of my father's family in the last century. The largest and best is one of which I have had occasion to speak in these pages, and therefore I will now only say that it is the portrait of a clergyman, in wig, gown, bands, and chaplain's scarf, and that it is the work of John Russell, R. A., and a very brilliant example of that once popular artist and pupil of Francis Cotes (1725-1770). Russell was born in 1744, and died in 1806, and the picture in my possession (undated) was probably drawn between 1780 and 1790. Russell obtained his R. A.ship in 1788, the year in which he made his crayon portrait of R. E. Sheridan, ætat. 37, now in the National Portrait Gallery. I have seen in the Louvre an exquisite specimen of Russell's crayons, representing, life size, a bright little girl, looking to the spectator and holding up cherries with her right hand, while she carries a basket of cherries with her left hand. In the Surrey Art Loan Exhibition, held at Guildford (Russell's birthplace), June, 1884, the Large or Western Hall, Room No. 2, was mainly devoted to an exhibition of the "Works by John Russell, R.A." It is said that he exhibited in London 337 pictures. The one in my keeping has been in the possession of the family from the time when it was painted, and has never been exhibited. Its dimensions are

224 in. by 17 in., and of course it is under glass, as are the ten other crayon portraits that now hang in my hall.

Seven of these (19 in. by 15 in.) are by "Saunders," dated 1750. Who Saunders was I do not know. He is said to have been residing at Stourbridge, Worcestershire, when these portraits were painted, and the father, mother, two sons, and three daughters whom the seven pictures represent were living within five miles of Stourbridge. The portraits are extremely good and pleasing, and as fresh as though they had just come from the painter. Two other crayon portraits of old ladies (18 in. by 13 in.) may possibly be by Saunders, but are unsigned and have no date. The last crayon portrait (also 18 in. by 13 in.) has no name or date, and appears to be by a different artist and of an earlier period, as it represents a clergyman in wig, gown, and bands, who | died early in 1730. These eleven portraits of members of one family afford a proof that in the last century no little popularity was given to crayons, pastels, or pastils. CUTHBERT BEDE.

DOGS MENTIONED BY SIR WALTER SCOTT.

(See 'Names of Dogs,' 7th S. vi. 144, 269, 374.)

edition.

As I do not suppose my list is complete, your correspondents can supply any omissions they may notice.

Maida, stag-hound, the prototype of Bevis in 'Woodstock'; Bran, Nimrod, stag-hounds; Hamlet, Douglas, Percy, greyhounds; Camp, bullterrier; Spicey, terrier; Finette, setter.-Sir Walter's own dogs.

Pandour.-Mr. Skene's dog, mentioned with Camp in Marmion,' introduction to canto iv. Yarrow, sheep-dog.—'Marmion,' same reference as the last.

Stumah (i. e., Faithful); Lufra.-Lady of the Lake.'

Ban, Buscar, deer-hounds; Bran, greyhound.Waverley, Whistler, greyhound.

Wasp, terrier; Mustard and Pepper, terriers; Plato, spaniel; Yarrow, sheep-dog.-' Guy Mannering Bingo, mongrel."

Juno, setter. Antiquary.'
Killbuck. Black Dwarf.'

Elphin, spaniel ("Ye ken our dog's name, and it's no a common ane").- Old Mortality.' Lucy, spaniel.-' Rob Roy.'

Dustiefoot.-' Heart of Midlothian.' Talbot, Teviot, deer-hounds.-'Bride of Lammermoor.'

Balder, wolf-dog; Fangs, "a sort of lurcher, half mastiff, half greyhound."- Ivanhoe.' Wolf, stag-greyhound. - Abbot.'

Bash, Battie, greyhounds; Belzie, bulldog.Fortunes of Nigel.'

Talbot, Beaumont, boar-hounds. - 'Quentin Durward.'

Neptune; Thetis.-Redgauntlet.'
Thryme, wolf-dog.-"Betrothed.'
Roswal, stag-greyhound.-'Talisman.'
Bevis, wolf-dog.—'Woodstock.'

Charlot, spaniel.-'Fair Maid of Perth.'
Wolf-fanger, hound.-'Anne of Geierstein.'

of Sir Walter's elder daughter Sophia, Mrs. J. G. Lockhart, with a very large dog standing beside her, but which dog this is I do not precisely know. Lockhart says ('Life of Scott,' same edition as above, vol. v. p. 349) of Scott's friend John Ballantyne "Rigdum Funnidos," as Scott used to call him, after a character in Henry Carey's burlesque play-that "his horses were all called after heroes in Scott's poems or novels; and at this time he usually rode up to his auction on a tall, milkwhite hunter, yclept Old Mortality, attended by a leash or two of greyhounds-Die Vernon, Jenny Dennison, and so forth, by name." JONATHAN BOUCHIER.

