Nov. 22. 1851.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



409 



GENERAL JAMES WOLFE. 



(Vol. iv., pp. 271. 322.) 



Many letters of Wolfe's will be found published 

 in the Naval and Militarij Gazette of the latter 

 part of last and early part of this year. 



By the statement of your correspondent Mr. 

 Cole, Wolfe was promoted as captain in Burrell's 

 regiment (at present the 4th, or king's own) in 

 1744. Now Eurrell's regiment took the left of 

 the first line at CuUodeu, so that James Wolfe, 

 unless absent on leave, or employed on particular 

 duty, must have been in that action. The left of 

 the second line was occupied by "Colonel Wolfe's" 

 regiment (now the 8th or "king's"). See the 

 "Rebellion of 1745," by Robert Chambers, in 

 Constable's Miscellany, vol. xvi. p. 86. Captains 

 of nineteen were common enough at that period, 

 but Wolfe is the only one whose name has excited 

 attention. 



As to Wolfe's having been " the youngest 

 general ever intrusted with such a responsible 

 command" as that at Quebec, your correspondent 

 surely forgets Napoleon in modern, and the Black 

 Prince in more remote times. 



I have seen at Mr. Scott's, of Cahircon, in the 

 CO. Clare, an engraving of Wolfe : he is designated 

 as the " Hero of Louisburgh," and is represented 

 with his right to the spectator, the right hand and 

 arm raised as if enforcing an order. The features 

 are small, the nose rather " cocked," and the face 

 conveys the idea of spirit and determination ; he 

 wears a very small three-cocked hat, with a plain 

 black cockade, a sort of frock coat reaching to the 

 knees, where it is met by long boots ; there are no 

 epaulets, a twist belt confines the coat, and sup- 

 ports a cartouche-box in front, and a bayonet at 

 the right side, and he carries a fusil slung from his 

 right shoulder " en bandouilliere." 



It is said that the father of \Volfe was an Irish- 

 man, and I have been shown in the co. Wicklow 

 the farm on which it is said that James ^Volfe was 

 born. It lies near Ncvvtown-Mount-Kennedy. 

 Be that as it may, the name has been made cele- 

 brated in Ireland within the last half century bv 

 three individuals : first, the Lord Kilwarden, who 

 was murdered during Emmett's rising in 1803; 

 seoomlly, tiie late Chief Baron, who spelt his 

 name " with a difference ;" and last, not least, the 

 author of the celebrated lines on the " Burial of 

 Sir John Moore." Kereiensis. 



PUNISHMENT OF EDWAHD OF CAERNARVON BY HIS 

 FATHER. — CHARACTER OF EDWARD I. 



(Vol. iv., p. 338.) 



I think considerable liglit is thrown upon this 

 very remarkable incident by a letter of the prince 

 himself to the Earl of Lincoln, dated Midhurst, 



June 14, which appears upon the Roll of that 

 prince's letters lately discovered at the Chapter 

 House, Westminster. (See Ninth Report of the 

 Deputij Keeper of the Public Records, App. II., 

 No. 5.) This letter has been printed in one of 

 the volumes of the Sussex Archaeological Society, 

 having been written from that county. For such 

 of your readers as may not have either of these 

 books at command, I will give the material part of 

 the letter, translated : 



" On Sunday, the 13th of June, we came to Mid- 

 hurst, where we found the lord the king, our father; 

 the Monday following, on account of certain words 

 which, it had been reported to the king, had taken 

 place between us and the Bishop of Chester, he was so 

 enraged with us that he has forbidden us, or any of our 

 retinue, to dare to enter his house ; and he has for- 

 bidden all the people of his houseliold and of the ex- 

 chequer to give or h^nd us anything for the support of 

 our household. VVe are staying at Midhurst to wait 

 his pleasure and favour, and we shall follow after him 

 as well as we are able, at a distance of ten or twelve 

 miles from his house, until we have been able to re- 

 cover his good will, which we very much desire.' 



The roll contains several letter's which show 

 how seriously tlie prince was affected by his father's 

 displeasure, and how the king was appeased. 



By the letter above quoted, the "minister" 

 appears to have been the Bishop of Chester, then 

 treasurer of the royal household. But the con- 

 nexion between the prince's case and that of Wil- 

 liam de Brewosa does not appear, unless they were 

 on intimate terms, as is not improbable : and the 

 punishment of the prince himself is, in my opinion, 

 referred to as a precedent or justification of the 

 pimishment imposed upon Brewes. That the 

 severe punishment so imposed was richly deserved 

 none can doubt who has read the report on the 

 Roll: but an unfortunate error in the press* 

 makes it appear that the prince, and not De Brewes, 

 was the culprit, and performed the penance. 



To return to the prince's offence and punish- 

 ment. He appears to have been nearly starved 

 into submission, as the royal prohibition against 

 supplying him with articles or money was obliged 

 to be removed by a Letter Close directed to all the 

 sheriffs, dated Ospring, 22nd July. 



The whole transaction is highly characteristic of 

 the firmness of the king. Whether the prince's 

 letters which I have referred to make out a case 

 of harshness, as regards some other circumstances, 

 I will not now trouble you with. But while 

 examining cotemporary documents illustrative of 

 the prince and his correspondents, I met with 

 an entry upon the Close Roll (33 Edw. I.) too 

 strikingly illustrative of the determination and 



* Page S.T!). col. I. line 40., where " Edwiird " is 

 printed instead of " William de Brewes." 



