"M. Fræhn has discovered in an Arabian author, Ibn-abi-Yakoub-el-Nedim, who wrote in 987, a passage stating that at that period the Russians already possessed the art of writing. This author has even preserved a specimen of Russian writing of the tenth century, which, he says, he received from an ambassador sent to Russia by one of the Princes of the Caucasus. These characters do not resemble the Greek alphabet, or the runes of the Scandinavian races. It would appear, therefore, that the first germ of civilisation in Russia preceded the establishment of Rurik and the Varangi in this country, instead of having been introduced by them. A circumstance of peculiar interest is, that these ancient Russian letters, so different from any other alphabet, have the greatest analogy with those inscriptions, yet unexplained, sculptured on the rocks of the desert between Suez and Mount Sinai, and noticed there in the sixth century of our æra. The analogy existing between these inscriptions placed on the confines of Africa and Asia, and others found in Siberia, had already been demonstrated by Tychsen. M. Fræhn is about to publish this interesting discovery."

Query, what ground is there for the above assertions, and what has been since published in support of such a statement?

μ.

BOILING TO DEATH AS A PUNISHMENT.
(Vol. ii., p. 519.)

L. H. K. gives an extract from Howe's Chronicle, detailing the punishment of one Richard Rose (as also of another person) in the above manner for the crime of poisoning, and inquires if this was a peculiar mode of punishing of cooks. No reply to this having yet appeared, and the subject being only incidentally mentioned at Vol. iii., p. 153., I venture to submit to you the following Notes I have made upon it.

The crime of poisoning was always considered as most detestable, "because it can, of all others, be the least prevented either by manhood or forethought." Nevertheless, prior to the statute of 22 Hen. VIII. c. 9. there was no peculiarity in the mode of punishment. The occurrence to which Howe refers, appears to have excited considerable attention, probably on account of the supposition that the life of the bishop was aimed at; so much so, that the extraordinary step was taken of passing an Act of Parliament, retrospective in its enactments as against the culprit (who is variously described as Rose, Roose, otherwise Cooke, and Rouse), prescribing the mode of punishment as above, and declaring the crime of poisoning to be treason for the future. The occurrence is thus related in a foot-note to Rapin, 2nd edit. vol. i. p. 792.:—

"During this Session of Parliament [1531] one Richard Rouse, a cook, on the 16th February poisoned some soop in the Bishop of Rochester's kitchen, with which seventeen persons were mortally infected; and one of the gentlemen died of it, and some poor people that were charitably fed with the remainder were also infected, one woman dying. The person was apprehended; and by Act of Parliament poisoning was declared treason, and Rouse was attainted and sentenced to be boiled to death, which was to be the punishment of poisoning for all times to come. The sentence was executed in Smithfield soon after."

This horrible punishment did not remain on the Statute Books for any very lengthened period, the above statute of Henry being repealed by statutes 1 Edw. VI. c. 12., and 1 Mary, stat. I. c. 1., by which all new treasons were abolished, since which the punishment has been the same as in other cases of murder. If within the reach of any correspondent, an extract from the statute of Henry would be interesting.

J. B. COLMAN.

Eye, Dec. 16. 1851.