Ropley, Alresford.

PROTESTANT AND PAPIST, 1716-1731.

(Concluded from p. 423.)

One of the most notable points in favour of the Catholics, in interpreting the disinheriting statute of 1700, was the doctrine that the burden of showing that the declaration required by the Act had not been made rested with the Protestant plaintiff. A Bill to remedy this was rejected in 1706. It was even held* that, as this was a penal statute, and the law would never compel a party to incriminate himself, the defendant could not be asked to discover to the plaintiff whether he, or even the testator under whom he claimed, was a Papist or not. In carefully numbering and preserving all his cousins' letters Mr. Beresford seems to have had a wary eye on such a plea as this, and to meet it he would no doubt have brought out with a flourish that confiding postscript in which Mdlle. Chaumont exhorted her aunt to reflect on the advantage of dying a member of the Catholic Church.

But assuming the law was strong enough to oust Mrs. Skipwith and the Chaumonts, it seems far from certain that it would have given its decree in favour of the usurping Beresford. The willt seems to have given the property to Mrs. Skipwith for life, then to the three Chaumonts, with a gift over of their shares (only in the event of their dying without issue) in favour of Beresford. No doubt Mrs. Skipwith was disabled, and the Chaumonts were disabled, for they were all Papists; but, as to the Chaumonts' issue, in whose favour a gift was here implied by law, they were unborn. Who, then, could say they were Papists, or would be Papists? This was just the kind of difficulty the judges loved to get hold of and fling in the face of the enterprising litigant. Indeed, it was in one case actually held that in order "to preserve the con

* Smith v. Read (12 Geo. II.), 1 Atk., 526.

† I judge of the contents only from the correspondence. I cannot find the original at Somerset House. Perhaps some East Anglian reader may have the curiosity to search for it at Lincoln.

tingent remainder" to the unborn sons of a Papist, the Protestant next in remainder after them must be kept out of the estate till the Papist died without Protestant issue, and in the mean time the Protestant heirs-at-law of the person creating the settlement were entitled to the rents. According to this doctrine the real person entitled would be not Edward Beresford, but the nearest Protestant heir of Mrs. Ayscough. At this point the shadow of one Mr. Fuller Skipwith, mentioned once in the correspondence, looms vaguely in the background. To judge by his name, he would evidently be entitled as heir in priority to Beresford; and as it appears he was not in correspondence with his relations at Namur, it may be supposed he would not be disqualified as a Papist. At all events, we may imagine it would have been uphill work to prove he was such if he chose to deny it.

On the whole, the prospect of litigation could not have been inviting, and Beresford must have comforted himself mightily with the idea of quietly buying up for a tenth of its value the interest of the only persons who were likely to come forward against him. Alas! as his legal friend no doubt was not slow to point out, here another difficulty arose. According to the Act, the Papists could take nothing; and it must, therefore, naturally follow that they had nothing they could convey to any one else. A plaintiff in ejectment was actually successful in ousting an unfortunate Protestant who had laid out his money on the security of a Papist's mortgage. Here, if the dénoment was to be a happy one, and our Protestant was to be "made secure," some legal miracle was urgently needed. Was there no deus ex machina capable of performing it? Beresford hints in his letter to his adviser that his cousins might "sue out a fine and recovery"-alluding, with some confusion, pardonable in one not professionally versed in such matters, to those two time-honoured legal conjuring tricks, which, after being performed for some four or five centuries with undiminished applause, only received their quietus from the legislature in 1834. By means of a "fine," a farce in one act, so to speak, a feat most marvellous in legal eyes was accomplished; man and wife was (or were ?) constituted for the nonce two separate persons, and a married woman was thus privileged to consent to the sale of her lands by her husband, he being thus enabled to pocket the proceeds without accounting to her heirs. A "recovery" was a more mysterious proceeding, and required the complicity of at least a third party, who as "a man of straw" could be safely called upon to take the risk of an action at the hands of indefinite generations of

"It contains 222 chapters......and is said, in the front, to be translated from the Italian by an Arragonese Moslem named Mostafa de Aranda. There is a preface prefixed to it, wherein the discoverer of the original MS., who was a Christian monk, called Fra Marina, tells us that having accidentally met with a writing of Irenæus (among others), wherein he speaks against S. Paul, alleging for his authority the Gospel of S. Barnabas, he became exceedingly desirous to find this Gospel."

