498 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



[No. 60. 



Norwich, who had a son, Arthur Downing, of the 

 comity of Norfolk, whose son, Calybiit (the grand- 

 father of the first Sir George), was of Shennington, 

 in Gloucestershire. 



]\Jr. Sims, in his Index to the Heralds' Visitations, 

 refers to pedigrees and arms of tlie family of 

 Downing under Buckinghamshire, Essex, and 

 Norfolk. C. H. CoorEE. 



Cambridge, December 9. 1850. 



Burning to Death, orBwnirig of the Hill (Vol. ii., 

 p. 441.). — Tiie following extract from Collinson's 

 Somerset, vol. iii. p. 374., where it is quoted from 

 the Laws of the Miners of Mendip, 1G87, may 

 throw some light upon the incidents referred to by 

 J. W. H. : — 



" Among certain laws liy which the miners were 

 anciently regulated is the followinj;, viz. : 



"' That if any man of that occupation do pick or 

 steal any lead or ore to the value of thirteen pence 

 halfpenny, the lord or his officer may arrest all his 

 lead and ore, house and hearth, with all bis goods, 

 grooves, and works, and keep tliem as forfeit to his own 

 use ; and shall take the person that hath so offended, 

 and bring him where his bouse and work, and all 

 his tools and instruments belonging to the same oc- 

 cupation, are ; and put liim into bis house or work, 

 and set every thing on fire about him, and banish him 

 from that occupation before all the miners for ever.' — 

 Laws of the Miners of Mendip, 1687. 



" This is called liurjiing of the Hill." 



It is to be hoped that any of the readers of 

 " Notes and Queries " resident among this 

 mining population (who are said to retain many 

 other ancient and remarkable customs), and pos- 

 sessing any information in illustration of it, will 

 record it in your columns. William J. Tiioms. 



The Roscommon Peerage (Vol. ii., p. 469.). — 

 My attention has been called to an article in 

 No. 58. respecting the descendants of the first 

 Earl of Kosconnnon. 



As I am very much interested in the subject, I 

 beg An Hibernian, should this meet his eye, to 

 allow me to correspond with him. 



He is quite right as to the old tombstone. When 

 I was a boj', some five or six and forty years ago, 

 my father, one day as we were passing by the 

 churchyard, menlioned thnt stone to me ; but as I 

 had then several cousins living whose claims were 

 prior to mine, the matter made but little impres- 

 sion upon my mind. 



My father was Thomas, the second son of 

 Garrett, who was the son of Thomas, down to 

 whom the genealogy from the first Earl was traced 

 upon the stone. 



That stone and another, as I learn, were re- 

 moved and destroyed, or concealed, many years 

 ago, doubtless through some interested motive ; 

 and, unfortunately, no copies of the inscriptions 

 have, that I can discover, been preserved by any 

 branch of the family. 



When the late Earl became a claimant, it was 

 not known whether the descendants of Patrick, my 

 father's elder brother, who had all emigrated, were 

 living or dead ; which circumstance, it was consi- 

 dered, would be an impediment to my claim. 



Besides which it was also thought, tlie testimony 

 on the stone having been lost, that the traditions 

 in the family would not be sufficient to establish a 

 claim : under these circumstances I refrained from 

 coming forward to oppose the claims of the late 

 Earl. But now, as it is believed that there are 

 none of my cousins living, I am endeavouring to 

 collect evidence insupp(jrt of my claim; and proof 

 of what your correspondent states would be ex- 

 ceedingly useful. Gakkett Dillon, M.D. 



S. Queen's Parade, Bath. 



The Word "after'' in the Ruhric (Vol. ii., 

 p. 424.). — In the edition of ihfi Latin Common 

 Prayer, published in 12mo., Londini, 1574, which 

 must be a very early edition (probably the fourth 

 or fifth), there is a great verbal diiference in the 

 conclusion of the exhortation from the English 

 original. It stands thus : 



" Quajiropter omnes vos qui pra;sentes hie adestis, 

 per Dei nomen obtestor, ut interni sensus vestri, cum 

 meo conjunct! pariter, ad calestis clementiae thronum 

 subvolent, ut in hunc, qui sequitur, sermonem, succe- 

 datur." 



Then follows the rubric, " Generalis confessio, 

 ab unlversa congregatione dicenda, genibus llexis." 

 It would appear from this, that the confession was 

 repeated at the same time by the minister and the 

 congregation, and not by the congregation after 

 the minister. 



Of the authenticity of this edition there can be 

 no doubt. It bears the royal arms on the title- 

 page, and is printed " Cum privilegio RegijE majes- 

 tatis. E.xcudebat Thomas Vautrollenus." I have 

 not seen the earlier editions. A Greek version 

 was printed with the Latin, in one volume, one 

 year before ; and the Latin was republished in 

 1584. The edition of 1574 was printed before the 

 Catechism was completed by tlie questions on the 

 sacraments. In the rubrics of the Lord's Prayer, 

 in the Post Communion, and in the last prayers of 

 the Coinmination Service, the word after is ren- 

 dered by post. 



The difi'erence between the Latin and the 

 English in the exhortation is very remarkable, for 

 it does not make the priest dictate the confession, 

 but repeat it with them; whereas the English ser- 

 vices of Edward and Elizabeth, unaltered in any 

 std)sequent editions, distinctly make the priest 

 dictate the confession. There can be no doubt 

 about the sense of the word after, when we find it 

 in the rubrics of the Post Communion and Coin- 

 mination translated /»o.s-f. Some of your readers 

 may be able to give an account of the Latin ver- 

 sions, and explain by what influence the alteration 



