16 : 
NOTES AND QUERIES. 
[2nd §. No 1, Jan. 5. 756; 
was built where it is, was that, the old church 
being in decay, the Burdett of that day offered to 
build a new church at any place the inhabitants 
chose, provided they would draw the materials for 
building it; this they declined to do, and there- 
upon he built it in the place.most convenient to 
himself, near Foremark Hall, and most inconve- 
nient to the greater part of the parishioners, 
many of whom have a mile to plod their weary 
way to church on a Sunday. The old church 
stood at the eastern end of the village of Ingleby. 
C. S. Greaves. 
PHOTOGRAPHIC CORRESPONDENCE. 
On Concave Field for Photographic Pictures (15t S. xii. 
516.) — Having read, carefully, Mr. Bowman’s new 
method of taking photographs, I am sorry to find that, 
for three reasons, it must be incorrect. With your per- 
mission I will point them out. First, describe an arc, 
and draw its chord, which divide into any number of 
equal parts: from the centre of the circle, of which the 
are is a segment, draw through the points of division on 
the chord to the arc, when it will be evident that the 
measures on the are become less as they recede from the 
middle of the are. This being the case, it is plain that, 
were a building divided by horizontal lines at equal dis- 
tances apart, they would become nearer to each other as 
they approached the top. Or, if a church with a spire 
were the object, the spire would be much lower than it 
should be. In this particular, then, this new method is 
a failure. 
Next: supposing a building to be divided by perpen- 
dicular lines, whether at equal distances or otherwise, 
they would be represented in the photograph by curved 
lines, tending to the top and bottom of the diameter of 
the circle of which the curve of photograph were a seg- 
ment. This will be evident by considering the light im- 
pinging on the curve, as a plane, from the centre of 
circle to the curve. And the lines in the photographic 
curved plane would be much like the gores or lines of 
latitude on a‘gilobe. This is a second cause of failure, 
Mr. Bowman has not said whether the chord of the arc 
is to be vertical or horizontal; but this would merely 
alter the results rotatively. I have concluded that the 
chord is to be vertical: were it horizontal, then those 
lines, which might be horizontal in the object, would be 
curves approaching each. other, &c.; whilst the perpen- 
diculars would, retaining perpendicularity, fail to repre- 
sent justly spaces equally drawn or placed on the object. 
The third failure is, that there can be only one line 
strictly in focus, viz. that depicted by the plane of light 
which is in the same plane as the radius of the circle; 
because, lines from that centre to any other part of the 
photographic plane, will be longer than the radius. 
It is, nevertheless, true, that were the photograph kept 
in the same condition as whilst in the camera, and it 
were viewed through a pinhole at the centre of the circle, 
then, as far as the lines were concerned, all would be cor- 
rect; but still, the want of focus would be apparent. 
Were the photographic plane a portion of a hollow sphere, 
then every point would be in focus; but this must be 
viewed from the centre, and through a pinhole. But, as 
such a surface would be utterly impracticable, it is out of 
the question. 
Believe me, Sir, I should have felt great pleasure, if 
this new and ingenious method had been satisfactory ; 
but as it is otherwise, I thought it due to photography to 
make this communication, and which I trust will not be 
deemed obtrusive. T. L. Mererrr. 
Maidstone. 
Replies ta Minor Queries. 
Thomas Bewick, Wood Engraver (18. xii. 510.) 
—If W. L. N. (Bath) is inclined to become the 
executor of Bewick’s compassionate bequest, by 
endeavouring to raise a fund for the purpose of 
representing, in good woodcuts, interesting native 
objects in the animal kingdom, accompanied by 
letterpress descriptive of the benefits conferred on 
man by some objects of rustic persecution, such as 
toads, all British snakes except the viper, &c. &c., 
I know not any place in the kingdom where he 
would be more likely to meet with support than 
Bath. I shall myself be very happy to support 
him with an annual subscription of twenty shil- 
lings, till all our friends shall be represented and 
recommended for their good works to the protec- 
tion of our species. 
This done, I would subscribe for the pictures of 
our enemies, whether quadrupeds, birds, reptiles, 
or insects, and in the letterpress of these I would 
describe the ingenuity they display, and the most 
merciful means for their destruction. Perhaps 
the venerable Society for Promoting Christian 
Knowledge would admit such prints, when pub- 
lished, on their Catalogue, and allow them equal 
favour with the elephants, tigers, and other beasts 
of which they have the copyright, the use of 
hanging which on the walls of national and Sun- 
day schools I never could understand. And per- 
haps the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to 
Animals might lend their aid to the cause, instead 
of confining their views to the sufferings of quad- 
rupeds alone. Geo, E. Frere. 
Royden Hall, Diss. 
General Wolfe (1* S. xii. 312.) — Should not 
the date of Miss M. Deverell’s publication be 
1781, and not 1731? She was one of six sisters 
who lived at a house at Nailsworth, now called 
“The Deverells.” Miss Mary was also the au- 
thoress of a volume of Sermons. The initials 
“FED.” were no doubt those of the elder sister 
Elizabeth, who resided at Bath. Jno. 5S. Burn. 
Copyright in privately printed Books (1* 58. 
xii. 495.) — As a question of strict property 
(which involves copyright), there is, I apprehend, 
no difference between manuscript and print. It 
cannot be doubted that the property of the 
Patriot King remained in Bolingbroke as com- 
pletely, after Pope had had it, by his desire, pri- 
vately printed, but carefully reserved from publi- 
cation, as when it was in MS., and that the Court 
of Chancery would have prohibited a piratical re- 
production of it. The question as to copyright 
(though founded on the doctrine of property) in- 
