Mr. Penny. These were the two houses next on the right (or east) hand of the junction of Berry Street with the Row. When Penny married he added a third house, No. 26, as his "private side." The house was still standing when the paper was written twenty-one years ago, and the writer was permitted by the occupiers to explore and sketch it. The result appears in some charming drawings, representing (1) the exterior of the house; (2) the sitting-room; and (3) the way up to bed, a staircase worn by the feet of countless schoolboys. The name of Wilderness Row no longer exists, and I am unable to say if the old house, with its immortal memories, has survived. Should this be the case, some memorial of Thackeray's residence might, I think, fitly be erected.
Source of Quotation Wanted (11 S. viii. 89).—The reference for Bishop Fraser's quotation is Aristotle, 'Rhetoric,' II. xv. p. 1390, b. 25-28, in the Berlin edition. The passage as it stands in the original is:—
Φορὰ γὰρ τίς ἐστιν ἐν τοῖς γένεσιν ἀνδρῶν ὥσπερ ἐν τοῖς κατὰ τὰς χώρας γιγνομένοις, καὶ ἐνίοτε ἂν ᾖ ἀγαθὸν τὸ γένος, ἐγγίγνονται διά τινος χρόνου ἄνδρες περιττοί, κἄπειτα πάλιν ἀναδίδωσιν.
In Bishop Fraser's time the 'Rhetoric' was a good deal more studied at Oxford than it is at present. Different people will differently appreciate the balance of educational gain or loss that has accrued owing to the change. John R. Magrath.
Queen's College, Oxford.
The quotation referred to is from Aristotle's 'Rhetoric,' Book II. chap. xv. par. 3. [ut supra].
I quoted the sentence in a paper on the Celtic families of Tudor and Cromwell some years ago, not knowing it had been used by Bishop Fraser, and probably in a somewhat different sense. It is in the Transactions of the Royal Historical Society for 1886, New Series, vol. iii. p. 359, where it will be seen that my translation is somewhat
different from that given by your correspondent. J. Foster Palmer.
8, Royal Avenue, S.W.
Maimonides and Evolution (11 S. viii. 47). The passage in Maimonides is not an anticipation of Darwin, or anything except the vaguest expression of a notion of physical development in mammalia, such as long anteceded Darwin.
I ask the indulgence of 'N. & Q.' for the essential part of the Maimonides passage, to show that his Paleyan theology has nothing to do with specific science at all, much less Darwin:—
"On considering the Divine acts, or the processes of nature, we get an insight into the prudence and wisdom of God as displayed in the creation of animals, with the gradual development of the movements of their limbs and the relative positions of the latter, and we perceive also His wisdom and plan in the successive and gradual development of the whole condition of each individual. The gradual development of the animals' movements and the relative position of the limbs may be illustrated by the brain … The nerves are the organs of sensation and … motion… But nerves … are too soft to set the joints in motion; therefore God made the following arrangement: the nerves … become muscles [&c.]. By this gradual development the nerves are enabled to set the limbs in motion … In a similar manner did God provide for each individual animal of the class of mammalia."—'Guide to the Perplexed,' pt. iii. chap, xxxii., opening.
Hartford, Conn.
'The Fruitless Precaution' (11 S. viii. 89).—Some years ago, in Paris, I witnessed a very amusing play at the Comedie entitled 'La Précaution inutile,' but cannot remember if the author's name was given on the bill of the play. If G. B. M. were to write to the director, he might get a clue.
The book which Pepys so enjoyed reading was a translation of Paul Scarron's story 'La Précaution inutile.' John Davies of Kidwelly issued English translations of three of Scarron's stories separately in 1657, and among them 'The Fruitless Precaution.' A copy does not appear to be in the British Museum. The stories in Davies's translation were afterwards issued in a collected form in 1665. For a criticism of 'The Fruitless Precaution' see 'Bibliotheque des Romans,' January, 1776.
187, Piccadilly, W.
London to Budapest in 1859 (11 S. viii. 70). My friend Mr. J. L. Lucas sent me a cutting with the query at the above reference. I am afraid, however, that I cannot give a precise answer. I know from the official Hungarian publications that the total length of the railways in Hungary at the end of 1858 was only a little over 800 miles, and during the year 1859 only about 80 miles were built. This will give an idea of the poor development of railways in that country by that date, if one considers that Hungary is larger than the
