Sept. 10. 1853.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



251 



account of a Query signed (not A. E. B. but) B., 

 afBrming that I had " discovered a flaw in the 

 great Johnson ! " Now it happened that the flaw 

 was described, even in B.'s own quotation from 

 me, as "certainly not Johnson's mistake, for he was 

 a clear-headed arithmetician." B. gave me half a 

 year to answer ; and then, no answer appearing, 

 privately forwarded the printed Query, with a 

 request to know whether the readers of " N. & Q." 

 were not of a class sufficiently intelligent to appre- 

 ciate a defence from me. The fact was, that I 

 thought them too intelligent to need it, after the 

 correction (by B. himself, in p. 127.) of the mis- 

 quotation. It is not in letters as in law, that 

 judgment must be signed for the plaintifi* if the 

 defendant do not appear. There is also an ano- 

 nymous octavo tract, mostly directed, or at least 

 (so far as I have read) much directed, against the 

 arguments of the same article, and containing mis- 

 apprehensions of a similar kind. That my unfor- 

 tunate article should be so misunderstood in three 

 distinct quarters, is, I am afraid, sufficient pre- 

 sumption against its clearness ; and shows me that 

 obscurus fio is, as much as ever, the attendant of 

 hrevis esse laboro : but I am still fully persuaded 

 of the truth of the conclusions. A. De Morgan. 



liADY PERCY, WIFE OF HOTSPUR (DAUGHTER OF 

 EDMUND MORTIMER, EARL OF MARCH), AND 



JANE Seymour's royal descent. 



(Vol. vii., p. 42. ; Vol. viii., pp. 104. 1 84.) 



The mischief that arises from apparently the 

 most ti'ifling inaccuracy in a statement of fact is 

 scarcely to be estimated. A mistake is repeated, 

 multiplied, and perpetuated often to an extent 

 that no after rectification can thoroughly efface. 

 Blunders even become sacred by antiquity ; and 

 the attempt to correct any misstatement, if it does 

 not entirely fail through the subsequent destruc- 

 tion of evidence that would have contained the 

 refutation, is frequently received with a coldness 

 and suspicion, and can seldom, with every aid from 

 undoubted sources, be brought to prevail against 

 the more familiar and preconceived impression. 

 An illustration of this may be seen in the refer- 

 ence made by your correspondent C. V. to the 

 authority of Dugdale, as overriding the result of 

 later investigations relative to the issue respec- 

 tively of the fifth and seventh Lords Clifford of 

 Westmoreland. The loose and ill-advised asser- 

 tion o{ Miss Strickland, intended as it clearly was 

 to insinuate a mean origin in Jane Seymour, and 

 to lessen her pretension to an exalted birth, has 

 fortunately received a most complete and signal 

 disproof; but a question is now raised, which, if 

 it can be supported, will suit Miss Strickland's 

 view quite as well as her own inconclusive state- 

 ment. I cannot but think that what she wished 



to say is, as hinted In the suggestion of C. V., that 

 the claim contended for cannot be supported 

 through the alleged marriage of a Wentworth with 

 the descendant of Elizabeth Percy, because Eliza- 

 beth, Lady Percy's only daughter. Lady Elizabeth 

 de Percy, who married John, Lord Clifford, is by 

 some ancient heralds stated to have left no daugh- 

 ter. This would have been an intelligible asser- 

 tion, and not entirely Inconsistent with what may 

 be gathered from peerages, and other works com- 

 piled solely upon the authority of Dugdale ; and 

 it is indeed the very point of difficulty contem- 

 plated by your learned correspondent C. V., who, 

 if I do not mistake the signature. Is himself an 

 authority entitled to much respect. 



Dugdale, Collins, and Nicolas make the Inter- 

 marriage of Wentworth to have taken place with 

 a daughter of Roger, fifth Lord Clifford ; and 

 Dugdale and Collins are silent as to any female 

 Issue of John, the seventh Lord. Edmondson 

 (Baronagium Genealogicum, vol. Iv. p. 364.) 

 adopts the same conclusion ; taut no higher autho- 

 rity is cited by any one of the above writers, upon 

 which to found this statement. On the other 

 hand, both Collins and Edmondson, in the Went- 

 worth pedigree, show the marriage of Sir Philip 

 Wentworth, of Nettlested, to have taken place 

 with a daughter of John, seventh Lord Clifford. 

 Edmondson describes the daughter as Elizabeth ; 

 but Collins more accurately calls her Mary. 

 Banks (Baj'onage, vol. ii. p. 90.) gives both state- 

 ments with an asterisk, implying a doubt as to 

 which of the two is to be accepted. 



The Pembroke MS. contains a summary of the 

 lives of the Veterlponts, Cliffords, and the Earls 

 of Cumberland, compiled from original documents 

 and fiimily records for the celebrated Lady Anne 

 Countess Do-.vager of Pembroke, daughter and 

 sole heir of George Clifford, Earl of Cumberland, 

 who died In 1605. This valuable collection gives 

 the most minute particulars and anecdotes con- 

 nected with the ancient family of the Lords 

 Clifford and their descendants, and being a few 

 years anterior In date to the publication of Dug- 

 dale's Baronage, the Information contained there 

 Is entitled to the greatest possible weight as an 

 original and independent authority. 



In this MS. (a copy of which is In the British 

 Museum, Harl. 6177.) the descendants of Roger, 

 fifth Lord Clifford, are named, but there is no 

 mention of any daughter who formed an alliance 

 with a Wentworth. Afterwards come the issue of 

 the marriage of John, seventh Lord Clifford, with 

 Elizabeth Percy, the only daughter of Henry 

 Lord Percy, surnamed Hotspur, son to Henry 

 Earl of Northumberland. 



" This Elizabeth Percy was one of tlie greatest 

 women of her time, both for her birth and her mar- 

 riages, &c. Their eldest son, Thomas de Clifford, 

 succeeded his father both in his lands and honours, &C. 



