354
NOTES AND QUERIES. cio- B. in. MAY 6, was.
husbandry flail, rakes, forks, spade, shovel,
shears, scythe, large and small measures.
Neither side, however, shows the complete
designs, and the transfers were evidently
made for larger mugs, as there are portions
shown of another compartment at bottom,
two other circles in which are portions of
-an old-fashioned scales and beam, a sieve, and
a mash or brewing tub. The handles have a
thistle in flower decoration. Round the
inside, an inch deep, is a rose - leaf and
clover decoration. THOS. RATCLIFFE.
Worktop.
CHRISTOPHER SMART AND THE MADHOUSE <10 th S. iii. 221, 276). I know what Mr. Gosse has said on this subject, but I fail to see that Smart was absent from Cambridge becaitse lie ^vas confined in a madhouse. The order quoted says that Mr. Smart is allowed, in lieu of commons, 101. up to Michaelmas, 1751. Mr. Gosse ('Gossip in a Library,' p. 190) says: "In October, 1751, Gray curtly re- marks, 'Smart sets out for Bedlam.'" In the letter from which he quotes there is no mention whatever of Smart by name ; but that is a trifle, for, as I have said, it is quite clear that the man referred to, whoever he was, is at Walpole's service if he cares to have him, and therefore is not really setting out for Bedlam. But if the order of the Treasury proves anything concerning Smart's confinement in a madhouse, it proves that he was so confined before October, 1751, for the payment is for a past period up to 29 Sep- tember. So, again, if the passage (8 October) to Walpole refers to Smart, he is really a free man at the date of Gray's letter. But the truth is, of course, that Smart has to keep away from college and \ieperdu because he is beset with duns and generally un- bearable, and the authorities, and perhaps his care for his own safety, enforce his absence.
Let me remove another misconception. On 27 November, 1753, it is
"ordered that the dividend assigned to Mr. Smart be deposited in the treasury until the Society be satisfied that he has a right to the same, it being credibly reported that he has been married for some time, and that notice be sent to Mr. Smart of Jiis dividend being detained."
Mr. Gosse asserts that, in spite of this order and the fact that Smart was married in 1753, he was allowed to retain his fellow- ship. He bases this inference upon the order of 16 January, 1754 :
" That Mr. Smart have leave to keep his name on the College Books without any expense, so long as lie continues to write for the premium left by Mr. Seaton."
The truth is, obviously, that Smart is too
poor to keep his name on the books, which
any member of a college may do by the pay-
ment of a small annual fee. It is necessary
that Smart's name should be so kept if he is
to compete for the Seatonian prize, and he
probably applies for, and certainly obtains,
this from the college without payment. That
he forfeited his fellowship after marriage is
unquestionable.
Though it is a subordinate detail, I must add that I am more and more convinced that the man of whom Gray speaks in the letter of 8 October, 1751, is not Smart. Gray says, "We have a man here" that is at Cam- bridge; but Smart is not at Cambridge. In my view he does not venture to show himself there. The allowance is made for him as absent up to 29 September. Is it to be contended that between that date and 8 October he turned up again at Pembroke College ? For what conceivable reason ?
D. C. TOVEY.
Worplesdon Rectory, Guildford.
MASONS' MARKS (10 th S. iii. 228, 296, 332). These do not belong to the mason. Each is the mark or tally of the quarryman who got out the stone. Figures or numbers are used to-day. In any building where the marks remain they are seen differing and closely mixed, just being chance marks on the stones when they were used, and not as referring to the mason who laid them. If they referred to the mason there must have been a fresh man for every varying mark ; thus hardly two consecutive stones would have been laid by the same man. They are found only on the upper parts of buildings, or on walls where not combed down. They helped also to show the bed of the stone. E. GREEN.
EPIGRAM ON A ROSE (10 th S. iii. 309). I have just read this epigram in a manuscript book of poetical extracts, dated October, 1843, but the wording differs slightly from that of your correspondent F. W., with an additional verse. The two verses in the manuscript book are as follows :
Should this fair rose offend thy sight,
Placed in thy bosom bare, 'Twill blush to find itself less white,
And turn Lancastrian there.
But if thy ruby lips it spy,
To kiss it shouldst thou deign, With blushes pale 'twill lose its dye,
And Yorkist turn again.
There is a note that " these lines were pre- sented by Lionel, Duke of Clarence, of the House of York, to Lady Elizabeth de Burgh, of the House of Lancaster." This poetical
