Replies.
BELLARMIN'S MONSTROUS PARADOX.
(Vol. iv., p. 45.)
The defence of Cardinal Bellarmin set up by your correspondent J. W. CT. is not new, and is exceedingly plausible at first sight. Allow me, however, to direct the attention of your readers to the following reply to a similar defence, which I take from the Sequel to Letters to M. Gondon, by Dr. Wordsworth, Canon of Westminster, pp. 10. 11.:
"I would first beg leave to observe that my three reviewers, in their zeal to speak for Cardinal Bellarmine, have not allowed him to speak for himself. They seem not to have remembered that this very passage was severely censured in his life-time, and that in the Review which he wrote of his own works, by way of explanation, he endeavoured to set up a defence for it, which is wholly at variance with their apologies for him. He says, 'When I affirmed that, if the Pope commanded a vice or forbad a virtue, the church would be bound to believe virtue to be evil and vice good, I was speaking concerning doubtful acts of virtue or vice; for if he ordered a manifest vice, or forbad a manifest virtue, it would be necessary to say with St. Peter, We must obey God rather than man.' Recognitio Librorum omnium Roberti Bellarmini ab ipso edita, Ingolstad, 1608, p. 19. 'Ubi diximus quod si Papa præciperet vitium aut prohiberet virtutem, Ecclesia teneretur credere virtutem esse malam et vitium esse bonum, locuti sumus de actibus dubiis virtutum aut vitiorum; nam si præciperet manifestum vitium aut prohiberet manifestam virtutem, dicendum esset cum Petro obedire oportet magis Deo quam hominibus.'
"This is his own defence; let it be received for what it is worth; it differs entirely from that which the reviewers make for him."
It would occupy too much of your valuable space to insert the whole of Dr. Wordsworth's observations, which, however, every one who is desirous of thoroughly investigating the subject, ought to read and consider.
TYRO.
Dublin.
THE GOOKINS OF KENT.
(Vol. i., pp. 385. 492.)
In the 1st volume of the New England Historical and Genealogical Register, pp. 345., &c., and in subsequent volumes, an interesting account, by J. W. Thornton, Esq., of Boston, may be found of the "Gookins of America," who are descendants of Sir Vincent Gookin, Knt., to whom your correspondents refer.
Mr. Thornton explains the omission of the descendants of Vincent and Daniel in the pedigree found in Berry's Kent, p. 113., and which is from the original visitation in Heralds' College, by the fact, that they probably went to the co. Cork, and Daniel from thence to Virginia. He cites undoubted proof that Daniel arrived in Virginia in November, 1621, and was one of twenty-six patentees to whom, in 1620, King James granted a patent of land in that colony, they having "undertaken to transport great multitudes of persons and cattle to Virginia." In 1626 this Daniel is described in a deed as of "Carygoline, in the county of Cork, within the kingdom of Ireland, Esquire." In February 1630 a deed is recorded, made by "Daniel Gookin, of Newport Newes, Virginia, the younger, Gentleman." Upon the records of the Court of James City, held Nov. 22, 1642, Captain John Gookin is mentioned. Mr. Thornton infers that the elder Daniel returned to Ireland, and that Daniel the younger, and Captain John Gookin, were his sons. During the religious troubles which arose in Virginia, Daniel, junior, and Mary his wife, left for New England, where they arrived on May 10, 1644, and where he became, as he had been, a person of considerable influence. He was promoted to the rank of Major-General in the colony, and died March 19, 1686-7, æt. 75. For further mention of him, see Carlyle's Letters and Speeches of Oliver Cromwell, Let. 143. and Note; Thurloe's State Papers, vol. iv. pp. 6. 440. 449.; vol. v. p. 509.; vol. vi. p. 362. He is spoken of, says Mr. Thornton, by an authority of the time, as a "Kentish soldier." Colonel Charles Gookin, whom Penn sent as a governor to his colony, is described by the latter in a letter, dated London, Sept. 28, 1708, as "of years and experience," "and of what they call a good family, his grandfather Sir Vincent Gookin having been an early great planter in Ireland, in King James First's and the first Charles's days." Governor Gookin assumed his duties in Pennsylvania in 1708, and was recalled in 1717. He was never married.
In a letter dated Philadelphia, Nov. 28, 1709, Governor Gookin writes to a grandson of Major-General Daniel Gookin, of New England: "I assure you that the account you gave me of that part of our family settled in America was extremely satisfactory;" and again, Nov. 22, 1710, to the same he says: "By a letter from Ireland I am informed two of our relatives are lately dead, viz. Robert Gookin, son of my uncle Robert, and Augustine Gookin, eldest son of my uncle Charles." He subscribes himself "cousin," &c.
