"Because," wrote James, it can neither be honour nor contentment to either part that a treaty of marriage should be long trayned on, you may resolve them att the first that the constitucion of our estate cannot beare any generall change or alteracion in our ecclesiasticall or temporall lawes touching religion, for so much as concerns our owne subjects. And if it shalbe objected to you that wee consented to great liberties to our owne subjects in the articles of the treatie of marriage betwixt Spaine and us, you may show them that, in the first project of that treatie, the articles were neither demaunded by them nor consented to by us to any such extention, although the greatness of the portion might have challenged or seemed to have mooved us to the approoving of some extraordinary conditions. But that which indeed inlarged us in that point was the promises made, and the hope we conceived of the restitucion of the Palatinat. And we the rather inclined to lardger conditions for the tender respect we had not to make our sonne's journey thither vayn, nor to suffer him to returne with a scorne, if more than was convenient for us to do, and all that were possible might have prevented it. You may further represent to that king the modesty wee used in the time of his endeavours to reduce all those

of the reformed religion to the condicion of his will, and then you may shewe him that the example of his pretending for liberty to our Romaine Catholique subjects may and ought to teach us to doe the like for the Protestants his subjects, and with greater reason and pretext, they having a kinde of legall interest in the fruition of their consciences and exercise of theire consciences, and exercise of theire religion. . . . there being noe such thing in the case of our Romaine Catholique subjects. Neither can it bee doubted, when our piety and lenity shall bee examined wherewith wee have treated our Romaine Catholique subjects ever since our coming to this Crowne, but that it is a just allegation that, for our owne safety, suerty of our state, and for the safety of the Romaine Catholiques our subjects, wee may not dissolve or generally suspend our lawes concerning them. For when they shall have the raynes losed to them, they may by abuse of favor and liberty constrayne us (contrary to our naturall affeccions, to deale with them with more rigour than wee are inclined too; soe as wee may not article for dispensation and liberty to our Romaine Catholique subjects, but ould the raynes of those lawes in our owne gratious hands. And you may assure that King and his ministers, that in contemplacion of that marriage, wee shalbe the rather inclined to use our subjects Roman Catholicks with all favour, soe long as they shall behave themselves moderately and keeping their consciences to themselves, shall use their conversacion without scandall." *

As long as La Vieuville was in office in France, every effort was made to conciliate James. It is true that he was told that the French would not be content with a verbal engagement not to persecute, but must have a written promise. But La Vieuville was one of those men who do not like to look difficulties in the face, and on June 14, Carlisle wrote that

"They do here let fall unto us that though they are bound to make these high demands for their own honour, the satisfaction of those of the Catholic party, and particularly for the facilitating of the dispensation at Rome, yet it will be always in your Majesty's power to put the same in execution according to your own pleasure."+

* Draft of Instructions, Harl. MS. 1584, fol. 10. + State Papers. France.

By Charles, at least, the first sign that more would be asked than he had offered was received with dissatisfaction. On June 6, Tillières wrote that an emissary whom he had employed to the Prince "l'a trouvé forte dur, et avec peu de dessein de satisfaire à la France aux points les plus essentiels." Under these circumstances La Vieuville allowed Kensington to go over to England offering to agree to a middle course. James would not be asked to make a formal engagement; but let him write a letter embodying his intentions. To this James consented; but his concession was useless. La Vieuville, who, it is said, had taken the step of asking for the letter without informing his master, was turned out of office and succeeded by Richelieu. Richelieu was firm. A formal article he must have, or there would be no marriage at all.

Here James was firm. A letter might convey his meaning in any form he pleased. An article was a direct breach of his son's promises. His arguments may fairly be taken from a later despatch of Conway's:

"His Majestie," wrote the Secretary about the 25th of September...."cannot bee wonne to any more in lardgenes of promise or other forme, it being apparant to all this kingdome what promise the Prince hath made and the King approved, not to enter into articles or conditions with any other Prince for the emunityes of his subjects Romaine Catholiques, that beeing indeede to part his soveraignity, and give a portion of it to another King, and teache his people relyance upon a forraigne Prince, by whose favour they enjoy freedome and liberty."

