader), and that 

 such corruption had abstracted the true key to 

 the right construction. To make good this last 

 position, two things I must do : first, cite the whole 

 passage, without change of letter or tittle, as it 

 stands in the Folios '23 and '32 ; next, show the 

 trivial and vulgar use of " contents " as a singular 

 noun. In Folio '23, thus : 



*' Qu. Nay my good Lord, let me ore-rule you now ; 

 That sport best pleases that doth least know how. 



Where Zeale striues to content, and the contents 

 Dies in the Zeale of that which it presents : 

 Their forme confoundfd, makes most forme in mirth, 

 When great things labouring perish in their birth." 



Act IV. p. 141. 

 With this the Folio '32 exactly corresponds, save 

 that the speaker is Prin., not Qu. ; ore-rules is 

 •written as two words without the hyphen, and 

 strives for striues. I have been thus precise, be- 

 cause criticism is to me not " a game," nor admis- 

 sive of cogging and falsification. 



I must now show the hackneyed use of contents 

 as a singular noun. An anonymous correspondent 

 of " N. & Q." has already pointed out one in Mea- 

 sure for Measure, Act IV. Sc. 2. : 



" Duhe. The contents of this is the returne of the 

 Duke." 

 Another : 



" This is the contents thereof." — Calvin's 82nd Ser- 

 mon vpon Job, p. 419., Golding's translation. 



Another : 



" After this were articles of peace propounded, y= 

 contents wherof was, that he should departe out of 

 Asia." — The 31st Booke of Justine, fol. 139., Golding's 

 translation of Justin's Tragus Fompeius. 



Another : 



" Plinie wrlteth hereof an excellent letter, the con- 

 tents wliereof is, that this ladie, mistrusting her husband, 

 was condemned to die," &c. — HistoricaU Meditations, 

 lib. iii. chap. xi. p. 178. Written in Latin by P. Came- 

 rarius, and done into English by John Molle, Esq. : 

 London, 1621. 

 Another : 



" The contents whereof is this." — Id., lib. v. chap. vi. 

 p. 342. 



Another : 



" Therefore George, being led with an heroieall dis- 

 daine, and neuertheless giuiiig the bridle beyond mo- 

 deration to his anger, vnderstanding that Albert was 

 come to Newstad, resolued with himselfe (without 

 acquainting any bodie) to write a letter vnto him, the 

 contents whereof was," &c. — Id., lib. v. chap. xii. p. 366. 



If the reader wants more examples, let him give 

 himself the trouble to open the first book that 

 comes to hand, and I dare say the perusal of a 

 dozen pages will supply some ; yet have we two 

 editors of Shakspeare, Johnson and Collier, so un- 

 acquainted with the usage of their own tongue, 

 and the imiversal logic of thought, as not to know 

 that a word like contends, according as it is under- 

 stood collectively or distributively, may be, and, 

 as we have just seen, in fact is, treated, as a sin- 

 gular or plural ; that, I say, contents taken seve- 

 rally, every content, or in gross, tlie whole mass, is 

 respectively plural or singular. It was therefore 

 optional with Shakspeai*e to employ the word 

 either as a singular or plural, but not in the same 

 sentence to do both : here, liowever, he was tied 



