of England was a great political pump, by which Mr. Pitt the more readily raised, in the days of our fathers, those large supplies for which we "misere minores" have now to answer to the tax-gatherer.

In 1713 this pump had a new case, in the form of a charter for ten years, and the minister pumped up with it 1,200,000l. in Exchequer bills, which the corporation undertook at three per cent. In 1742 it was again repaired by a new charter, for which the minister helped himself to 1,600,000l. out of the corporation's well of gold. In 1764 it was mended again, at a cost of 110,000l., and the new works were tried by the exhaustion of a million pounds. In 1781 these works were worn out, and fresh ones were supplied at a cost of three millions. In 1832 it was again put into good working condition, and the ministry undertook to keep it in repair at 120,000l. a-year.

In 1797, Mr. Pitt, by an order in council suspending cash payments, prohibited the public from drawing gold by his pump, and modified its spout so as to make it discharge onepound notes, and worthy John Bull was compelled to keep the promises instead of taking the fruition of the golden stream till after the conclusion of the French war.

Mr. Francis gives us the history of the great commercial bubbles, in which we have lively narrations of the wild phrenzy of the Mississippi scheme of Law and the South Sea bubble of 1720. So eager were the French to share the golden favours of Law that Mr. Francis tells us his ante-chamber

66

was crowded by women of rank and beauty, and interviews with him were sought with so much assiduity that one lady caused her carriage to be upset to attract his attention, and another stopped before his hotel, and ordered her servants to raise the cry of Fire;" and so madly were the English hastening to be rich in the time of the South Sea bubble that they subscribed to companies of which a suggested one to dredge up the valuables of the Egyptians from the Red Sea could hardly be considered a burlesque.

Mr. Francis may possibly take it hard that we should object to his work GENT. MAG. VOL. XXIX.

what may be directed with equal justice against many modern histories." The historian of our days usually mingles everywhere with his facts moral comments, many of them the results of hasty generalization, by which he makes himself responsible, not only for his historical matter, but also for motives and principles with which he chooses to connect it; and thence to the reader, who, from the strength of old opinions, or the conviction of new discovery, cannot receive the historian's philosophy as well as his history, his work becomes vitiated. A historian's readers may need his facts, but may not desire his opinions. They may not wish to be led into a theory, but may be trying one of their own, and timber already formed into a boat is not therefore so fit for building a house. A historian, to be a historian to posterity, must not write what they may refute, and therefore must write only incontrovertible truth.

As an instance of what we are objecting to, we need only take a school book-Goldsmith's History of England, where we are told of Cæsar's invasion of Britain, that, "having overrun Gaul, and being anxious to extend his fame, he determined upon the conquest of a country that seemed to promise him an easy triumph;" where the author makes himself responsible, not only for the historical fact that Cæsar determined to invade Britain, but also for what may be controverted

that his motive to the invasion was exclusively an anxiety to extend his fame, and that Britain seemed to promise him an easy conquest. He tells us himself that he invaded Britain because the Britons had helped the Gallic enemies of Rome, and some have attributed to him a desire of opening with Britain a traffic in slaves; and we cannot conceive that after the strong resistance he had met from the Celts in Gaul, the Celts of Britain could seem to promise him an easy triumph.

So our author, in speaking of the violence and impudence of "Henry Sacheverell, an apostate Whig," says (p. 94), " An apostate is usually violent in proportion to his apostacy, and Dr. Henry Sacheverell was no exception to the rule;" and, "Impudence is generally successful for a time, and the

I

ture of the Earl of Ormond, Trin. coll. Dubl.; bonnet, from a portrait of the sixteenth century at Tarnaway castle; figure of an ancient Irish breacan clag, in the possession of C. Walker, esq. Dublin; the belted plaid, from Birt's Letters, 1726; Irish, from illuminations in the MS. of Giraldus Cambrensis, in possession of Sir Thos. Phillipps, Bart. Middle Hill, Worcestershire breacan clag, falluinn, and hose, from the fragment of a gravestone in the girth of the ruined church of Innisaile, in Loch Awe; breacan spreighte, falluinn, and truis, from a sculpture among the ruins of Iona, thirteenth century; belted plaid and falluinn, from a sculpture in the castle of Carnaserai, in Argyllshire; tabbed bonnet, falluinn, and shoulder-plaid, from a sculpture at the castle of Inch Connell, Loch Awe; plaided jerkin and truis, from a grave-stone in the ruined church of Kiel, in Morven; breacan clag, or cochal, from a gravestone in the burial ground of Clun na mac righ, in Lorn; Irish figure, from Speed's Theatre of Britain; hood, from the fragment of a grave-stone in the ruined church of Arisaig; details from the fragments of a sculpture among the ruins of Iona; from the fragment of a grave-stone in the island of Dalalia, Loch Sheal; from a sculpture in the ruined chapel of Dunstaffnage; George second Earl of Seaforth, time of Charles I. from the original portrait in the possession of the De Witt family, Amsterdam; Conflict. Katheran trib. vocatur Clan Kaye et Clan Quhattan, from the original drawing in the splendid MS. copy of Boethius's Hist. in the possession of Mr. Hawkesly, Wardour-street, London; the Marquis of Montrose, about the year 1644, from the original painting preserved in the Nairn family; Sir Donald Gormsone, about 1644, from the original in the possession of the Duc de Tarentum; Irish figures, time of Charles I. from a very scarce engraving in the Doucean collection in the Bodleian Library; portrait of a Highland chief, time of Charles II. from the painting in the possession of Glengarrie, at Inverruie; figure from a very scarce woodcut, an. 1630; a carnach, from the Glengarrie picture above mentioned; a figure from the die of a medal of H. R. H. the Prince Charles Edward,