But James had a formidable difficulty to contend with. The new French ambassador, Effiat, in diplomatic skill, had completely won a second Gondomar in knowledge of the world and Buckingham to his side, and Buckingham finally brought James over, reluctant as he was.

over

Charles's conversion may be gradually traced in three letters, the originals of which are all amongst the French State Papers at the Record Office, the first of them having been printed incorrectly from a copy in the Clarendon State Papers (vol. ii. chap. ix.) They are all to the Earl of Carlisle. The first, written on August 13, was as follows:

"Carlile,-The chanses which you (propheticlie) foretowld of the Courte of France hes much astoniched us here; but, most of all, the French King's disavouing of his ministers †, weh, for mine owen parte, hes made me a St. Thomas for beliving of anie good ishew of your negotiation. If you fynd they persist in this new way that they have begunn in making an article for our Roman Catholiq subjects, dallie no more with them, but breake ofe the treatie of marriage, keeping the frendshipe in as faire tearmes as ye can. And, belive it, ye will have as greate honnor with breaking upon these tearmes, as

* Harl. MS. 1588, fol. 266.

I. e. disavowing the offer made by La Vieuville through Kensington.

Charles originally wrote "with this fickle nation," but carefully deleted the words with his pen. In the copy in the Clarendon State Papers, they are left standing.

with making the alliance. Yet use what industrie you can to reduce them to reason, for respect the person of the ladie as being a worthie creature, fitt to bee my wyfe. But as ye love me, put it to a quike ishew on way or other, and what event soever the business shall have, I shall ever remaine

"Your constant loving friend,

"CHARLES P.

"Rufford, the 13 of August, 1624." The next letter is couched in a marvellously different tone. It was written on September 9, the French having conceded nothing, and the situation otherwise remaining unchanged:

"Carlile,-If the answers to your despaches com[e] not so fast as you desyer, or as (it may be) th[e] business requyres, blame me not, for the King [and] especially our Committie are so slow, that if it were] not for me, I thinke we should be twice as long] on answering you. The business now is a[11] brought to so good an ishew, that if it [is] not spoild in Rome, I hope that your] treatise will be shortlie brought to a happie conclusion], wherfor I pray you warn your Monsers that the least streching more breakes the string], and then Spaine will lafe at us both. So I rest

"Your constant loving frend "CHARLES P. "I know ye looke for thakes for what ye have done, but although ye deserve it now, ye shall have none while all be done, and then ye shall have as much as your bake can beare.

"Whythall, the 9 of Sep. 1624."

For all this, the string bore more stretching without breaking. For more than a month, James giving way step by step in matters of detail, held out on the main point. Let the final result be told in Charles's own words. The third letter was written on October 19:

"Carlile,-Your despach with Larking* gave us anuffe adoe to keepe all things from an unrecoverable breache, for my father at first startled verrie much at it, and would scarce heer of reason, which made me feare that his aversness was built upon som hope of good overtures from Gondomar (who they say is to be shortlie heer, tho I beleeve it not), which made [me] deale plainlie with the King, telling him I could never mach with Spain, and so intreated him to fynd a fitt mach for me. Though he was a littel angrie at first at it, yet afterward he allowed our opinions to be reason, which befor he rejected; so that now I hope all dificulties on both sydes be overcum. The King cals for me, so I rest "Your loving constant frend,

"Royston: the 19 of Sber, 1621."

"CHARLES P.

It was a natural consequence of this resolution that Parliament, which James had promised to summon in November, was prorogued, and that accordingly there was no money to provide for Mansfeld's troops, who were consequently left to starve. Yet when Charles met his first Parliament next year, he had nothing to say except that it had drawn him into the war and must find him means to carry it on. What were the Letter of the 13th by Lorkin telling of the refusal of the French to promise formally to make a league with England for the recovery of the Palatinate by means of Mansfeld's troops.

causes which led to Charles's resolution to break his promise is a story too long to tell here, but there can be no doubt that he intended to keep it at least up to August 13.

SAMUEL R. GARDINER.

HOW TO DESCRIBE A BOOK.

I have for some years past been annoyed, to use a mild term, by the excessive carelessness which the contributors of "N. & Q." exhibit when they have occasion to mention the title of a book. Whether for the purpose of asking the name of an author of an anonymous work, or citing a book for reference, want of accuracy is their chief characteristic. So far as giving exact references to editions and pages, the Editor has pretty well schooled us into accuracy, but the title of a book is a different matter. I need not cite instances in support of this assertion: every number bears evidence of it.

