The fuppofed Welsh Indians are, it feems, called Panes, or Panis by fome. We fee in the maps that the Padoucas, Panis, and Canfez, are intermixed with each other. Charlevoix, vol. II. p. 224,. fays, that the Panis are a very numerous nation, divided into feveral cantous, which have names very different from each other, and reckons amongst their tribes the Canfez and the Macotatas.

Coxe fays, that the Matocantes, Panimahas, Paneaffas, Panelogas, and Parias, are but different tribes of the fame people. See pages 11 & 16.

The Mactotatas of Charlevoix, and the Matocantes of Coxe, feem to retain fomething of Madog in their names; in the Silurian dialect of the Welsh it would be wrote and pronounced Matoc; Matociait, and Matociaint, would be purely Silurian Welsh for Madawgwys, or the people of Madoc; and the Silurian dialect feems, by a comparifon with our oldeft MSS, to have retained the moft of any of our dialects the antient orthography and pronunciation.

Should this rude and hafty piece of information be thought worthy of pub lic notice, I may, perhaps, give you the trouble of peruling fome further information that I have from time to time

collected; leaving it, with all poffible deference, to your better judgement, to determine whether it may or may not be worthy the attention of your readers.

EDWARD WILLIAMS.

Mr. URBAN, Edinburgh, June 20. I THINK the fecond volume of Maitland's Hiftory of Scotland was compiled from what materials he had left by Dr. James Grainger, my old and intimate acquaintance, who died at Antigua, Dec. 24, 1767, having published a tranflation of Tibullus, 1759, 12mo, 2 vois; a Letter to Dr. Smollett on his fuppofed criticilm on it in the Critical Review, 1759 (fee vol. XXIX. 8183); the Sugar-cane, a poem, 1764, 4to; and Hiftoria Febris intermittentis Annorum 1746, 7, 8, 1757. He was a very excellent humourift, terved feveral years as a furgeon of a marching regiment, and then fold cut. It is very certain, that William Maitland compofed the firft vo

lume of that work, and Mr. Andrew Milar engaged the Doctor to complete Yours, &c. G. P.

the book.

fis "De antiquis Oratoribus Commentarii," which he left incomplete, having been published at Oxford, 1787, with a new title to the first part, and addrefs to the reader, in which the editors obferve, that the original delay of publica tion arofe from a want of the notes intended by Mr. M. who was prevented by death from executing his defign; after an unfuccefsful enquiry of his heirs whether any thing of the kind was exifting among his MSS, it was conjectured fome notes might be found written on the margin of his copy of Hudfon's edition; but into whofe hands that copy had fallen did not appear. "Cum ex hæredibus ftatim quæfitum effet utrum ejufmodi quidpiam inter fcripta ejus extaret, re folicite explorata vere nimis compertum eft nihil omnino fupereffe; nifi fortafle editionis Hudfonianæ exemplari ab editore noftro notæ quædam adfcriptæ fuerint: quod exemplar cujus in manus jam incideret, non liquet." The book fellers having in vain waited for fome one to undertake the tafk, chofe rather to fend the book unfinished into the

world than difappoint the expectations of the young ftudents, who have long wanted fuch an edition.

Be fo good as to inform the editors and the book fellers, that the copy of Hudfon's Dionyfius fell, at Mr. Mores's fale by S. Paterfon, Aug. 1779, into my hands. Mr. Mores had not fpared to cut out of fuch a fcarce and valuable edition the 120 pages of vol. II. that fuited his purpofe, from p. 125 to p. 190, and from

p.266 top. 320, inclufive, and, after largely

correcting with his pen the tranflation as it ftands in his printed edition, gave them to the compofitor, and, when done with, ftuck them into the volume again in their feribbled, dirty ftate. There is not in this book a note more by Mr. M. than what is printed.

Mr. URBAN,

R. G..

June 28. BSERVING in fome late news-papers an advertilement from a meeting of English Catholicks, held at the Crown and Anchor, in relation to the act of Parliament lately palled for their relief; I am induced to fend you the fol lowing information concerning both the act and the meeting, which my intimate acquaintance with many of the parties concerned, and the ftri& eye I have kept on the progrefs of this bufinefs, enable me to give you. I am confident thele

* The fecond had Mr. M's title, "Oxoniz, e Theatro Sheldoniano, 1749.'

particulars

particulars cannot but prove acceptable to your readers, as they tend to throw light upon a fubject which is fo little understood, that the very defcription of perfons, who have been relieved by the Legiflature, is hardly yet alcertained. Every one must have oblerved, that they are fometimes called Protefing Catholic Difenters, at other times. Protesting Catbolicks, or Englifb Catholicks, or Catholic Difenters.

