Oct. 5. 1850.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



295 



if existing as an agent at all in the matter; and 

 cannot be " any tliino-," or " any party," or " any 

 impulse," in the indefinite sense intended in these 

 phrases, iloreover, there seems no difficulty in 

 expressing, in a simple and direct manner, that the 

 agent was a very dilFerent, or opposite, or dissimi- 

 lar " thing," or " person," or " impulse" from that 

 supposed. 



i wish some persons of competent authority in 

 the science of our language (and many such there 

 are wlio write in your pages) would take up 

 this subject, with a view to preserve the purity of 

 it ; and would also, for the future, exercise a watch- 

 ful vigilance over the use, for t\ie Jir.'it time, of any 

 incorrect, or low words or phrases, in composition ; 

 and so endeavour to con line them to the vulgar, or 

 to those who ape the vulgar iu their style. 



r. H. F. 



Fastitocalon—Fastitocaloii. Cod. Exon. fol.96.6. 

 p. 360. 18. read Airwrdo . . x^^^'-^'-'V- Tyclisen, Phy- 

 siologies Si/rus, cap. XXX. : did the digamma get to 

 Crediton by way of Cricklade ? F. Q. 



eattpvic^. 



BISHOP COSIN S CONFERENCE. 



Basire, in his Dead Man's Real Speech (pp. 59, 

 60.), amongst other " notable instances " of Bishop 

 Cosin's zeal and constancy in defence of the Church 

 of England, mentions 



" A solemn conference both by word and writing 

 betwixt him and the Prior of the English Benedictines 

 at Paris, supposed to be Robinson. The argument 

 was concerning the vafidity of tlie ordination of our 

 priests, &c., in the Church of England. Tlie issue 

 was, our Doctor had the better so fiir, that he could 

 never get from the Prior any reply to his last answer. 

 This conference was undertaken to fix a person of 

 honour then wavering about that point ; the sum of 

 which conference (as I am informed), was written by 

 Dr. Cosiu to Dr. Morley, the now Right Reverend 

 Lord Bishop of Winchester, in two letters bearing date 

 June II, July 11, 1C45." 



The substance of this conference has been pre- 

 served among the Smith Manuscripts in the Bod- 

 leian Library ; but it is not in the Ibrm of letters to 

 Dr. Morley. Vol. xl. of this valuable collection of 

 manuscripts contains (as described in Smitli's table 

 of contents) : — 



1 1. " Papers of Bp. Cosins in defence of the Ordina- 



j tion of the Church of England against Father Prior. 

 1 " The first of these is Bp. Cosin's Review of the 

 I Father's Letter, &l-. [the title-jj.igc is placed at p. 77.] 

 j " Then follows a letter (which is indeed the IJishop's 



first pajjcr, and should be put first) from Bishop Cosin 



to the Father. 



" After tliat the Father's Answer to Bishop Cosin's 



Review at p. 81. 



" Then come two other papers about the validity of 

 our Ordination, with a preface concerning the occasion, 

 p. 89." 



2. " Then, p. 101., A Letter from a Rom. Catli, to 

 a Lady about communicating in one kind, — with 

 Bishop Cosin's Answer." 



3. " Lastly, in p. 153., is A Letter of Bp. Cosin's 

 to Dr. Collins concerning the Sabbath." 



The order in which the papers under the first 

 heail, about our English ordination, should fall, 

 appears to be as follows : — 



1. There is a note attached to p. 65., evidently 

 written by Dr. Tbo. Smith himself, in the follow- 

 ing words : 



" Transcript of several papers of Bisliop Cosin's sent 

 to me by Dr. J. Smith, Prebendary of Durham. — T. S." 



2. At p. 77. the title-page is given thus : 



" A Review of a Letter sent from F. P. R. to a 

 Lady (whom he would have persuaded to the Rom. 

 party) in opposition to a former paper given him fur 

 the defence of the Church of England in the Ordina- 

 tion of Priests." 



To this are appended the respective forms of 

 ordering priests used in the Church of England 

 and in the Roman Church. 



3. Then, at p. 89., we have " the occasion of this 



Discourse concerning the Ordination of 



Priests," &c. This is a kind of preface, which con- 

 tains the first paper that was given to the Prior, 

 dated June 14, 1645 ; also another paper, bearing 

 date July 11, 1645, but ending abruptly in the 

 middle of a sentence, and having written below it 

 (probably in Dr. J. Smith's hand) the following 

 note : 



" The rest of tliis is not yet fomid, and that which is 

 written thus far is not in the Bishop's own hand, but 

 tlie copy is very fair." 



However, this second paper (ending thus 

 abruptly) appears to be no more than the first 

 draft of a hmg letter from Cosin to the Prior, 

 which commences at p. 65. of this MS., and which 

 is dated " from the Court of S. Gcrmains, July 

 11, 1645 ; " for not only does this letter bear the 

 same date as the before-mentioned fragment, but 

 it begins by complaining of the tone of expression 

 in a fetter evidently received from tlie Prior after 

 the draft had been prepared, but before it was 

 sent olf ; and it concludes with the following note 

 appended as a 23ostscript : 

 " Sir, 



' The enclosed (most of it) was prepared for you a 

 fortnight since; hut now (upon the occasion given by 

 your letter) you have it with some advantage from 



" Your servt., J. C. 



" I desire the fav"' ..... 



"S. Germ. July 12." 



4. The most important part of this MS., how- 

 ever, is coidained in the long letter or treatise 



— I 