1745, in possession of Mr. Rettie, Argyll-street, Glasgow; Andrew Macpherson of Clunie, before 1701, the nineteenth chief of the clan Chattan, from the original painting at Clunie Castle; John third Earl of Breadalbane, 1708, from the original painting in the possession of the Earl de Grey, St. James's-square, London; Kenneth, third Lord Duffus, about 1710, from the original painting in the possession of the Countess Dowager of Caithness; a Highland chieftain, about 1714, from a very rare and probably unpublished print in the collection of the late Annabella Countess de Grey; God save King James, about 1714, being the raising of the royal standard, from the same; Domhnuill mor boidhche, 1716, piper to the Earl of Mar and to King James VIII. from the original in the possession of Mr. Donald Mac Garrow, Forres; Brigadier Grant, 1713; David Grant of Dalbuic, 1714, this and the former from the original paintings at Castle Grant; Patrick Grant of Miltoun, 1714, from a similar source; Old Glenbucket, 1745, from the original in the possession of the Chevalier Gordon, Versailles; Rob Roy, about 1704, from the original portrait at Broomhill, near Hamilton; Ditto about 1714, from the painting in the possession of the Society of Antiquaries, Edinburgh; Ditto about 1734 from the original belonging to George Buchanan, esq. of Arden, on Loch Lomond side; William Cumming 1714, piper to the Laird of Grant, from the original at Castle Grant; Major Fraser, of Castle Leathers, about 1728, from the original in the possession of Miss Grant of Kilminavaig, Inverness; a Greek, from a drawing by the late H. H. Williams, esq.; figure from the picture of Sir Donald Gormsone; Irish, from Derrick's Image of Ireland; Irish, from the Douce engraving; portrait of a Highland chieftain, 1725, from originals belonging to the Duke of Leeds, and Mr. G. A. Williams, Cheltenham; His Royal Highness the Prince Charles Edward, from the original in possession of the authors; Alasdair Ruadh of Glengarrie, from the original belonging to Glengarrie, at Inverruie; Sir Alexander Macdonald, about 1745, seventh baronet of Sleit, and fourteenth chieftain of clan Donald North, from the original at Ar

midall; Robert Grant of Larg, about 1775, from the original at Castle Grant; the Duke of Perth, 1745, from the portrait at Drummond Castle; Sir James Macdonald, 1754, eighth baronet of Sleit, and fifteenth chieftain of the clan Donald North; Sir Alexander Macdonald, 1754, brother to the last, and his successor, afterwards first Lord Macdonald, from the original pictures at Armidall; Alexander, first Lord Macdonald, about 1772, in a “hill dress," from the portrait at Armidall; Norman Macleod, about 1779, twentieth chief of the Shiol Thormaid, or Macleods of Harris; the breacan spreigthe, falluinn, and truis, from a gravestone of the sixteenth century, in the cemetery of Relig-Ouran, Iona.

Such is this national work, as it may be justly styled, and we can assure our readers it will not in any way fall short of their expectations.

The History of the College of All Saints, Maidstone. By Beale Poste. Royal Svo.

THE great wealth which the more distinguished churchmen enjoyed in the middle ages of our history was usually devoted to some important public object. When the age for founding new monasteries was past, we find that several “colleges" arose, the works of episcopal munificence; some of which, having been placed in the universities of Oxford and Cambridge, have survived to modern times, whilst others shared the fate of the monastic institutions.

There were three colleges founded by the archbishops of Canterbury, within their own diocese; by archbishop Peckham at Wingham in 1292; by archbishop Courtenay at Maidstone in 1395; and by archbishop Kempe at Wye in 1439.

