472
NOTES AND QUERIES. [11 s. i. JUNE n, 1910.
The Rev. Joseph Standen (1639-1710) is
mentioned in Noble's continuation of
Granger's ' History,' vol. ii. p. 141, as being
probably " a descendant of Anthony Standen,
Esq., Cupbearer to Henry, King of Scotland,
and sworn servant to his son, James I. of
Great Britain. M W. SCOTT.
LONDON TAVERNS IN THE SEVENTEENTH
CENTURY : " THE COCK TAVERN " (10 S. xii.
127, 190, 254, 414; 11 S. i. 190). Several
correspondents have put MR. HEMS right as
to the exact location of the old " Cock
Tavern Vl at Temple Bar, or rather, where
Temple Bar once stood.
MR. CECIL CLARKE (p. 414) speaks of the old sign of " The Cock " as having been stolen, and, as he thinks, afterwards re- covered. This was so, I believe. There was considerable mystery about the whole transaction, and I and many other Templars who had an almost daily chop and half- pint of stout (we had degenerated since Tennyson's ode was written, and few of us could manage a pint then !) in the old place, were greatly excited about it.
As MR. DOUGLAS infers (p. 254), there was some considerable delay before the old place actually came down, notwithstanding that the site was badly wanted. The value of the business done for such a small place was large, and was of such a nature that it could be carried on with only a narrow entrance for its customers, whilst the com- pensation for disturbance must have been considerable. Eventually it crossed over the way almost bodily, I may say, all the old fittings (including the Jacobean oak fireplace, the old tables and benches, together with the' seventeenth -century farthing token, the only one, I believe, of the old " Cock Tavern u known to be in existence) being removed to a little east of the Inner Temple gateway and the so-called Henry VIII. 's Palace. This is a circumstance to which none of your correspondents have alluded, perhaps because it is so well known, whilst, if I remember rightly, I and others in the pages of * N. & Q.' have referred to its continued existence, and the upstairs room where the business was carried on amidst its old surroundings, and, as far as possible, in the old way.
It was shortly before this removal, I think (the proprietor at that time being Mr. Col- nett), that this stealing if stealing it was took place. There were various rumours accounting for its disappearance. Some put it down to the action of American relic -
hunters ; others believed that it was taken
away because the proprietor was afraid that
it might be stolen, as it was known that the
long-drawn-out existence of the old house
must shortly come to an end, or that it
might not be included in the list of fixtures
in case they had to be sold. I myself
questioned Mr. Colnett on the subject, but
could get very little information.
Anyhow, about the time of the removal of the tavern to the south side of Fleet Street, as I have said, the gilt effigy reappeared in its old place over the doorway. This must be some thirty years or more ago, but I never forget, when I pay occasional visits to London, to look in at " The Old Cock Tavern " and order my luncheon as of old. But somehow, with all the old waiters gone and a new proprietor, it does not seem the same thing, though perhaps over twenty years of a tropical diet may have spoilt my palate somewhat. The very class of customers seems changed, for I fancy that nothing like so many Templars take their luncheons there now that their up-to-date Benchers provide for them such excellent and reasonable repasts in the halls of their own Inns. "Tempora mu- tantur, nos et mutamur in illis."
J. S. UDAL, F.S.A.
Antigua, W.I.
See also Taylor the Water Poet's 'The Carriers' Cosmography ; or, A Brief Relation of the Inns, Ordinaries, Hostelries, and others Lodgings in and near London,* 1637, which includes a few of the taverns already mentioned, and about eighty more signs.
TOM JONES.
EASTER TWICE IN ONE YEAR, O.S. (11 S. i. 305, 376). ' Whitaker's Almanack,* 1910, p. 69, ' Table of Easter Days,' &c., uses the historical computation, to the exclusion of the civil, ecclesiastical, or legal year, and is historically correct in doing so.
The civil year used to begin on the 25th of March, a fixed date, whereas Easter Day was always the first Sunday after the first full moon which happened next after the one-and-twentieth day of March. And if the full moon happened upon a Sunday, Easter Day was the Sunday after. Thus Easter Day could happen on the 22nd, 23rd, or 24th of March, i.e., at the end of a civil year, or, as it were, before its proper time ; so two Easter Days would occasion- ally fall in one civil year. But the historical year (1 January 31 December) could not
