424
NOTES AND QUERIES. [io* s. L MAY 28, HOI.
Surrey) ; another daughter, Mary, married
Sir Edward Selwyn (of Friston, co. Sussex),
Knt. Both the pedigrees cited state that Hester Smith married R. Fleetwood, but as she mentions sisters Brand and Selwin (sic) in her will, they are evidently incorrect.
Betham's Baronetage ' is also in error, as it gives the husband's name as Robert. Inci- dentally, this answers the query in 9 th S. ix. 513
I now come to the will of Robert Fleetwood, citizen and glass-seller, of London, son of the regicide and Hester Fleetwood (Robert the first, of my first paper). In his will, dated 9 July, and proved 15 August, 1712 (P.C.C. Barnes, 153), he directs that he is to be interred in the parish church of St. Andrew Undershaft, in which parish he was living, or in the vault belonging to the said parish ; the will likewise mentions that the house was in Lime Street Ward. He leaves to his honoured mother Hester Fleetwood 101. per annum, " according to obligation I am under for that purpose," and requests that, should he predecease her, she would be pleased to name his son Robert as her executor. To his eldest son George he leaves two shillings and sixpence " and no more, he having already had a full Child's part and more," and been an expense to him. To his son and daughter Cleaver he leaves a guinea apiece for a ring, his daughter having already had her portion. After various bequests he leaves the residue of his estate, South Sea stock, goodwill of business, &c., to be divided into three equal parts, for his wife Anne and his sons Robert and John. He wishes Robert to have the management of the business, and that John should serve the full term of his apprenticeship with his brother. The exe- cutors are his wife and the sons Robert and John, with Benjamin Steward, glass-seller, as overseer and arbitrator if need be.
The following extracts from the parish registers relate to him and his family ; a further search would probably disclose other -entries :
Christenings.
1720, April 6. John, the son of Robert Fleetwood and Jane his wife.
1721, April 25. Charles, y e son of Robert Fleet- wood and Jane his wife.
Burials.
1712, Aug. 10. Robert Fleetwood. 1721, April 28. Charles, y e son of Robert and Jane Fleetwood. 1721, Oct. 6. Robert Fleetwood.
The children baptized must have been the
grandchildren of Robert who died in 1712. obert Fleetwood who died in 1721 was in all probability the father of the children.
Administration of the estate of Jane
Fleetwood, late of West Moulsey, co.
Surrey, widow, was granted to her son
Robert Fleetwood, 17 March, 1752 (P.C.C.
Bettesworth), but I cannot state positively
that she was the widow of Robert and
mother of the two children baptized in 1720
and 1721, though the connexion of the Brand
family also with Moulsey can hardly be a
coincidence.
With regard to Hester Fleetwood 's con- nexion with the Quakers, I must express my obligation to Mr. Norman Penney (of the Friends' Library at Devonshire House, 12, Bishppsgate Street Without, where many interesting Quaker records are preserved), who has been at great pains to verify that she was a member of that body. R. W. B.
SHAKESPEARIANA.
" HORSE " (10 th S. i. 342). The suggestion of " horse " for " horses " in ' Macbeth,' II. iv. 13, would slightly improve the scansion of the line, and is so far desirable ; but in face of Shakespeare's free use of extra syllables in his verse, it is not cogent on that ground. Is it, then, cogent on any other? Are we to understand that any emendation restoring "Anglo-Saxon" or "Middle English" forms to Shakespeare is desirable? Perhaps not. We are asked to strike out the s in the I.e. "because it contradicts Shakespeare's usage in many other passages." Now what is Shakespeare's usage? PEOF. SKEAT admits that the form " horses " is found in Shake- speare. It is. Schmidt's 'Lexicon' gives eleven references, "&c.," for it. For "horse" as plural it gives eleven only (including PKOF. SKEAT'S ten). Admitted these latter, the poet's usage seems to prefer the dissyllabic plural. But I propose to examine the eleven more closely.
Let me premise that while Schmidt's 'Lexicon' as a work of reference is of the highest utility, the lexicographer's dicta on English meanings and usage are not to be swallowed uncritically ; and few that read his inept note on " organ-pipe " (' Temp.,' III. iii. 98) will defer to his taste.
In Sonnet 91 there seems to me not the slightest presumption that "horse" is plural. A man keeps more than one hawk, more than one hound, but often not more than one horse.
In 'Tarn. Shr.,' Induct., 61, the same applies.
' 1 Henry VL,' V. v. 54, proves nothing : in a category of things they need not be all in the same number (e.g., " Verbera,
- arnifices, robur, pix, lammina, tsedse ").