The archbishops had a palace at Maidstone, a circumstance which naturally led Courtenay's attention to the state of the parochial church. He obtained the royal licence to make it collegiate in the year 1395; and the erection of the college for the residence of the members of the establish ment was the necessary consequence.

These buildings have been preserved to the present day, and they have lately been again converted to somewhat of a collegiate purpose, namely, one of the schools conducted under the superintendence of the Diocesan Board.*

Mr. Poste, who resides in the vicinity, has taken the opportunity to examine the architectural features of the college, which he describes with much care, and he has at the same time collected, in the present volume, a variety of other materials illustrative of the history of the church, the college estate, and other matters more or less connected with the subject.

There has been a very extraordinary uncertainty regarding the place of sepulture of archbishop Courtenay, and some of the writers on Kentish antiquities have expressed themselves not a little puzzled and mystified thereanent. Nor is Mr. Poste entirely relieved of doubt on the matter. But if the early statements on the matter are considered with a due regard to their attendant dates, we do not find anything otherwise extraordinary than that the archbishop was a little undecided in his own wishes on the subject.

It is clear that the intended enlargement of the church of Maidstone had not taken place at the time of the archbishop's death. An entire twelvemonth had not elapsed from the day when he procured the licence already mentioned. By his will, (which perhaps was made when in the West of England,) he had desired to be buried in the cathedral church of Exeter, with others of his illustrious family; but in a codicil, added only three days before his death, being then lying in his manor-house of Maidstone, he appointed his interment to be in the cemetery of the adjoining church, in the place which he had shown to John apprehend any particular humility, as Boteler, his esquire. Here we do not some writers have supposed, in this mention of the churchyard; but we conclude that the spot designated was church, in which foundations had been in that part of it to the east of the laid for extending the latter forty feet

to the eastward,* and where his body would have been entombed in a magnificent chapel. Now, the facts of the case, as respects Maidstone church, seem to have been these. The archbishop's death occurred at an earlier period than was favourable to the execution of so sumptuous a plan as had been formed, and which would have required the surplus of the archiepiscopal revenues for some years to come. The executors were therefore obliged to reduce the design; they deserted the foundations which had been laid, and they erected the stalls for the collegiate establishment in that part of the church where they still remain.

With regard to the disposal of the archbishop's corpse, it was determined to carry it at once to his cathedral church, which was done three days after his death, and it was there interred-in the presence of King Richard the Second, who was then in that city, -at the feet of the Prince of Wales, the King's father, near the shrine of Saint Thomas, on the south. Of this procedure, as Mr. Poste remarks, we have as particular an entry as could be desired.†

"Anno Domini MCCCLXXXXVI, ultimo die mensis Julii, feria secunda, obiit recolendæ memoriæ Dns. Willielmus Courtney Archiepiscopus Cantuariensis in manerio suo de Madyston circa horam

nonam

diei: : cujus corpus feria quinta sequente delatum est Cantuariam; et in præsentia Richardi regis incliti Secundi, et multorum magnatum, prelatorum, comitum et baronum, ad pedes Domini Edwardi principis Walliæ patris præfati Dni. Regis Richardi, juxta feretrum Sancti Thomæ ex parte australi, honorificè traditum sepulturæ."

In this place of sepulture, close by the highly-venerated shrine of Saint

Thomas, and next to the spot which had been thought the most honourable that could be found for the interment of the king's father, it is impossible not to perceive that the greatest respect was intended to the deceased archbishop; and, from the circumstance of the king being present, it is by no means an unreasonable inference to suppose that the deviation from the will of the defunct was made by royal command.‡

A monument was erected over the grave, with an effigy of the archbishop in stone, which still exists, but no record is preserved of any epitaph, a deficiency which has somewhat encouraged the doubts on this subject.

It would not be without regret that the members of the College of Maidstone perceived themselves deprived of the remains of their Founder. However, a very splendid representation of him in brass plate was laid down in the centre of their church, on an immense slab, (which still remains, but despoiled of its brasses,) measuring 13 ft. 6 inc. in length, by 4 ft. 3 inc. in width. The inscription has been preserved by Weever, and the first lines are as follow:

Nomine Willelmus en Courtnaius reverendus, Qui se post obitum legaverat hic tumulandum. In presenti loco quam jam fundarat ab imo, Omnibus et sanctis titulo sacravit honoris.

The mistake was natural to a careless observer (and Weever was one of the most careless) that here was the grave of the archbishop; but the wording of this inscription is sufficiently peculiar to show that it did not commemorate an ordinary case of interment. The word en is of course intended to apply to the engraved representation,—“Be