From Mr. Thornton's account, and the remarks of your correspondent, I think I may venture to deduce the following table:—
| SIR VINCENT G., Kt., Lived at Highfield House, Bitton, Gloucester, which he purchased in 1627, d. 1637, and bu. at Bitton. —married JUDITH, dau. of xx. Wood, d. 1642, bu. at Bitton. | | DANIEL, who went to Virginia. —married xv. | | |||||||
| _____________________________________________________________ | __________________________ | |||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ||
| SAMUEL, | VINCENT, | FRANCES, | ROBERT. | CHARLES. | Maj.-G. | JOHN. | ||
| buried at Bitton, 1635. | publishes his pamphlet in 1634, left Bitton in 1646, living in 1655. —married Mary x. | baptized at Bitton, 1637. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | DANIEL, —married Mary xx. | | | | | | | | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |||||
| ROBERT, conveys Bitton in 1646. | ROBERT, d. 1710. | AUGUSTINE, eldest son, d. 1710. | DANIEL, SAMUEL, NATHANIEL, &c., some of whose descendants still live in New England. | |||||
EDWARD ARMSTRONG,
Recording Secretary of the
Historical Society of Pennsylvania.
CURIOUS MONUMENTAL INSCRIPTION.
(Vol. iv., p. 20.)
The inscription on the tombstone of Christ. Burraway, in Martham Church, copied by your correspondent E. S. T., singular as it is, and startling as the story attached to it seems, is not without a parallel, for we have a similar inscription on another mysterious mother of the name of Marulla in ancient times, which is given by Boxhornius in his Monumenta Illustrium Virorum et Elogia, Amst. 1638, fol. 112. He appears to have found it on a ruined sarcophagus at Rome, of which he has given representation, and in his Index thus refers to it:
"Hersilus cum Marulla, quæ ei mater, soror, et sponsa fuit."
Your correspondent has not mentioned the source of his explanation of the enigma: I presume it is traditional. The ancient inscription, it will be seen, solves it in the last two lines. The coincidence of these two inscriptions is not a little remarkable.
"SENICAPRI QVICVMQVE SVBIS SACRARIA FAVNI HÆC LEGE ROMANA VERBA NOTATA MANV. HERSILVS HIC IACEO MECVM MARVLLA QVIESCIT QVÆ SOROR ET GENITRIX, QVÆ MIHI SPONSA FVIT VERA NEGAS, FRONTEMQVE TRAHIS: ENIYGMATA SPHYNGOS CREDIS, SVNT PYTHIO VERA MAGIS TRIPODE. ME PATER E NATA GENVIT, MIHI IVNGITVR ILLA, SIC SOROR ET CONIVNCX, SIC FVIT ILLA PARENS."
In that entertaining volume La Sylva Curiosa de Julian de Medrano, Cavallero Navarro, first printed in 1583, and reprinted at Paris in 1608, a somewhat similar story is related, and the monumental inscription in French is given. Some of these stories must surely be apocryphal.[2]
"Passing through the Bourbonnese country I was told, that many years since a young gentleman there had, by some fortuitous accident, lain with his own mother, who became pregnant by him. That some time after, a favourable opportunity offering, he went to the wars, and was absent from his home some fourteen or fifteen years. At the expiration of that time returning home, he found his mother well stricken in years, who had a few days previous taken into her service a handsome lass, who had been brought up from infancy in the mountains of Auvergne. This young woman being of a naturally affectionate disposition, seemed much attached to her mistress, and relieved her of all her household cares, without knowing how nearly they were related; for she was her daughter, the fruit of the intercourse with her son, now master of the house; notwithstanding there was no one in those parts that knew it. The young man seeing her virtuous, graceful, and handsome, became enamored of her, in so much that, although his relations wished him to marry a rich wife, and all that his friends endeavoured to divert his passion, and counselled him to bestow his love elsewhere, it was all to no purpose, but, preferring her to all others he had seen, he married her. They lived together many years, had several children, and were buried in the same tomb, without either of them having ever known that they were father and daughter, brother and sister! until after a lapse of time, a shepherd from Auvergne coming into the Bourbonnese country, told the history to the inhabitants of the place where this doubly incestuous couple lived. When I passed through the country I was shown the spot where they dwelt, and the church where they were interred; and a copy of the epitaph which was placed upon their tomb was given me, which was as follows:
"'Cy gîst la fille, cy gîst le père,
Cy gîst la sœur, cy gîst le frère,
Cy gîst la femme et le mary,
Et si n'y a que deux corps ici.'"
