The reviewer in G. M. p. 244, would read
“Hos rapiet numeros, non homo sed mulus aut bos,”
comparing (p. 170) “Asinus, mulus velut, et bos.” But why alter what Skelton intended for a pentameter? In what follows, the reviewer says that “‘hanc’ should be placed in hooks [hanc], as we think it is only a misprint for ‘aut’.” Would not “aut” stand oddly at the end of a sentence?
P. 170.
“Et cines socios.”
“Should it not be ‘cives’?” says the reviewer in G. M. p. 244. No,—as the preceding “Carpens vitales auras” shews.
P. 218.
“Qui caterisatis categorias cacodæmoniorum.”
“Mr. Dyce,” says the reviewer in G. M. p. 244, “conjectures catarrhizatis, which we do not exactly understand. We should read ‘cæteris datis;’” and he compares “enduced a secte” at p. 216, and two other similar passages. I still think that “caterisatis” is probably the old spelling of “catarrhizatis.”