342 Mr. Lofft, on the Mufic and Words of Handel. [Mayt, 
of eftimating the extent of property 
throughout the county by the number 
of proprietors manors, we fhould have 
named Lady Lucas next after the Duke 
of Bedford, her Ladyihip having the 
principal manors of nine parifhes. It is 
evident that in eftimating the proportions 
of ancient property by the Domefday 
Survey, where the number . of _hides 
attached to each manor is {fpecified, 
this method muft be fatisfactory and 
conclufive; and had we thought it fo 
with refpect to the prefent flate of pro- 
perty, we fhould have made more ule of 
if. 
With refpeét to the refidence of Sir 
Samuel Luke, Tam really at fome lois to 
difcover what Mr. Belfham means to tind 
fault with. He fays “ we are informed 
(by Mr. L. p. 3.) that, Sir Samuel Luke’s 
houfe was either Hawnes or Wood-end. 
But this was never before fuppofed to 
admit of a doubt. Sir Samuel Luke’s 
houfe was unqueftionably ftuated at 
Wood-end in the parifli of Cople.” 
There certainly is no doubt, as we have 
afferted in p. 71. that Wood-end was the 
feat of the Luke family; however, though 
neither Mr. Belfham nor we doubt this, 
yet in the Magna Britannia of 1720, 
Wood-end near ‘loddington (in the parifh 
of Harlington) is faid to have been the 
feat of Sir Samuel Luke, and this error 
has been copied into two or three fubfe- 
quent works. The note in p. 3. is per- 
feétly correct: we could not affirm that 
Wood-end was the feat of Sir Samuel 
Luke, which Sir Lewis Dyve enjoyed in 
1643; becaufe Sir Samuel had at that 
time two houfes, namely, Hawnes (now 
the feat of Lord Carteret) and Wood-end, 
and I have reafon to believe that he re- 
fided chiefly at Hawnes ; the entries of 
births and burials of the Luke family 
from the year 1626 to 1654 having been 
principally made in the regifter of that 
parith; Woed-end was certainly their 
ancient refidence, they did not poflefs 
Hawnes more than 50 years. Here we 
are again charged with fuppofing inftead 
of afcertaining: Mr. Belfham, I dare fay 
does not want to be informed, that if 
even the title-deeds of every manor ‘were 
open to our infpettion, in many inftan- 
ces they do not go beyond the middle of 
the feventeenth century, in fome not be- 
yond the beginning of the laft: were 
the rolls of Chancery, which contain the 
grants and alienations of manors for 
the three laft centuries, as open to our 
refearches as thofe of a prior date pre~ 
ferved in the Tower, we fhould have 
had lefs difficulty in afcertaining this 
and feveral other points. The fum 
of what we could clearly afcertain with 
refpect to Hawnes, was, that Sir Roger 
Newdigate poffefied it fo late as 1603; 
Sir Samuel Luke ‘at leait from 1626 
to 1654; and that Lord Carteret pur- 
chafed it of Sir Humphry Wynch in 
1667: your readers will judge therefore 
whether our conjetture, that the Lukes 
purchafed of the Newdigates and Sir 
Humpbrey Wynch of the Lukes, was 
very improbable. 
Mr, Belfham fays, that “ the only fon 
of the Duke of Kent was not known by 
the title of Earl of Harold but fimply 
Lord Harold, his father being Duke 
Marquis and Earl of Kent and Baron of 
Harold.” . I ftill maintain on the con- 
trary, that we were perfeétly correét in 
calling him Earl of Harold, and refer Mr. 
B. for our authority to thé Herald’s books 
in the College of Arms, were he wil} find 
that the father was in 1706 created 
Vifcount Goodrich, Earl of Harold and 
Marquis of Kent: the fon bore the title 
of Earl of Harold; his eldeft fon is de- 
feribed as Earl of Harold on his monu 
ment i Flitton Church, was always f> 
defcribed in writing, but in converfation 
was no doubt, according to common 
ufage, called unceremonioully Lord Ha- 
rold. 
Your’s, &c. 
April 11, 1807. D. Lysons, 
Hempfied-Court, near Gloucefter. 
a 
Lo the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, : 
Ki my earlieft remembrance I 
have been, though no performer, 
an enthufiaftic lover of mufic, which I 
regard as one of the purett fources of 
confolation in the miferies of life, and 
one of the fublimeft heightners of its 
happinefs, as the univerfal language of 
the elevated and moitbenign affeétions. 
With thefe fentiments [I fhould be par- 
ticularly happy had I much information 
to offer on the fubjeét of your correfpon- 
dent’s* interefting and. refpectable en- 
quiry concerning the authors who com- 
pofed the words of the mufic of Handel, 
that great and venerable name, who ap- 
plied this art with an energy the moft 
fublime, a fcience the moft admirable, fer- 
tility and extent of invention which feems 
® P25, 
more 