The firft plan of an act in favour of thefe people originated in a connexion between the Noble Lord who are the refpective heads of the Roman Catholicks and the Diffenters. The celebrated PROTESTATION, which is preconized in the advertisement alluded to above, was the actual manufacture of Earl Spe; which, whatever its merits may be as a political or theological creed, is certainly an ungrammatical compofition, and teems with folecilms. This, by the influence of Lord P. and his friends, was obtruded on the Roman Catholic body, and figned by about 1,500 of them; not, however, without much oppofition and murmuring on one fide, and many explanations and declara tions on the other. Every one allowed that, in its broad meaning, and, as far as it was a test of civil and focial principles, this inftrument was faithful and true; but moft Roman Catholicks complained that it was expreffed in fuch vague and improper terms as to invade the particular tenets of their theological creed. They were answered, that the Proteftation was the work of Government, which would not fubmit to have a word of it changed; that Government understood it according to the explana⚫ tions that were then given; and that thofe, who refufed to fign it in the very words in which it was conceived, must be content to fit down under the oppro brium of thofe infamous charges profcribed in the faid inftrument. At that time the Roman Catholic body did not know what precife end this Proteftation was to anfwer. Soon after, however, the mystery was unraveled by the bill introduced into the Upper Houfe by the aforefaid Noble Earl, for the repeal of all religious pains and penalties; in which, though there was an exprefs claufe against Papifs being benefited by it, yet this was but a feint, as those who had figned the abovementioned deed were conceived by this time to be transmuted into Protefing Diffenters, and were, therefore, deemed worthy of all the privileges then expected by other Diffenters.

It is not neceffry to mention the fate of that bill, or to point out the fhort-fighted policy of thofe Roman Catholicks, who could build their hopes on the illjudged and intemperate exertions of a man who, in his introduction to that very bill, could boaft of his "teaching the Bench of Bishops Divinity, and the Lord Chancellor Law."

Difappointed in their hopes of carrying their point by a coup de main, and obtaining by furprize all the advantages the Diffenters were then contending for, they were obliged to have recourse to the ordinary, laborious method of raifing friends in parliament, in order to procure a particular bill in their own favour. Various obftacles and delays were thrown in the way of this project by Miniftry, who trembled at the idea of renewing a bufinefs, which once had well nigh proved the ruin of this country. At all events, they thought it necellary to pay attention to the prejudices of the people, and with this view required that the Roman Catholicks thould fwear to the terms of the Pro:eftation which fo many of them had figned. Other claufes were added or altered, fill more calculated to embroil or perplex a people already divided. Ascordingly, the controverfial civil war amongst them became every day more violent; the heads of the Laity being for the most part on one fide, and the heads of the Clergy for the most part on the other. It would be an endless task to enter into the particulars of this difpute; let it fuffice to fay, that a Noble Duke, in one of the highest departments of the State, declared, at the fecond reading of the bill in the Houfe of Peers, that, having feen the publications on both fides, he thought the Divines had the better of the argument.

The grand error of the committee was, in their having negotiated and agreed with Miniftry to a form of oath, comprehending a number of theological queftions, without the confent or parti cipation of their head clergy. Having agreed, they conceived themselves obliged to proceed; and therefore, at the beginning of March, brought forward their bill for the exclufive benefit of Protefing Catholic Diffenters, as they now called themfelves, leaving thofe of their brethren to infamy and penalty, who, however they agreed with them in the fubftance, objected to the wording of their oath. Every precaution having been taken by one party, and

none

none at all by the other, it was conceived that the bufinefs would have been foon over, and the bill would rapidly run through parliament: but the memDers of that auguft body, in both Houfes, proceeded with that caution which both policy and humanity demanded on the occafion at their hands. They were at the pains of examining into the difpute fubfifting amongst the Roman Catholicks; and finding it turn on the meaning of phrates and words, the Protefters believing the fame theological creed with the Non-Protefters, and the Non-Protefters holding the fame civil and focial principles of which the Protefters fo loudly boafted, they faw the impropriety of making fish of one party and flesh of the other, and refufed to ground the intended Relief on the narrow and intolerant bafis which was originally marked out. The confequence was, that the plan of the bill was totally changed; the oath was accommodated to the confciences of the moft fcrupulous; and the famous Proteftation was not only thrown afide as unneceffary, but its very name, toge ther with the affinitive words Proteft and Protefing, were expunged from every part of the bill; they were even judged to be of a dangerous tendency, as the adoption of them might lead to objects of a very different nature from those marked out in the bill, and, in the end, might even endanger the A&t of Settlement.

I conceive it to be owing to this very circumftance, of the Proteftation having been fo roughly treated by Parliament, and fo difgraced in the face of the nation, that its friends have endeavoured to cover its fhame with unneceffary and ill-timed eulogiums at the meeting of the Roman Catholic Committee, which took place on the 9th inft. at the Crown and Anchor tavern. I must inform you, however, that a division took place on the queftion, whether this cejebrated inftrument fhould be placed in the Museum or be committed to the flames; and that, even in this partial meeting, its friends were only in the proportion of 105 to 71. I must alfo obferve, that thofe who adhere to it as an explicit teft of their civil and focial principles, do not adhere to it as an accurate expofition of their religious belief on thofe very points it fpeaks to.