Though I have entitled this note "How to describe a Book," it would have perhaps been more accurate, but not so interesting, to have simply put the word "Bibliography"; for it is upon several moot points regarding bibliographical matters that I wish to comment.

It seems to me a pity that a science which is becoming so popular and universal as the knowledge of books and proper manner of describing them should be encumbered with unwieldy words like bibliography, bibliographical, biographical, anonymous, anonymity, pseudonymous, and others of equally portentous sound. The unlearned (and profitable) trades are blessed with words to describe their tools and productions which are intelligible to the meanest capacity.

The less profit the longer words appears to be the rule. If we garden we use a spade, a hoe, an axe, a barrow, a rake; if we row, a scull, an oar; if we speculate, we have money, stock, funds; even if we go to law, we have bills of costs. Observe the simplicity of these words. Yet, if we study to make proper lists of books, we cannot get on without words of ten to fifteen letters. I make these remarks as they occur to me, without however any expectation of altering the nomenclature, though such a thing has not unfrequently been done, and everybody will recollect the storm in a tea-cup that was aroused by the shortening of the words telegraphic despatch to telegram. How to describe a book is so simple a matter that most people go wrong, quite unconsciously of course. Everybody thinks he understands a thing so simple, just as nearly everybody-and at all events all literary men-think they know all about cataloguing and libraries because they are literary men. Ample evidence will be found in support of this assertion in the blue book or the library of the British Museum. The fact is, unless a

man has taken the trouble to study bibliography a little, he is never sure that he is giving such a description of a book as will enable another person to identify it.

Professor De Morgan, in his evidence before the commission on the British Museum (1850, 5729),

says:

"I know very few mathematicians indeed that I would trust to give me an accurate account of a mathematical

book. Unless they have paid special attention to bibliography as bibliography, they are very likely indeed to give erroneous accounts of books."

The learned mathematician spoke of mathematicians because he was so learned that he was prevented from using generalities when of his own knowledge he could only speak as to mathematicians, but what he says applies to all. Mr. Bolton Corney, in his excellent pamphlet On the New General Biographical Dictionary (London: Shoberl, 1839, 8vo), pointed out the prevalence of

this fault.

It is generally admitted, I believe, at least it is laid down by a gentleman whom I may consider an authority (Art of making Catalogues, &c. [by Dr. Crestadoro]) that five things at least are necessary to describe a book with a tolerable amount of certainty title, name of author, place, date, and size. This is for a catalogue of a library; but catalogues of libraries, when done at all (and I believe no large library in the world has yet got a complete catalogue), are with few exceptions done badly, and upon a low bibliographical standard. To the five things above-mentioned I should add, as not the least important, the publisher's name.

It is so manifest that all these six things are essential to the proper description of a book, that I shall not give one word of argument in their support. But for a bibliographical description it may be necessary to add the number of pages, the price, where printed, and any peculiarity. It is not sufficient, however, to give these particulars alone, they must be given in the order in which they occur on the title-page, and (here is where nearly everybody sins the most) nothing whatever must be interpolated between the first word of the title and the last. It is bad bibliography to put "Svo" before the date, as "8vo, 1871." It is difficult to explain this part of my subject without an illustration. Let us suppose the following information sent, and the manner of it is no exaggeration ::

"Sir,-Seeing that you are collecting, with a view to publication, names of authors of the nineteenth century, I beg to say that I was well acquainted with Miss Seaman, who died about the year 1830, a notice of whom you will find in the Ryde papers. She wrote Some Observations on Girls' Schools and Boarding Schools, but whether with her name or not I forget. Also, about 1822

was published by Smith of London an interesting religious tale called Lily, and in 16mo, 1825, a capital little work on the choice of books, with advice about Miss Edgeworth's novels."

It will be evident to any one that the whole of the above requires verification-a labour of hours, perhaps days, which might have been saved by a little knowledge on the part of our informant.

On investigation it appears, then, that our informant has scarcely given a single date or title correctly-1. Miss Seaman died in 1829, not 1830; 2. The reference to the Ryde papers is useless, as too wide for verification and inaccessible; 3. The title of each of her works is given from recollection, or rather from no recollection, and they are all incorrect; 4. The titles are made up; 5. Words not in the title-pages are interpolated before the date-i. e. it is interpolated, and in fact without notice; 6. The size of the book is placed everything is reversed. But I shall best be able to show what is wanted and how it should be which I must reserve for another note. done by giving the above information correctly,

OLPHAR HAMST.

