Aug. 30. 1851.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



151 



JUDGES STYLED KEVEREND, ETC. 



I read a Query not long ago as to tlie time when 

 the title " Very Reverend" was first given to 

 Deans. I would also olFer a Query, When did the 

 Judges lose tlie title of "■ Reverend " and " Very 

 Reverend," and obtain that of " Honorable ? " 

 In the second volume of The Year Books the ap- 

 probation of the twelve judges to the publication 

 of the reports is headed, " By the approbation of 

 the Reverend Judges ;" and the following is copied 

 from the ti lie-page: "ie Premier Part de les 

 Reports del Cases en Ley, que furent arg-ues en le 

 Temps de le tres Hatit et Puissant Prince, Roy 

 Edward le Tierce. Ore nouoelment Imprimes, 

 Corriges et Amendes, avec les Notations and Refer- 

 ences de r tres Reverend et tres Sage Juges de cest 

 Royaulme, Brook et Fitzherbert. Printed, 1679." 



in the title-page of the sixth volume we find 

 "Avec les Notations de le tres Reverend Juges, 

 Brook et Fitzherbei-t." 



Was this title, "Reverend," derived from the 

 address given to judges when ecclesiastics filled 

 judicial offices, or is it simply a title of respect 

 ai)plie<l to all persons to whom, on account of their 

 position in society, respectful address is due; of 

 which we have an example in Othello's address to 

 the Venetian senators : 



" Most potent, grave, and reverend seniors." 



When did the address, " The Honorable," now 

 given to the judges, come into use? 



How comes it that in Court the Puisne J\idges 

 are addressed by the title of " Lord," whereas the 

 Master of the Rolls, who ranks before them, re- 

 ceives the title of "Your Honor?" 



The use of the title " Honorable " to the House 

 of Commons, and to members within its walls, is 

 familiar to us all. 



The worthiness and antiquity of the title is 

 proved by its being given to one of the Persons of 

 the Eternal Trinity in the Te Deum. F. W. J. 



93. Frederick Egmont ; Peter (^Egmont ?^. — 

 They appear as booksellers merely and only, so far 

 as I can make out, because the promptorius pue- 

 rorum, or medidla grammutica, printed by Pynson, 

 in 1499, is said, in the coloplmn, to be at their 

 expense. Neither Ames nor Dibdin gives any 

 further evidence. The following is therefore 

 worth a Note. It is from the ud lectorem (or 

 rather, the adolescentihus studiosis) of the Mul- 

 torum Vocahulorum equivocorum interprctatio Ma- 

 gistri Johannes de garlandia : Paris, 1502, 4to. 



" Sed nihil tatn arduuni tainque difficile fiiit quod 

 labor improbus noii vicerit. Ut videlicet mei amicis- 

 iimo Fredericho Egmont morem gcrerem optatissimus : 



qui cum in vostra excellentissima anglie patria. Et 

 libroruin sit fidelissimus mercator et amicorum suorum 

 amantissinius, nullum unque librum ex officina sua 

 nisi perquam castigatus emittet." 



Query, was F. Egmont a printer as well as a 

 bookseller? Granting that officina means a shop, 

 how can a mere bookseller sell none but correctly 

 printed works ? The writer of the above was 

 himself a bookseller (Joh. Ant. Venetus). 



Of Peter above-mentioned, or rather of his 

 name, the following is the history : — The colophon 

 of the promptorius, of which there is a copy in the 

 Grenville Library, runs as follows: "... in ex- 

 pensis virtuosorum virorum Frederici Egmont et 

 Petri post pascha, anno domini mcccc nonagessimo 

 nono, decima v' die mensis Alaii." Hence Hain 

 and others have entered Peter post Pascha as an 

 English bookseller, presuming that the words jsosf 

 pascha cannot belong to the date, because the more 

 definite day, " May 15," follows. But surely, 

 among the varieties of the time when every man 

 did wliat seemed good in his own eyes as to titles, 

 colophons, &c., it may easily have happened that 

 a double description of a part of the date may 

 have occurred, one description containing more 

 than the other. Query, Can any other instance be 

 produced of this hypertautology ? * At any rate, 

 such a thing is more likely than that a bookseller 

 should have been called Peter After-Easter. At 

 the same time such whimsical things were done in 

 the Latinization of names, both by their owners 

 and by others for them, that no certain conclusion 

 can be drawn. For example, more atrocious 

 changes have been made than would be that of 

 Easterby mio post pascha. M. 



94. Unlucky for pregnant Women to take an Oath. 

 — In a police case, reported in The Times of the 

 28th of May, a woman was called as a witness who, 

 however, iipon the book being tendered to her, 

 positively refused to be sworn, with the remark, 

 that it must be evident to the magistrate that she 

 could not take an oath. The usher of the court 

 said that the woman was pregnant, and that low 

 women who were in that situation, entertained an 

 absurd belief that it was imlucky to take an oath. 

 What is the origin of this superstition ? Is it 

 common amongst the uneducated classes of so- 

 ciety ? COWGILL. 



95. Cockroach (Vol. i., p. 194.). — Having seen 

 in " Notes and Queries" some interesting parti- 

 culars on the subject of beetle mythology, I am 

 induced to put a Query as to the derivation of 

 the word " cockroach." The common appellation 

 for this insect in the French islands is ravet, but 



* [We are glad to supply our correspondent with 

 another instance of hypertautology, and from a work in 

 great demand during this part of the year. On the 

 cover of Bradshaw's Jiailway Guide we read, " Eighth 

 Month (August) 1st, 1851."] 