[2]Stories of the same nature are told in the Heptameron of the Queen of Navarre, 3me Journée, Nouvelle 30me, where the scene is laid in Languedoc; and by Jeremy Taylor in his Ductor Dubitantium, B. i. C. iii. Sect. 3., who cites Comitolus as his authority: here the scene is laid in Venice. By others the scene has been placed in London, and also in Scotland. Horace Walpole's Postscript to his Tragedy will of course be known to most of your readers.
S. W. SINGER.
Mickleham, July 28. 1851.
THE LATE MR. WILLIAM HONE.
(Vol. iii., pp. 477. 508.; Vol. iv., p. 25.)
Having been acquainted with Mr. Hone, when a bookseller in the Strand (the firm, I think, was Hone and Bone), who published several catalogues of scarce works in poetry and the drama, I feel some interest in the question raised upon his religious principles. It was no doubt this avocation which gave to Mr. Hone that extensive circle of information, which enabled him to conduct those amusing publications, The Every-day Book, The Year Book, and The Table Book. In what way my schoolfellow Charles Lamb became acquainted with Mr. Hone I know not; but I frequently heard him speak of his misfortunes, and I was witness to his endeavours to relieve his difficulties, by requesting his acquaintance to visit the coffee-house which Mrs. Hone opened in Gracechurch Street. I may communicate hereafter some information upon the intimacy which existed between Charles Lamb and Mr. Hone; my present note being confined to some more extensive and interesting pieces of information relative to Mr. Hone's conversion from infidelity to the pure principles of Christianity, than are furnished by MR. WILLIAM BARTON. For this purpose I transcribe a letter of Mr. Hone's, descriptive of his conversion, the cause which led to it, and his earnest desire to impress upon the public mind his sincerity in the change which had taken place. A more touching picture of real conviction, and of a renewed state of mind, is not perhaps upon record, and cannot too extensively be made known. The letter appeared a few years ago in the Churchman's Penny Magazine, vol. ii. p. 154., with the initials "T. H."
"Dear Sir,
"Your kindness towards me, and the desire you express of becoming serviceable to me, require that I should be explicit as regards the circumstances under which we met, a little time ago, and have since conversed on. I think my statement should be in writing, and hence this letter.
"It has pleased the Almighty, to have dealings with me for several years, until, by His Holy Spirit, I have been brought from darkness to light; to know HIM, through faith in Christ; to rest in His love, as in the cleft of a rock, safe from the storms and afflictions of the world. To acquaint all who ever heard of my name, with this mighty change of heart, has long been my desire; and it seems to me, that I ought not to exercise my restored faculties without tendering their first fruits as an humble offering to the promotion of His cause, by testifying of His great mercy. It has been my frequent and earnest prayer to God to enable me to do this, as His doing; to seek nothing but honour to His holy name, and in the fear of Him, and Him only, without regard to the praise or dispraise of man—come from what quarter it may—to have my soul possessed in patience; to wait and be still, as a mere instrument in His hands, made willing in the day of His power, to do His work. If it be His work, He will bless it: I pray that it may be. Now, in this matter, and in this view of it, self-seeking and personal gratification are out of the question. The desire to engage in it is the most earnest wish of my heart; but my heart was submitted to God, and in submission to Him, it seeks to do His will, to do the will of my Saviour, as my Lord and my God, who has done all things for me, and will do all things well. I believe He has put the desire into my heart to do this homage to His sovereignty, as a subject of His kingdom. To do it has been the ruling purpose of my mind: as an instance of it, let me mention, that I have been frequently asked by autograph collectors to write something in their albums. For the last two years I have done nothing in this way, till the 3rd of last month, a lady having brought in her album the night before, I remembered it was my birth-day, and wrote the following lines:
"'The proudest heart that ever beat
Hath been subdued in me;
The wildest will that ever rose
To scorn Thy cause, and aid Thy foes,
Is quell'd, my God, by Thee.
"'Thy will, and not my will, be done;
My heart be ever Thine:
Confessing Thee, the mighty Word,
My Saviour Christ, my God, my Lord,
Thy Cross shall be my sign.'