After this account, you will not be furprized that a debate fhould have

taken place on the vote of thanks to the Committee for bringing the bill to a fortunate issue: the Non-Protesters declaring that, as the act was not formed on the original plan of the Committee, but was fuch as had been framed to admit them alfo to its advantages, and as the oath, which was the hinge on which all the advantages of the act turned, had been granted to their humble and earnest reprefentations to Government, that, therefore, their leaders were at least as much entitled to thanks for the happy fue of the bill as were the leaders of the other party; an amendment to the vote of thanks was therefore made, and feconded, that the Roman Catholic Prelates bould be thanked in conjunction with the Committee. This amendment, however, was over-ruled on the pretended ground, that the order of public debates required that the original motion fhould be difpofed of before the amendment was difcuffed. However diforderly this conduct may appear, I apprehend it will appear much more so to have fuppreffed, in the public advertisement, the vote of thanks which was afterwards carried nem. con. in favour of one of thofe clerical gentlemen. A. B-R.

Mr. URBAN,

June 24.

I

You OU are too well acquainted with the nature of the barometer to be told, that no meteorologist has hitherto been able to lay down any theory to guide the man of bufinefs or the man of pleasure in their feveral purfuits. thould think it, however, a defideratum not to be entirely defpaired of. For my amufement, I have of late kept a diary of the barometer, wind, and weather (a fpecimen of which I have fent you); and find that, though I cannot always with certainty predict what changes will take place, I have, from three years experience, been very feldom mistaken. The Journal, inserted in your Magazine for May from a Northern correfpond ent, has tempted me to fend you a fimilar one for May and June. It may not be unprofitable to compare diaries made in different parts of the kingdom, to fix the theory of the barometer on more certain ground than at prefent: and, as my refidence is 120 miles due North of London, in the county of Norfolk, within 12 miles of the fea, I think, if you have room to infert my fpecimen, it may tempt your Northern correfpondent to be regular in tranfmitting his

and,

Mr. URBAN,

IT

July 1. T will certainly oblige Antiquitatis Confervator (fee p. 401), and probably fome others of your readers, to be informed of the existence of another filver heart, or memorial of Charles I. in every respect the fame as that defcribed on page 401, except the infcription en the infide of the lid (or that part anfwering to fig. 4 in the plate p. 401); this has on the infide of the lid I morne for monerchie. Underneath this infcription, and alfo underneath the King's head on the other half, are the figures II rudely scratched; which, I think, puts it beyond doubt that thefe different memorials were made by one and the fame perfon, and that the figures VI and II are marks whereby to distinguish the refpective halves. J. R. W.

Mr. URBAN,

July 2. You OU will please to correct an error in your Obituary for the last month, P. 590, concerning the monument erected in Wallbrook church for Mrs. Macaulay. It was taken down (by the ftatuary who erected it) in the life-time of Dr. Wilfon, and by his order. Whether the Doctor was inftigated fo to do from motives of revenge, because the married Mr. Graham, or whether from fear, because the Veftry was just upon citing him to the Commons for it, I will not undertake to fay; perhaps from both; for, very foon after, he fold the vault, which he built to depofit her re. mains in, to a branch of the Royds, a wealthy and refpectable family in that parih; fo that it was her doating admirer, then rector, not his fucceffor, moft profanely (if Mr. Pennant will have it 10) pulled it down.

Whatever idea Mr. Pennant may have of this tranfaction, the inhabitants of the parish thought the church was not a proper place for enthufiaftic Party and politicks, and was determined to carry the matter into the Ecclefiaftical Court, if the Doctor had not thought proper to have it taken down almost as fuddenly as it was put up. The prefent incumbent, who was his fucceffor, did not, nor could he, take any fieps whatever about this business. A. Y. Z.

apprehenfions refpecting the Lunar Tides. Having frequently the opportunity to notice the beneficial influence of the Moon on our well-known Thames a, few miles Eaft of the metropolis, I have often applied the great change daily made therein to the fuperior power of the Earth on the waters of the Moon; and I can but admire that, while I well knew that opaque body always prefented the fame afpect to our view, it did at no time occur to my mind, the almost uniform attraction of this globe on the feas of that fatellite, however great, fo circumftanced, could make but little variation in its rivers.

***

"I should be very glad to see any fermon of Dr. Doddridge's, and should look upon a letter from him as an honour, provided he will write to me as a person who wants both inftruction and reproof, but not as one who has attained any fhare of that Chriftian piety and felf-denial, without which all pretenfions to the name of a Difciple are vain."

I could not fatisfy myfelf till I had fent you the above, as it will not only encourage you to write to her, but thew you how amiable and humble a disposi tion you have to addrefs. I pray God to improve this friendship to you both, and then I fhall think myself of fome fervice in life.

You were fo good as to defign for us a parcel, which I fhall be glad to receive, as there is nothing you either write or do but I am interefted in. You muft forgive my reminding you, that fo faithful a minifter of the Gospel not only merits our highest regards, but our many bleffings alfo. I dread flack hands in the vineyard. We must be all up and doing, confidering that the Lord is at hand: and let us not lofe the things we have wrought, but labour and exhort each other to diligence and faithfulness. O, my friend! we fhall reap plentifully if we faint not. It is thinking of your unwearied labours that inspires my dead heart at this moment with great earneftnefs; and I want words to tell you what fhall be your reward. All I can fay is, that it is infinite bounty which is to pay you; and this is much beyond my reck"oning. You have, you ever will have,

my