9ths.x.D H c.27,i902.] NOTES AND QUERIES.
519
to the Catholic reaction. Other communications
have already seen the light in the Cornhitt and
Macmillan's magazines, the Art Journal, and the
Church Quarterly. The republication is in all
respects judicious.
De Necessariit Obseryantiis Scaccarii Dialogm. By Richard, son of Nigel, Treasurer of England and Bishop of London. Edited by Arthur Hughes, C. G. Crump, and C. Johnson. (Oxford, Claren- don Press.)
To three Oxford scholars we are indebted for a recension of the ' Dialogus de Scaccario,' which now appears in what may well be regarded as the definite form. The basis is naturally supplied in Thomas Madox's edition, drawn by that fine anti- quary from the Red Book of the Exchequer, a thirteenth-century MS., and first printed as an appendix to his admirable ' History of the Ex- chequer.' So full tribute to the merits of the work has been yielded by Bishop Stubbs that ignorance concerning it is no longer pardonable. Long before the appearance in what, until thirty years ago, was the recognized edition it was known to anti- quaries and lawyers, passages from it being cited in Camden's 'Britannia,' Spelman's ' Glossarium,' Coke's ' First Institute,' and Selden's ' Titles of Honour,' while the importance attached to it is shown in the numerous MSS. of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries which preceded its appear- ance in print. In 1870 it was included by Dr. Stubbs in his 'Select Charters,' where it is still accessible, and in 1875 Dr. F. Liebermann, of Got- tingen, published his ' Einleitung in den Dialogus de Scaccario,' in which, in giving an account of the matter contained in the treatise, he suggests some textual alterations. The text of the 'Select Charters' is that generally used. It is virtually the same as that printed by Madox in 1711, in the preparation of which he had been assisted by George Holmes, Deputy-Keeper of the Records in the Tower. Deservedly high as this collation stands, the new editors are able to describe it as untrustworthy, and the text itself as in passages uncritical. An instance of this kind of error is shown in the preface to part i B. p. 56, 1. 21, where thesubstitutioii ifor the word mammona=" arches "of " in misericordia" converts a passage into nonsense. The aims of the editors, none of whom puts in any claim to originality, have been to supply from a collation of the four most important MSS. the best obtainable text, and to collect and reduce to the form of a commentary existing references to the book, adding to them such results of their own observations as seem to introduce points that have escaped previous notice. An account is supplied of the MSS. on which the text is based, and one also of the very numerous transcripts, abridgments, translations, &c., which are to be found in the British Museum, the Bodleian, and the libraries of various colleges and Inns of Court. The three MSS. principally employed are the Red Book of the Exchequer, the Black Book of the Exchequer, and the Cotton MS. Cleopatra A. 16. The last named is held on the whole the most valuable, and when its reading agrees with that of either of the pre- ceding the result is held conclusive, fn orthography the editors have been guided by the Pipe Rolls of Henry II., which were written under the eye and in the language of the Treasurer, and are accord- ingly assumed to represent his standard. By these methods it is hoped that a text is obtained which
will command the approval of scholars. To pro-
nounce definitely on this implies an amount and
kind of labour such as few have the ability and the
leisure to employ. We have not the presumption
to speak on the subject, and content ourselves with
commending the work to the attention of legal
antiquaries. That the treatise, first assigned to
Gervase of Tilbury, is not his was shown by Madox,
who also first established that it is due to Richard,
Bishop of London. The part of the work that will
be most frequently consulted is the account of the
origin of the Exchequer, its staff and constitution,
its action while sitting, and the manner generally
in which the money owing to the king was collected
and accounted for. This portion alone will render
it of highest importance to the student of legal
antiquities and of the constitution.
A Catalogue of Notable Middle Templars. By John Hutchinson. (Printed for the Honourable Society of the Middle Temple.)
So convinced of the merit of this compilation were the Masters of the Bench of the Middle Temple that, at the instance of Master C. H. Hopwood, K.C., they ordered it to be printed at the expense of the House. It consists of a list of Englishmen or British subjects, about 1,000 in all, deserving a record in any standard work of British biography whose names are to be found also in the Admission Books of the Middle Temple. In every case a short biography is appended to the narfle. This does not aim at supplanting the record given in most cases in the 'D.N.B.,? but renders the volume useful for handy reference. The lion's share is naturally monopolized by the law, but there are many names of distinguished authors, statesmen, &c., whom public estimation does not connect with that pro- fession. A cursory glance over the volume reveals the presence of Thomas Carew the poet, the great Earl of Clarendon, William Congreve the drama- tist, William Cowper, Charles Dickens, Sir Francis Drake, John Evelyn, Henry Fielding, John Ford, Sir Martin Frobisher, Fulke Greville, the Marquis of Halifax, Inigo Jones, Thomas Madox the legal antiquary, John Marstpn, John Pym, Sir Walter Raleigh, Richard Brinsley Sheridan, William Makepeace' Thackeray, Sir Henry Wotton, and innumerable others with less claim to eminence. Not seldom, however, the lives of less famous individuals are those of most interest to the reader or the student. Exactly four centuries are covered by the catalogue, the earliest of the Inn Registers being dated 1501. Chaucer and "Moral" Gower are said by tradition to have belonged to the Temple, but whether Middle or Inner cannot be told. Their names do not accordingly appear.
Who's Who, 1903. (A. & C. Black.) ON its appearance for the fifty-fifth year ' Who 's Who' has well on to 1,600 pages. This great aug- mentation is obtained, although tables which were of interest far inferior to the biographical portion have been removed, untilin the present volumeampng these only the Royal family and the obituary notices are retained. Constant use of this invaluable book of reference has enabled us to dispense with almost all others of its class. As regards individuals con- cerning whom the public is interested, it ranks with Burke and other indispensable works. As an index of accomplishment and a guide to addresses it is equally important. " Everybody who is any- body " does not appear in the Blue Book, the Red