"These lines, I thought, would be ill placed among contributions of different import: I therefore wrote them at the end of my Bible, and put some others, of a religious and kindly admonitory tendency, in the lady's album. Not even in the albums can I write without manifesting, that to please is less my object than to acknowledge the goodness of God. Well, then, my dear Sir, in this respect you may gather, in some degree, how it is with me, and how God has wrought upon my mind, and operates upon it to the end I speak of. When His hand struck me as for death, it was in a house of prayer, and whilst being carried from the place in men's arms as for dead, He lifted my heart to His throne of grace. During the loneliness of what seemed to be my dying bed, and the discomfort of my awful infirmity, and the ruin of my house, and family, and property, He was with me, and comforted me; and hitherto He has helped me, and I bless His holy name; my faith in Him is unshaken, and He keeps me constantly to himself; and despite of worldly affections, and nature's fear, I depend on Him and the workings of His providence, that He will never leave me nor forsake me. It has never entered my mind, even as a shadow, that I can do anything for Him; but what He enables me to do, I will do to His glory. In the dark seasons of the hidings of His face, I would wait on Him who waited for me while I resisted the drawings of His love; and when I sit in the light of His countenance, I would stand up and magnify His name before the people. And now, that He has wonderfully raised me up, after a long season of calamity, to the power of using my pen, I pray that He may direct it to tell of His mercy to me, and by what way He has brought me to acknowledge Him, 'the Lord our righteousness,' 'God blessed for ever,' at all times, and in all places, where there may be need of it. I trust I may never be ashamed to declare His Name; but readily exemplify, by His help, the courage and obedience of a Christian man, and, as a good soldier of Christ, fight the good fight with the sword of the Spirit.
"May God grant me grace to do His will, is my humble supplication. I am,
"Dear Sir,
"Yours most sincerely,
"WM. HONE."
The foregoing letter may perhaps be considered too pharasaical; but when is added to it the following note by Mr. Hone, relating the afflictions which had overtaken him, and well nigh overwhelmed him, it cannot appear surprising that when he sought comfort and relief from where alone they are to be found, his heart overflowed with thankfulness and praise.
I find the subjoined notice to his readers in Hone's Table Book, vol. ii. p. 737.:—
"Note.
"Under severe affliction I cannot make up this sheet as I wish. This day week my second son was brought home with his skull fractured. To-day intelligence has arrived to me of the death of my eldest son.
"The necessity I have been under of submitting recently to a surgical operation on myself, with a long summer of sickness to every member of my family, and accumulated troubles of earlier origin, and of another nature, have prevented me too often from satisfying the wishes of readers, and the claims of correspondents. I crave that they will be pleased to receive this as a general apology, in lieu of particular notices, and in the stead of promises to effect what I can no longer hope to accomplish, and forbear to attempt.
"WM. HONE.
"December 12. 1827."
J. M. G.
Worcester.
Mr. Hone, whose friendship I enjoyed for some years, became toward the latter part of his life a devout and humble Christian, and member of the dissenting church under the pastorate of the Rev. Thomas Binney, to which also several members of his family[3] belonged. Meeting him accidentally, about ten years since, in Great Bell Alley, London Wall, he led me to a small bookshop, kept I think by one of his daughters, and showed me part of a pamphlet he was then engaged upon, relative to his own religious life and experience, as I understood him. This, I believe, has never appeared, though he published in 1841 The early Life and Conversion of William Hone, of Ripley,[4] his father.
[3] "His wife, four daughters, and a son-in-law."
[4] London: T. Ward and Co. 8vo. pp. 48.
At p. 46. of this interesting narrative, he subjoins an extract from a new edition of Simpson's Plea for Religion, printed for Jackson and Walford, describing the happy change which had taken place in his own mind. To this account, written, as Mr. Hone says, "by a very dear friend who knows me intimately," he sets his affirmation; so that there can be no doubt of its accuracy.
A Life of William Hone, by one who could treat it philosophically, would be so deeply interesting, that I am surprised it has never been undertaken. "The history of my three days' trials in Guildhall," says he, "may be dug out from the journals of the period: the history of my mind and heart, my scepticism, my atheism, and God's final dealings with me, remains to be written. If my life be prolonged a few months, the work may appear in my lifetime." This was written June 3, 1841. Was any progress, and what, made in it?
Who so fit to "gather up the fragments," as his late pastor, Mr. Binney, the deeply thoughtful author of one of our best biographies extant, the Life of Sir T. F. Buxton?
DOUGLAS ALLPORT.
[The concluding words of our correspondent are calculated to mislead our readers. The Life of Sir T. F. Buxton is by his son; whereas Mr. Binney's is merely a sketch of his character, with that of other eminent individuals, published, we believe, in a small pamphlet.]
