Qud §, No 8,, Fs. 23. ’56.] 
per se. There is la credenza dell’ ultare, la credenza del 
battisterio, la credenza dell’ olio santo, and there is a cre- 
denza in everybody’s chamber.” Another correspondent, 
that “ Credence, French; credenza, Italian; Kredentz, Ger- 
man; and credentia, Latin, all mean, primarily, a cup- 
board, press, or pantry, and are probably derived from credo, 
credendum, a place of trust. We find in Baretti’s [talian 
Dictionary, ‘ Credenza, armario, dove si ripongon le cose da 
mangiare,—a buttery or pantry.’ Cotgrave translates 
“Credence, silver plate, or a cupboard of silver plate.’ 
Menage, in his Dictionnaire Etymologique, gives us ‘ Cre- 
dence, a buffet or sideboard, on which silver plate is 
placed; of late, we say in France a credensier for a butler, 
and it is to be found in that sense in Rabelais. Kredentz, 
in German, signifies a buffet.’ Ducange distinguishes the 
primary and secondary senses: ‘ Credentia, abacus, ta- 
bula seu mensa, in qua vasa ad convivia reponuntur, vel 
etiam mensula que vasa altaris continet.’ And even the 
Ceremoniale Romanum carries the matter no higher: — 
‘Credentiam appellant mensam, supra quam vasa argentea 
sive aurea ad convivium opportuna prparantur: et simi- 
liter in divinis, supra quam ad sacrificandum necessaria 
continentur.’ ”] 
Discovery of the Safety-Valve.—In The Times 
of Wednesday, February 6, it is stated that “the 
safety-valve of the steam-engine was discovered 
by a boy in his anxiety to get away from his work 
to play at marbles.” Where can I meet with the 
particulars of this incident ? L. S$. 
[The name of the lad was Humphrey Potter, a cock-boy, 
as he was called. The incident is recorded in Lardner’s 
work, The Steam-Engine Explained, edit. 1840, p.71.] 
Replies, 
THE DE WITS: TICHELAER. 
(270 Sato) 
Historians dispose of Tichelaer briefly as “an 
infamous barber,” or “un _ scélérat.” I have 
searched for something more precise of the wit- 
ness on whose sole, and not uncontradicted evi- 
dence, Cornelius De Wit was put to the torture 
and condemned, and I think a short account of 
pies taken from original sources, may be accept- 
able. 
Tichelaer’s services were amply paid for. The 
High Court of Holland declared him blameless, 
and decreed him costs in the prosecution of Cor- 
nelius De Wit; and afterwards, on his repre- 
sentation that some persons persisted in calling 
him hard names — een notorien vagabond ende en 
infaem persoon 't welch alsoo het suppliant niet staet 
te lijden — certified formally, on the 17th October, 
1672, that he had acted as an honourable man; 
still, as his patriotism was doubted, he published, 
not on his own account, but for those friends to 
whom his good name was dear, a statement en- 
titled : 
“ Waarchtig Verhael van ’t gepasseerde in en omtrent 
de zaken tusschen Wilhelm Tichelaer, Mr. Chirugen tot 
NOTES AND QUERIES. 
155 
Piershil en Mr. Cornelius De Wit Ruart van Putten, 
nopende de conspiratie tegens syn Hoogheijt den Heer 
Prins van Orangen. 4to. pp. 30., 1672.” 
On the back of the title-page is a caution that 
no copies are genuine but those which bear the 
author’s initials, W. T. 
He states, that he was born at Old Beyerland, 
of a good family, and was about thirty years old 
at the time of writing, well proportioned, above 
the middle height, a lover (liebhaber) of the re- 
formed religion, and a surgeon practising at 
Piershil. He also practised as a barber, for he 
says the lord (heer) of Piershil owed him five 
guldens, and the mayor ten guldens, for shaving 
(raseren), and because he asked for his money, 
they took away his office of surgeon to the poor 
of Piershil. Probably there was something more 
than simple dunning, as he was prosecuted and 
condemned, for insulting the lord and the mayor, 
to make honourable and profitable reparation,— 
honourable, in asking pardon on his knees of God 
and the prosecutors; profitable, in paying a fine of 
ten guldens to the poor of Piershil, and twenty- 
five to the Ruart van Putten, with all the costs. 
He says that to complain of this judgment he 
sought an interview with the Ruart, Cornelius De 
Wit, at his house at Dordrecht. He had been 
before the court of Piershil on charges of rape 
and fraud. In 1670, he had offered marriage to 
one Janneken Eeuwouts, but, being rejected, he 
urged his suit so offensively that she left the town 
and placed herself under the protection of a widow 
lady at Dordrecht. Tichelaer sent two men with 
a forged letter, to the effect that her aunt was 
dangerously ill, and wished her to return with 
them. She complied, and they put her on board 
a boat, and left her with Tichelaer, who used much 
violence, and was stopped only by a storm, which 
obliged him to land. For this outrage proceed- 
ings were taken, and still pending when he called 
upon the Ruart. 
The fraud was on his maidservant, Cornelia 
Pleunen, who sued him for her wages. He swore 
to a set-off to a greater amount, for bleedings and 
medicines, but was disbelieved, and ordered to 
pay debt and costs. He was also charged with 
having forged a certificate of his good morals, 
attendance at church, and skill as a surgeon; but 
I do not find that he was prosecuted for this. 
Possibly these antecedents were not known to 
those who arrested the Ruart on Tichelaer’s in- 
formation; but proof of all was tendered to the 
High Court, while it was deliberating on putting 
the Ruart to the torture. Tichelaer, in proof of 
the truth of his charges, offered to be tortured 
against the Ruart. Ido not know whether that 
was allowable by the practice of the court, but 
the wife and friends of the Ruart, in their memo- 
rial, object to it as unequal, because Tichelaer, 
being a surgeon, could fortify (verharden) himself 