THE POCKET-DIAL OF ROBERT DEVEREUX, EARL OF ESSEX, 1593.

In Mr. Bruce's elaborate paper on this curious article read before the Society of Antiquaries on the 4th of May, 1865, and published with a plate in the Archeologia (vol. xl. part ii. p. 344 et seq.), it is stated that the history of the dialclock or watch after the earl's death is unknown. It appears from Jardine's Criminal Trials (vol. c. pp. 371-2, 12mo, 1832) that the three divines who attended the Earl of Essex in prison were Thomas Montford, William Barlow, and Abdie Ashton, the last-named being the earl's favourite chaplain, and one who accompanied him to the scaffold. William Barlow is clearly the individual stated by Mr. Bruce to be a clergyman, son of Bishop Barlow of Chichester, and the learned author of a scientific book on the mariner's compass, called The Navigator's Supply (4to, Lond. 1597), which he dedicated to the Earl of Essex. Abdie Ashton (for whom see "N. & Q." 2nd S. viii. 1859), Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge (omitted by the Coopers), was the second of the seven sons of the Rev. John Ashton, Rector of Middleton, Lancashire, and is named in the Journal of Nicholas Asheton of Downham, Esq., in 1617, edited by me for the Chetham Society in 1848. In an abstract of his will, which is dated Middleton, August 27, 1633, the following interesting legacy occurs, and is printed in a note in Assheton's Journal; and there can be little doubt that it refers to the identical pocket-dial made by Kynwin, described with so much accuracy by Mr.

:

It is so common to call the portrait of any boy in a blue dress a "Blue Boy," that unless each case is closely investigated it is much easier to be misled, as Jackson may have been about Buttall's "Blue Boy," and as Fulcher was about Ford's "Blue-coat Boy," than to obtain the right description, as we have experienced. Sketches also pass as "Blue Boys," no matter what size; and photographs, engravings, and chromos of the Grosvenor "Blue Boy" are now rather a numerous family.

as

The sketch which formerly belonged to the Bishop of Ely was sold at Christie's in 1864, and if we are rightly informed, it was afterwards restored to resemble the Grosvenor "Blue Boy much as possible, and then sold to Lord Elcho when its originality was gone. Whether this sketch subsequently entered the Grosvenor Gallery as an original one by Gainsborough or not we do not know, but among the pictures lent from that gallery for the conversazione of the Civil Engineers in 1867 there was a "Finished sketch of The Blue Boy.' T. Gainsborough, R.A.," which had quite a newly restored look about it. Mr. Hogarth has a clever sketch of the Grosvenor "Blue Boy" by Fanny Corbeaux. Lord Mornington, we believe, purchased the sketch of the "Blue Boy" at Maclise's sale in 1870, and which Mr. Hogarth thought to be more after the leastknown "Blue Boy" than the rival one.

By far the finest and largest full-length sketch or copy of the "Blue Boy" we have yet seen, excepting, of course, the two big "Blue Boys," belongs to Chas. Jas. Freake, Esq., Cromwell House, South Kensington. It was bought at Brighton a few years ago, in a damaged condition, for ten pounds, but by whom or when painted is not known. It has since been lined and restored after the Grosvenor "Blue Boy," so that here also whatever originality it possessed is gone, but still it is a fine bright picture-canvas about three feet in height by two feet in width, or about half the height, and less than half the width of the least-known "Blue Boy,” which is nearly six feet in height by four feet two inches in width.

Of "Blue Boys" in other than Vandyke costumes we may refer to the portrait of Lieut.

"N. & Q." 4th S. iv. 41; v. 37.

Another one, reported as in North Wales, was traced to Glasgow, and is thus described by the lady who possesses it

"The Blue Boy' by Gainsborough was given to me by Miss Griffiths some years ago. I heard it was presented by Gainsborough when staying in Wales to a friend of Miss Griffiths', who left it to her. It is not a full-length portrait, and the dress is a light-fitting plain blue jacket with a loose white handkerchief underneath the jacket."

National Gallery has been stoutly maintained to
Even the blue-clad in the Bailey family in the
be "The Blue Boy by Gainsborough in the
National Collection."
J. SEWELL, Assoc. Inst. C. E.

