1807.) 
rounding vapour. By a procefs the 
reverfe of the above, Mr. W. imagines, 
that excefs of eleétricity in the atmo- 
ighere, in feafons of unofual drought, 
might be drawn off to the earth, fo as to 
precipitate the aqueous vapours, and 
occafion rain. Thunder ftorms he alfo 
hopes to prevent, or render harmlels by 
there machines, when furnifhed with 
conduétors to the earth, fer ufe on fuch 
eccafions. I fhall not trouble your rea- 
ders further with thefe details, but con- 
elude for the prefent, and am, 
Wefiminjier, Your's, &c. 
Tth March, 1807. J. Farry. 
eee 
Lo the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR 
i your valuable Mifcellany of Fe- 
bruary latt, p. 25, a correfpondent, 
‘* Inquifitor,” afks “ what prince or po- 
tentate firft addreffed himfelf to his fub- 
jects in the plural number, as we always 
fee in Proclamations.” 
With refpect to this point, Bifhop 
Nicolfon, in his Hift. Lib. p. 146, fays, on 
the authority of Coke’s Inftit. that, “¢ the 
firft of our kings, who wrote in the plural 
number, was King John ; his predeceflors 
writing in the fingular. They ufed ego 
in their grants: and this king, with thote 
that followed him nos.” 
{ beg leave to obferve, that upon in- 
veltigation, I find this opinion to be in- 
correct: for in an edi¢t of William the 
Congueror (printed in vol. 1, of Rapin’s 
fift.) the plural number is ufed, through- 
out-jiatuimus,. volumus, &c. | But in 
another charter of the fame king, in- 
ferted in the Formulare’ Angl. p. 36, the 
fingular is ufed.. All the charters of 
Hen. I. and If. without exception, ap- 
pear to be addreffed in the fingular num- 
ber.—See Formulare Angl. p. 37, No. 64, 
aud. Monaft. Angi. vol. i, 782— 
“<. Sciatis me dediffe.” King Stephen, 
alfo, in every inflance ufes the fingular. 
See Monaft. Angl. vol. i, p. 779, and 
Form. Angl. p. 40, No. 68. On the 
other hand, Richard 1. feems invariably 
to fpeak im the plural— Seciatis nos con- 
cefji/je’.—See Form. Angl, p.51; Rymer, 
yol, i, p. 65 and 80; Monatt. Angl. 
vol. i, p. 782. With regard to the 
practice of King John, and that of the 
fovereigns who to!lowed him, the obfer- 
vation of Coke and Nicolfon is confirmed 
by the example of feveral charters in- 
ferted in the works to which I have 
above referred. 
According to this ftatement, therefore, 
-$ feems that William the Conqueror, 
Plural Number in Royal Grants, Xc. 
3s 
ufed fometimes the fingular and fome- 
times the plural number, in his charters; 
that Henry I. and II, and Stephen, in- 
variably addreffed themfelves m the 
fingular; and that from the commence- 
ment of the reign of Richard I. the 
cuftom of fpeaking in the plural number 
has been continued without variation, 
to the prefent time. The forms whicls 
obtained in France, on fimilar occafions, 
are exhibited by Mabillon, De Re Di- 
plomat. Your obedient fervant, 
Glafiampton, W. M. Mosererzr, 
March 12, 1807. 
a 
Lo the Editor of the Monthly Magazine, 
sik, 
'N your number for March, (p. 137) I 
ain accufed of mifreprefentation. My 
whole apology fthall be a fimple fiate- 
ment of plain facts. 
The blue cover of laft November 
Magazine, (vol. xxii. p. $49,) announces 
a “* Defence of Earl Stanhope’s Syftem 
of tuning Piano-Fortes.” But in the 
effay itfelf the author propofes a fourth 
way of dividing the o¢tave; in oppofition 
to the great principle of Earl Stanhope, 
which is to make the key of C, as perfeét 
as poffible. This fourth fyftem rejetis 
the biequal third of E—G fharp, by 
making C—E one femibiequal third, 
and the E—G iharp another; leaving 
the A flat to C exactly as in the Stan- 
hope fyffem: and hence the beauty of 
C—H is entirely deftroyed, 
To find out, or to invent, are to me 
terms of fimilar import, and whether the 
four propofitions 1 quoted (or mifrepre- 
fented) contain real information, I thall, 
after fairly ftating the fenfes in which I 
underftand them, leave te the difcern- 
ment of impartial readers, ; 
I. Harl Stankope’s Syfiem is clear and 
perfpicuous. It is fo doubtlefs to thofe 
who are both mathematicians and mu- 
ficians ; but’ how many perfons unite 
thefe two charatters, is a queftion to 
which I can give no anfwer. 
If. Liisa new difcovery, Tierce Wolves 
excepted. Kurnberger, like Earl Stan- 
hope, makes his C—li-a perfeét third, 
How far the ditonic third A flat C of 
Kirnberger (£4) and lus flatter enhar- 
monic fourth s—A fiat, (542) differ from 
the two biequal thirds of Karl Stanhope; 
are queftions I referve for future invefti- 
gation. I can, however, affure the pub- 
lie, that I never faw the four tierce wolyes 
in their refpective columns, before [ 
opened Earl Stanhope’s work; and [I 
de 
- 