PLAIDS AND TARTANS.
(Vol. iv., pp. 7. 77.)
I can assure A LOWLANDER that the reviewer's story is quite true, it being gathered from Sir John Sinclair, who, in a letter to Mr. Pinkerton, dated in May, 1796, says:
"It is well known that the philibeg was invented by an Englishman in Lochabar, about sixty years ago, who naturally thought his workmen would be more active in that light petticoat than in the belted plaid; and that it was more decent to wear it than to have no clothing at all, which was the case with some of those employed by him in cutting down the woods in Lochabar."—See Pinkerton's Correspondence, vol. i. p. 404.
I never understood that there was any presumed antiquity about the philibeg or kilt. In the Encyclopædia Britannica it is described as a "modern substitute" for the lower part of the plaid.
Presuming, that I have settled this point, I will pass to the original Query of a JUROR, p. 7., still quoting Pinkerton:
"There is very little doubt but that the 'Tartan' passed from Flanders (whence all our articles came) to the Lowlands in the fifteenth century, and thence to the Highlands. It is never mentioned before the latter part of that century. It first occurs in the accompts of James III., 1474, and seems to have passed from England; for the 'rouge tartarin' in the statutes of the Order of the Bath in the time of Edward IV. (apud Upton de Re Milit.) is surely red tartan, or cloth with red stripes of various shades."
Again—
"As to the plaid, there is no reason to believe it more ancient than the philibeg. In the sixteenth century Fordun (lib. ii. cap. 9.) only mentions the Highland people as 'amictu deformis,' a term conveying the idea of a vague savage dress of skins.
"In the book of dress printed at Paris in 1562, the Highland chief is in the Irish dress wearing a mantle. The woman is dressed in sheep and deer skins. Lesley, in 1570, is the first who mentions the modern Highland dress, but represents the tartan as even then being exclusively confined to the use of people of rank.
"Buchanan, 1580, mentions the plaids, but says they are brown; even as late as 1715 the remote Highlanders were only clothed in a long coat buttoned down to the mid-leg; this information was derived from the minister of Mulmearn (father of the Professor Ferguson), who said 'that those Highlanders who joined the Pretender from the most remote parts, were not dressed in party-coloured tartans, and had neither plaid nor philibeg.'"
So much for the assumed antiquity of the Scottish national costume. More interesting matter on this subject will be found in Pinkerton's Correspondence, vol. i. pp. 404-410.
BLOWEN.
THE CAXTON MEMORIAL.
(Vol. iv., pp. 33. 69.)
Whatever be the fate of The Caxton Memorial, as suggested by myself, the proposition is clear of interested motives. I neither aspire to the honours of a patron, nor to the honours of editorship. To revive the memory of the man, and to illustrate the literature of the period, are my sole objects.
I have to thank MR. BOTFIELD for his polite information. I was aware of the meeting of the 9th of July 1849, but not aware that the proposal of a statue of Caxton had been entertained at so early a date. The proceedings of the meeting, as reported in The Times, were confined to the question of subscriptions: on the statue question there is not the slightest hint.
The advocacy of a fictitious statue by so eminent an antiquary as MR. BOTFIELD, and the assurance which he gives that this object has been under consideration for at least two years, make it the more imperative on me to state my objections to it; and this I shall do with reference to his own arguments.
A maxim of the illustrious sir William Jones very apposite to the point in dispute, has floated in my memory from early life. It is this: "The best monument that can be erected to a man of literary talents is a good edition of his works." Such a man was William Caxton; and on this principle I would proceed. He would then owe the extension of his fame to the admirable art which he so successfully practised.
In the opinion of MR. BOTFIELD, the expense attendant on my project would be "fatal to its success." Now, as the Shakespeare Society prints at the rate of four volumes for a subscription of 1l., the committee of the Caxton Memorial could surely produce one volume for 10s. 6d. I should not advise any attempt at splendour. Paper such as Caxton would have chosen, a clear type, and extreme accuracy of text, are more important objects. Competent editors would soon offer their services; and, proud to have their names associated with so desirable an enterprise, would perform their parts with correspondent care and ability. Besides, it is easier to collect subscriptions, when you can promise a substantial return.
