36 
are portraits of the De Witts, apparently taken 
from the medal mentioned, “N. & Q.,” 1* S. 
xii. 244, 310. On the other side of the leaf are 
the lines quoted by Mr. Jenn. 
Like P., I was inclined to think the atrocities of 
the mob exaggerated ; but a careful examination 
of contemporary accounts has satisfied me that 
imagination cannot go beyond the reality. The 
De Witts’ friends asserted them without contra- 
diction, and they were recognised approvingly by 
many on the other side. The prices at which 
fingers and other parts of the deceased were sold, 
are stated by serious, and joked upon by comic 
writers. In the Spiegel van Ondankbarheyte en 
Wreetheyt, 1672, n. d., the De Witts are eulogised 
and lamented, a quatrain being devoted to each of 
the prominent incidents of the murder. One is: 
“Op’t afscheuren hunne Ingewanden, 
Zo menschen-vyreeters! zo! schaft menschen-vleesch ; 
hangd darmen, 
Om hals en middel: gras met ww bebloede armen 
Mit ingewand, dit vlesch sal swellen in uw krop: 
En dit gedarmte werd noch om uw hals een strop.” 
Page 9. 
“Dit vlesch sal swellen in uw krop” is an an- 
ticipation of Sydney Smith’s valedictory address 
to the Bishop of New Zealand, “ May you disagree 
with the cannibal who eats you!” 
De Haegsche Anatomie, door M. Borrebraegt*, 
n. d., gives a burlesque description of the cireum- 
stances in verse. One poem is called “ Besjes 
Kermes-Pot.” Bessy exults in haying the fat of 
two white (wit) geese to cook. In another, a 
dialogue between a carver and a butcher; the 
latter says: 
“°T is nouw een Batavier, diet meeste schlachten kan, 
Men draegt het vlees te koop van Witte, kees en Jan.” 
Four pictures of the murder have been painted. 
I cannot trace the originals, but engravings from 
them are common. 1. The De Witts coming out 
of the prison. 2. The murder. 3. The mob strip- 
ping the bodies. 4. The bodies on the gibbet. 
These are sometimes separate, generally in four 
compartments on one sheet, and in the Beroerten, 
&c., above cited, all the events are in one plate. 
In the Hist. dela Vie et de la Mort de C. et J. de 
Witte, tom. ii. p. 533., is a folding plate repre- 
senting the bodies on the gibbet, as seen by a 
painter at half-past ten at night, on August 22, 
after the mob had departed. 
This is a long reply, but I have confined myself 
to the questions asked. In the British Museum, 
under the heading “ Witt,” will be found three 
quarto volumes of pamphlets of great. rarity, pro- 
bably many unique. I have examined these and 
other works with care, and I quote from originals 
only, except in the reference to Basnage (whose 
* Borrebraegt was one of the assassins. He is not re- 
presented as the author, but as the anatomist. 
NOTES AND QUERIES. 
(2n4'S..No2., Jan. 12.56. 
book I have not yet been able to procure), which 
is taken from the History of England, in Lardner’s 
Cabinet Cyclopedia, vol. vii. p. 110. et seg. That 
‘contains the best short account of the murder 
which Iknow. LIhad not seen it when, at xii. 70., 
I asked what became of Tichelaer the barber. Of 
him and his employers I will give some account in 
another note. H. B.C. 
U. U. Club. 
THE VELLUM-BOUND JUNIUS. 
j (1* S. xii. 511.) 
A Note appears in your publication of this 
day upon the subject of a vellum-bound copy of 
the Letters of Junius, presumed to have been sent 
to the author by Mr. H. S. Woodfall, the printer, 
and which your correspondent states was formerly 
in the library at Stowe. 
Permit me to assure you that it is an error to 
suppose that any such eopy of the Letters of 
Junius was ever found at Stowe. 
An edition of the Letters printed in 1797, on 
vellum, and bound in purple morocco, will be 
found described in the Sale Catalogue of the 
Stowe Library, prepared by Messrs. Sotheby and 
Wilkinson, in 1849. Wiciiam JAMes SMITH. 
Conservative Club, December 29, 1855. 
After four years’ silence, Mr. Cramp has, at 
last, replied to my very simple and civil question. 
Considering the tone and temper of that reply — 
the hints and insinuations about tricks, evasions, 
and double dealings — his offensive allusions to 
this or that oracle, and the charge of “ effrontery 
not to be parelleled” which he brings against a 
gentleman, whose essay on the subject of Junius 
—whether conclusive or inconclusive —is re- 
markable for its honesty, truthfulness, and elabo- 
rate research, he has forfeited all claim to respect- 
ful attention. Mr. Cramr's reply might and 
ought to have been compressed into a paragraph. 
His original conjecture and statement (1* 8. 
ili. 262.) was this, —that the printer having bound 
a copy of Junius for and under the direction of 
the writer of the Letters, followed the pattern in 
the binding of other copies; and this, he said, 
would “account for similar copies having been 
found in the libraries of so many persons.” I 
asked where and when these many copies had 
been found, and said “TI should be obliged” if he 
would inform me. At length Mr. Cramp comes 
forward and refers for his authorities to what he 
calls “rumours.” The readers of “N. & Q.” will, 
I am sure, agree with me, that speculations 
founded on inferences deduced from rumours are 
not subjects worthy of discussion in its pages. 
Mr. Cramr himself must agree with me, for since 