The Lombard, E.C.

SUPERSTITION IN THE GERMAN ARMY.

The soldiers of Germany now pass for the best educated and most intelligent soldiers in the world. This is no doubt true of those who do not come out of the lowest classes of society; but 1 doubt the superior intelligence of those who do belong to the lowest classes. At all events, superstition seems to be rife among them, and superstition is not generally regarded as a mark of intelligence. The following charm was taken from a German soldier during the late war, and brought over to England by an English surgeon, whose name I have forgotten. In a lecture which he delivered at Cambridge, he said that the charm was worn and firmly believed in by a large number of German soldiers. The words, which I copy from a photograph of the original, run as follows:

:

"Haus- und Schutzbrief.

"Im Namen des Vaters und des Sohnes und des heiligen Geistes. Amen. L. T. L. K. H. B. K. N. K.

"Im Namen Gottes, des Vaters, des Sohnes und des heiligen Geistes.-So wie Cristis (sic) im Oehlgarten stillstand, so soll alles Geschütz stille stelin. Wer diesen Brief bei sich trägt, den wird nichts treffen von des Feindes Geschütz, und er wird von Dieben und Mörden (sic) gesichert sein.-Er darf sich nicht fürchten vor Degen, Gewehren, Pistolen, den so wie man auf ihn anschlägt,t

müssen, durch den Tod und Befehl Jesu unsichbar Alles durch den Befehl des Engels Michaelis, im Christu (sic), alle Geschütze stille stehn, ob Sichtbar oder Namen Gottes, des Vaters, des Sohnes, und des heiligen

The photograph bears on the back the name of Maltby & Co., Barnsbury Hall, Islington, London, N. I have copied verbatim, literatim, and punctuatim (if I may coin the word), and therefore neither I nor the printer must be held responsible for the very numerous misspellings, grammatical and other inaccuracies, which are to be found in it. I have marked a few of the most glaring with sic. The charm is written, not printed; but we learn incidentally that it may be used printed.

Here there seems to be a word of two or three letters which, owing to a fold in the original, has been indistinctly photographed.

Geistes.-Gott sei mit uns.-Wer diesen Segen bei sich trägt, der wird für (sic) feindlichen Kugeln geschützt bleiben. Wer dieses nicht glauben will, der schreibe ihn ab, hänge ihn einem Hunde um des (sic) Hals und schiesse auf ihn, so wird ehr sehen, dass der Hund nicht getroffen, und dass es war ist, auch wird derjenige, der an ihn glaupt nicht von dem Feinde gefangen genommen werden. So wahr ist es, das Jesus Christus auf Erden gewandelt hat, und jen Himmel gefahrn ist, so war ist es, das Jeder der an disen Brief glaubt, vor allen Gewehren und Waffen im Namen des lebendigen Gottes, des Vaters, des Sohnes und des heiligen Geistes unbeschädigt bleiben soll.-Ich bitte im Namen unsers Herrn Jesu Christi Blut, das mich keine Kugel treffen möge, sie sei von Gold,

Silber oder Blei. Gott im Himmel halte mich von allen frei. Im Namen Gottes des Vaters des Sohnes und des

heiligen Geistes, dieser Brief ist vom Himmel gesandt und im Jahre 1724 (?) in Holstein gefunden worden und schwebt über die Taufe Magdalenas, wie man ihn aber angreifen wollte wich er zurück bis zum Jahre 1791 bis

