Some whose good opinion we most value, and who have spoken most warmly in favour of our plan, have proved the sincerity of their praise by suggestions of improvement in its detail, and hints for its further extension. They may feel assured that such hints and such suggestions shall not be lost sight of. For instance, one respected correspondent hints that as we have very properly adopted Dr. Maitland's suggestion with regard to Herbert's edition of Ame's Typographical Antiquities, namely, that of "offering a receptacle for illustrations, additions, and corrections," and invited "our readers to take advantage of our columns to carry out Dr. Maitland's suggestions," we should open our columns with equal readiness to the correction and illustration of more modern and more popular works. We entirely concur with him; but in reference to this subject there is a distinction which must be borne in mind. Our own literature, like that of every other country, consists of two classes of books. We have the books of pretenders to knowledge, the hasty, crude, imperfect, but often for the time attractive and popular volumes of the Ned Purdons of the day. These books have a use—such as it is—and thus answer their purpose; but it would be for the credit of our literature, and save a world of trouble, if they were forgotten as soon as they had done so. To illustrate such books, to add to their information or correct their blunders, would be useless and almost ridiculous. They should be left to die of mere powerlessness and exhaustion, or to wither under the wholesome influence of a just and manly criticism.
But there are books of another kind—books which our worthy bibliopoles designate as "standard works." These are the books of competent workmen—books which are the result of honest labour and research, and which from the moment of their publication assume a permanent station in our national literature. Even in such books there are many things incomplete, many things erroneous. But it is the interest of every man that such books should be rendered as complete as possible; and whatever tends to illustrate or correct works of that class will be sure of insertion in our columns.
We would point to Macaulay's England, and Hallam's Introduction to the Literary History of the 15th, 16th, and 17th Centuries, his Middle Ages, and his Constitutional History, and we may add, as illustrations of a different kind, The Annals of the Stage of our excellent friend Mr. Collier, and The Handbook of London of our valued contributor Mr. Peter Cunningham, as examples of the sort of publications to which we allude. Such were the books we had in our mind, when we spoke in our Prospectus of the "NOTES AND QUERIES" becoming, through the inter-communication of our literary friends, "a most useful supplement to works already in existence—a treasury towards enriching future editions of them."
Another correspondent—a bibliographical friend—suggests that, for various reasons, which bibliographers will appreciate, our Prospectus should have a place in the body of our work. We believe that many of our readers concur in a wish for its preservation, and it will therefore be found in the Number now before them.
One suggestion again urges us to look carefully to Foreign Literature, and another points out the propriety of our making our paper as British as possible, so that our topographical facts should, as far as practicable, be restricted to the illustration of British counties, and our biographical ones to such as should contribute towards a Biographia Brittanica.
All these, and many other expressions of sympathy and promises of support, poured in upon us within a few hours after our birth. No one of them shall be forgotten; and if for a time our pages seem to indicate that we have made a QUERY as to the adoption of any suggestion, let our kind contributors be assured that there is no hint which reaches us, whether at present practicable or not, that we do not seriously and thankfully "make a NOTE of."
BISHOP AYLMER'S LETTER, AND THE POEM ON THE ARMADA.
As I am in a condition to answer the inquiry of your "Hearty Well-wisher," on p. 12 of your last Number of "NOTES AND QUERIES," I proceed to give him the information he asks. I shall be happy if what follows is of any use to your correspondent, taking it for granted that he is as zealous for your success as his signature indicates.
The "foolish rhyme," to which the attention of the Bishop of London had been directed by Lord Burghley, has the subsequent doggrel title:—