Qad §, Neo26., Junx 28. *56.) 
NOTES AND QUERIES. 517 
Samuel Eaton was a notable man in his day, 
and appeared not seldom before the public as an 
author. His character and writings appear to be 
little known, even to those who have professed to 
write the history of Independency in England and 
its literature. “His name is not mentioned in 
Hanbury’s three bulky volumes of Historical Me- 
morials relating to the Independents, If Mr. 
Taynor, or any of your correspondents, can fur- 
nish me with references to manuscript or printed 
books, illustrative of Eaton's life and writings, 
they will be gratefully received as contributions 
to a proposed history of Dukinfield, in which vil- 
lage Eaton ministered under the patronage of the 
parliamentary colonel of that name, and where 
he founded the first Independent Church in the 
county, if not in the north of England. If Mr. 
A. Taynor finds any difficulty in meeting with 
Aston’s book, I shall be happy to assist him in 
obtaining it. R. Brook Aspianp. 
Dukinfield, Cheshire, 
GoRTON’s “ BIOGRAPHICAL DICTIONARY,” 
(1 S, xi. 430.) 
Thave just seen the communication headed as 
above from Hanrvarprensis of Cambridge, New 
England, and as no notice appears to have been 
taken in “N. & Q.” of an error the writer has 
fallen into, I will venture to set him right. 
Harvarprensis has confounded two brothers 
whose Christian names present the same initials, a 
mistake by no means improbable even in their 
native country. 
Hugh James Rose was of Trin. Coll., Cambridge, 
B.A, 1817, fourteenth Wrangler, senior medallist, 
and senior prizeman, Fellow of his College. 
Henry John Rose was of St. John’s College, 
Cambridge, B.A. 1821, fifteenth Wrangler, Fellow 
of his College, and Hulsean Lecturer, 1833. 
By whom the Biographical Dictionary was ori- 
ginally projected I know not; but it was first un- 
dertaken by the elder Rose, Hugh James, and on 
his lamented death at a comparatively early age, 
after some years of declining health, it was carried 
on by the younger and surviving brother, Henry 
John. I hope this explanation will convince 
Harvarprensis that Rose’s Biographical Dic- 
tionary has not been published under false colours, 
4 strong suspicion of which is implied by the tone 
of his veiniiv ks, 
While upon this subject I would suggest to 
Tiarvarprensis to reflect on the utter imprac- 
ticability of the compilers of such a work study- 
ing the wishes and predilections of all those who 
would be likely to consult it, The volumes of a 
Biographical Dictionary which would satisfy every 
one might suflice to bridge the Atlantic; and who 
would purchase such a production? To say no- 
thing as to the possibility of its accomplishment. 
An amount of twelve yolumes merely will produce 
a considerable effect upon the sale of any pub- 
lication, and the absolute necessity of compression 
will account for many defects discoverable in, in- 
deed inseparable from, such a performance as a 
biographical dictionary for familiar use. <A penfect 
collection of the kind is hopeless: wherefore, re- 
collecting the difficulty of the undertaking, and 
the irreconcileable differences of opinion as to the 
names to be introduced, we should rather be 
grateful for those labours which have given us an 
useful, though incomplete, book of reference, than 
cavil because the unavoidable omissions do nat ac- 
cord with our own estimate of what the selections 
ought to have been. Anruur Hussey, 
Rottingdean. 
HENGIST AND HORSA, 
(2° §, i. 439.) 
A very singular illustration of the utility of 
“N. & Q.” has just oceurred. In a note, headed 
“ Hengist and Horsa,” signed with the honoured 
initials of J. M. K., I find these words : 
“There is no reason to believe the Frisian heroes 
Hengist and Horsa to be a bit more genuine than Cad- 
mus or Romulus. The banner and arms of Kent area 
mere fiction, derived at a very late period from the 
names themselves.” 
Now, it happened to me some years ago, or, 
according to the pictorial chronology of our good 
old fairy historians, “once upon a time,” to be 
one of a learned literary dinner party. To the 
young practitioner, very few operations of the 
mind are more painful. There is generally on 
such oceasions the one man—greatest of the great. 
The “ piéce de résistance” served up, on that day, 
was a very promontory of flesh, a moving moun- 
tain (after the manner of the more celebrated 
type in Dante) of gross intellectual vigour, I do 
not say “ He was the terror of his neighbourhaad ;” 
but the man was the awe, the law, and the autho- 
rity, the approving good, and inexorable authority 
of his circle. On the day we met, he was on duty 
as Dr. Johnson. The shadow of the great name 
loomed in the mental awe of the unseen presence 
felt by every person in the room. The head, and 
its contents, and the external ornament the flow- 
ing wig—the flopping brown coat—luminous but- 
ton holes—and now top-coat buttons— indeed 
were wanting; but then we had the introductory 
muttering before speech, the same vibratory mo- 
tion of the body, the same dogmatic noisy pouring 
forth of soul. The conversation fell or was led 
into the Anglo-Saxon period. Hengist and Horsa 
were the theme. From whence I precisely drew 
my authority, it would be difficult to say; but I 