sich Jemand mit dem Gedanken nährte, ihn abzuschreiben. Ferner gebietet er, das derjenige, welcher am Sontage Arbeitet, von Gott verdammt ist. ich gebe euch sechs Tage, eure Arbeit fortzusetzen und am Sontage früh in die Kirche zu gehn, die heilige Predigt und Gottes (sic) zu höhren, werdet ihr das nicht thun so werde ich euch strafen. Ich gebiete euch, dass ihr des Sontags früh in die (sic) Kirche mit Jedermann Jung und Alt andächtig für eure Sünden betet, damit sie euch vergeben werden, Schwöret nicht boshaft bei meinem Namen, begehrt nicht Silber oder Gold, und sehet nicht auf fleischliche Lüste und Begierden den sobald ich euch erschaffen habe, sobald kann ich euch wieder vernichten. Einer soll den andern nicht tödten mit der Zunge. und solltet nicht falsch gegen Euren Nächsten hinterm Rücken sein. Freuet euch eure (sic) Güter und eures Reichthums nicht. Ehret Vater und Mutter, redet nicht falsch Zeugnisch (sic) wieder den Nächsten, so gebe ich euch Gesundheit und Segen. Wer aber diesen Brief nicht glaubt und sich nicht darnach richtet. Der wird kein Glück und Segen haben. Diesen Brief soll einer dem andern Gedrukt oder geschrieben zukommen lassen und wenn ihr so viel Sinden gethan hättet, als Sand am Meere und Laub auf den Bäumen und Sterne am Himmel sind sollen sie euch vergeben werden. Wenn ihr glaubt und thut, was dieser Brief euch lehrt und saget wer aber dass nicht glaubt, der soll sterben. Bekehrt euch oder ihr werdet gepeinigt werden, und ich werde euch fragen am jüngsten Tage dann werdet ihr mir Antwort gebben müssen wegen euren vielen Sünden, Wer diesen Brief in seinem Hause hat,

oder bei sich trägt dem wird kein Donnerwetter schaden and ihr sollt von Feuer Wasser und alle Gewallt des Feindes behütet werden. In Schleswig Hollstein hatte ein Graf einen Diener, welcher sich für seinen Vater B. G. H. das Haupt abschlagen lassen wollte. Als nun solches geschehen sollte, da versagte der (sic) Scharfrichters Schwert, und er konnte ihm das Haupt nicht abschlagen. Als der Graf dieses sah, fragt er den Diener wie es zuginge, dass das Schwert ihm keinen Schaden zufügte, worauf der Diener ihm diesen Brief mit den Buchstaben LTLK HBK NK zeigte. Als der Graf dieses sah, befahl er dass ein Jeder diesen Brief bei sich tragen sollte.

"Dieser Brief ist besser den Gold."

For the benefit of those readers of "N. & Q." who are not familiar with German, I subjoin a brief account and summary of the above:

The charm came down from God in 1724, and hovered about some representation of the baptism of Mary Magdalene in Holstein, refusing to be

caught, until 1791, when some one had the happy thought to copy it as it hovered. The essence of the charm seems to consist in the letters L T L KH BK NK, pronounced in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Whoever wears the charm need have no fear of thieves or murderers, swords or firearms of any sort, neither will he receive injury from storm, fire, water, or any assault of the evil one; nor will he be taken prisoner. No bullet will strike him, be it of gold, of silver, or of lead. Whoever doubts this may hang the charm round a dog's neck, and shoot at him: he will find that he cannot hit him. The greater part of the charm, however, consists of pious exhortations couched in biblical language, threats of evil to those who disbelieve in it, and promises of reward to those who believe in it and do what it enjoins. It concludes with a tale bearing witness to its efficacy, and well calculated to inspire confidence into a superstitious soldier. A certain count in Schleswig Holstein had a servant, who had given himself up in his father's stead to have his head cut off. The executioner stood up to perform his office, when, lo and behold, his sword was powerless in his hands! The count seeing this, asked the servant how it was that the sword did him no harm, and the servant showed him the charm with its mystical letters. Whereupon the count gave orders that everyone should wear this charm about him.

Is there an English soldier would wear such a charm and believe in it? I hope and believe there is not. F. CHANCE.

Sydenham Hill.

THE "SCALES OF JUSTICE" NO LONGER A FABLE. On Monday, Dec. 4, at the Warrington Borough Court, before the mayor (Joseph Davies, Esq.), H. Bleckly, Esq., and C. Broadbent, Esq., Patrick Flanaghan was charged with having had an unjust half-pound weight in his possession. The mayor requested the clerk (Mr. H. Brown White) to see how many quill pens would be required to balance the scales when the just and unjust weights had been placed at either end. They would fine the defendant one shilling for each one. Mr. White: "Nine will make the scales balance."-The Mayor: "Then we will fine the defendant one shilling for each one." I owe it to Warrington, which is a Lancashire town, to say that all the three justices named above are Cheshire men.

M. D.

MADAME DE GENLIS.-Among the interesting letters I lately mentioned as being addressed to Madame de Genlis is one of Prince Talleyrand, who, you will see, attached, like J. W. Croker, great value to her correspondence. Although written on Sept. 4, 1805, nine months after the coronation of Napoleon (in Notre-Dame by Pope