To the other objections of MR. BOTFIELD, I shall reply more briefly. The biography of Caxton by Lewis is a very scarce book; and, in the opinion of Dibdin, "among the dullest of all biographical memoirs." As to that by MR. KNIGHT, only one fourth part of it relates to Caxton. In the Typographical antiquities we certainly have "copious extracts from his works;" but they are mixed up with much superfluity of disquisition. Whether such a memorial would be "hidden in a bookcase," must depend on the taste of the possessor. It would be accessible in the four quarters of the globe—which is as much as can be said of other books, and more than can be said of a statue.
I cannot admit the propriety of viewing Caxton as a mere printer. By continental writers he is more correctly appreciated. M. de la Serna calls him "homme de lettres, artiste renommé," etc.; and M. Suard observes, "dans presque tous les ouvrages imprimés par lui, il a inséré quelques lignes qui toujours attestent la pureté des intentions dont il était animé."
The advocates of a fictitious statue of Caxton have been apprized of my intention, and if certain estimable antiquaries should prove to be of the number, they must consider my opposition as the consequence of general principles.
It should be the object of antiquaries to illustrate "the history of former times"—as we read in a royal charter—not to substitute fiction for history. Now, it is admitted by MR. BOTFIELD that there is "no authentic portrait of Caxton." How then, he must allow me to ask, can it be assumed that the picture by Maclise is truthful? It may be much otherwise. Modern artists are no guides for antiquaries.
It is with statues as it is with medals. The first and most obvious use of them, as Addison remarks of the latter objects, is "the showing us the faces" of eminent persons. Even Horace Walpole, who has misled so many with regard to Caxton, has expressed himself very forcibly on the value of real portraits. If a statue fail in that particular, it is worthless; and should my own project find no favour with the public—a fountain by day—or, a light by night—or, an inscribed obelisk—or, even an inscribed tablet—would be far preferable as a monument.
If the dean of St. Paul's should resolve to place in other hands the sum which has been collected for this purpose, he may justly insist on the proper application of it; and as the Society of Arts may be induced to take charge of it, I must remind them of the circumstance under which the subscriptions were formerly obtained. It was assumed that a likeness of Caxton had been preserved. I transcribe from The Times:—
The meeting, [12 June, 1847] appeared to have been gratified with what they had seen and heard, and he [lord Morpeth] had only now to say to them, and to their fellow-countrymen in every part of the world, 'Subscribe.' (Applause.)
"A miniature portrait of Caxton, painted upon enamel by Mr. Bone, was handed to lord Morpeth, who stated that it had been copied from a likeness of Caxton, in an old illuminated MS."
His lordship was misinformed as to the authenticity of the portrait, it being copied from the Lambeth Ms.—but that circumstance does not affect the argument.
It is manifest, therefore, that a fictitious statue of Caxton, objectionable as it would be on other accounts, would also be very like a breach of faith with the original subscribers.
BOLTON CORNEY.
LADY FLORA HASTINGS' BEQUEST.
(Vol. iii., pp. 443. 522.; Vol. iv., p. 44.)
[MR. E. P. RICHARDS presents his compliments to the Editor of "NOTES AND QUERIES," and will thank him to insert the accompanying statement by the Marchioness of Bute, in respect to the lines said to have been written by her sister, Lady Flora Hastings, in the next number of his paper.
Cardiff, Aug. 5. 1851.]
A friend has copied and sent to me a passage in the paper named "NOTES AND QUERIES," of Saturday, July 19. 1851, No. 90. page 44.
The passage refers to my sister, Lady Flora Hastings, and a poem ascribed to her. If it were a matter solely of literary nature, I should not have interfered; considering the point in debate may not be interesting to a very extended circle of persons. But I feel it is a duty not to allow an undeserved imputation to rest on any one, especially on one styled a "Christian lady." Probably no person but myself can place the debated question beyond doubt. I do not know who the "Christian lady" or who ERZA may be; but the lines entitled "Lady Flora Hastings' Bequest" are not by Lady Flora Hastings. She solemnly bequeathed all her papers and manuscripts to me, and those verses are not amongst them; else they should have been included in the volume of her poems which I published. Moreover, Lady Flora Hastings never parted with her Bible till, by my brother's desire, I had warned her on the authority of the physicians that any hour might close her existence on earth. She was then unable to read it to herself. It was to me (not to my brother, as stated by CHARLOTTE ELIZABETH) that she confided the book and the message for our mother; and when she did so, she was too weak in body to have committed the simple words of the message to paper. I was with her night and day for many days before she gave the gift and message to my care, and she died in my arms. She could not have composed any verses, or written a word, or dictated a sentence, without my knowledge, for more than a week before she died.
S. F. C. BUTE AND DUMFRIES.
Largo House, Fife, July 30. 1851.