The story goes on to tell us how he discovered a copy in the library of Pope Sixtus V., and thereby (having stolen it in order that he might study it more at leisure!) became a convert to Mohammedanism. Whether this was an Arabic MS. or Italian is not clear; but assuming, as seems more probable, if, indeed, the whole story is not pure fiction, that it was the latter, it may have been the same MS. which was given in 1713 to Prince Eugene of Savoy by J. F. Cramer of the Hague.* Whatever truth there may be in the rest of the story, one thing at least is beyond question, and that is that Fra Marina found nothing in Irenæus to set him on the search for this "Gospel." Nothing seems to be really known as to the date of its composition (I am now alluding, of course, to the original document, which was certainly in existence long before the time of Mohammed, and not to the later version, in which the prophecies relating to him were interpolated); but even supposing it to have been in existence in the time of Irenæus, which is by no means probable, there is certainly not a word in his extant writings which can by any ingenuity be interpreted as alluding to it. But as I have already hinted, the whole story of Fra Marina and his discovery has all the appearance of pure fiction, and may, therefore, be dismissed without further notice. The Italian MS. is supposed to have been written about the year 1450, but of the probable date of the Arabic from which it is translated I can find no mention. Nor can I find any further account of the Spanish beyond what Sale tells us, except that, about fifty years later, Dr. White, in his Bampton Lectures' for 1784, mentions" a complete copy," together with an English translation of "a considerable part" of it, which was lent him by his friend Dr. Monkhouse, of Queen's

*See 'Menagiana,' iv, 321, ed. 1716.

A SPECIMEN OF GALLICIZED ENGLISH.-In 'N. & Q.,' 7th S. vi. 405, I have given 'A Specimen of Pure English,' largely copied from Schele de Vere. I now present the contrast to it, also mainly derived from the same author :

"To defend his conquest, the Norman gained possession of the country; and, master of the soil, erected fortresses and castles, and attempted to introduce novel comets, and even the ocean, attest how much was imterms. The universe and the seasons, the planets and pressed with the seal of the conqueror. Hills became mountains, and dales valleys, streams were called rivers, and woods were forests. The deer, the ox, the calf, the swine, the sheep appeared on the sumptuous table of the noble as venison, beef, veal, pork, and mutton. Salmon, sturgeon, lamprey, and bream became notable as deliand herons, quails and pigeons, stallions and hackneys cacies; serpents and lizards, squirrels and conies, falcons were novel names in the list of the contents of the animal kingdom; whilst the old worts became herbs or vegetables, and included onion and borage, lettuce and sage; together with such flowers as the primrose and violet, of rank and dignity appeared in duke and marquis, count peony and gentian, columbine and centaury. New titles and viscount, baron and baronet, equire and master. The mayor presided at the council above the Saxon alderman. The list of the officers of the government comprised chancellor and peer, chamberlain and ambassador, title, but the state and the court became French; the general and admiral. The king indeed retained his administration was carried on according to the constitution; treaties were concluded by ministers and submitted for approval to the sovereign; the privy council was consulted on the affairs of the empire, and loyal subbers debated on matters of grave importance, on peace or jects sent representatives to parliament. There the memwar; ordered the army and navy, disposed of the national treasury, contracted debts, and had their sessions and their parties. At brilliant feasts and splendid tournaments the flower of chivalry was assembled; heraldry abounded with its foreign terms, emblazoning the shield with pale and fess, chevron and saltire, disposed upon or or argent, gules, azure, vert, sable, or ermine, and covering it with a miscellaneous and marvellous array of heraldic charges, from the lion rampant to the diminutive roundel. At magnificent assemblies beauty and delicious music enchanted the multitude of dancers. A new splendour was added to society, and foreign customs polished the manners and excited the admiration of the ancient inhabitants, who, charmed by such elegance, recognized in their conquerors persons of a superior intelligence; and admiringly endeavoured to imitate their peculiarities and fashions, and even introduced numerous strange terms into a language which was thus rendered singularly complex."

In this specimen the number of French words is abnormally great, and rises to the very high rate of 50 per cent. I doubt if a much higher rate can