ii s. vii. JAX. 25, 1913.] NOTES AND QUERIES.
71
" TONNAGIUM." Ducange (s.v. ' Tunna ')
says that the word tonna.gium occurs " in
Statute 2 Westmonastrensi, cap. 29." The
word does not appear there, nor, so far as
a cursory examination shows, elsewhere in
the statute. I shall be glad to have a note
of its first occurrence in English Latin.
R. J. WHITWELL.
Union Society, Oxford.
"SEX HORAS SOMNO."
(11 S. vi. 411, 474.)
THE three Latin lines " Sex horas. . . .largire Camaenis," given at the latter reference, are not Sir Edward Coke's own composition. He merely introduces them as " these antient Verses " in section 85 of ' The First Part of the Institutes of the Lawes of Eng- land, or, a Commentarie upon Littleton.' London, 1628, the last line having ultro, not ultra, and being without a comma in the middle. The translation or adaptation that M. GOUDCHAUX quotes is by Sir William Jones, who capped it with
Seven hours to law, to soothing slumber seven, Ten to the world allot, and all to heaven.
Both epigrams were printed by Lord Teign- moiith in his ' Memoirs of the Life, Writings, and Correspondence of Sir William Jones,' with the remark : " On another scrap of paper, the following lines appear ; they were written by him in India, but at what period is not known, nor indeed of any consequence." But Andrew Amos, in ' Four Lectures on the Advantages of a Classical Education, as an Auxiliary to a Commercial Education,'* London. 1846, pp. 78-80, described a law- book in his possession, on the fly-leaf of which was " the original manuscript " of these lines "in Sir William Jones's hand- writing, with all its emendations," dated 1784. The version of Jones's own epigram corresponds, except for minor differences of spelling and punctuation, with that in Teignmouth's book ; but the translation from the Latin, even after one has taken all the numerous alternatives into considera- tion, differs widely. For instance, " the rest on nature fix " has no place there. The draft shows " the Muses claim the rest," " the Muse claims all beside," &c.
Sir William Jones's lines, in one form at least, are familiar to most readers, because
- See also his ' Gems of Latin Poetry,' 18-51, p. 120,
where the account is repeated.
of their occurrence in Macaulay's review of
Croker's ' Boswell.' Croker had quoted the
epigram in the form
Six hours to law, to soothing slumber seven, and complained that addition failed to account for one hour. The reviewer, de- lighted at the opportunity of " dusting that varlet's jacket," remarked that he " did not think it was in human dullness to miss the meaning of the lines so completely," and credited Jones with a " wretched conceit." Amos's comment is :
"You will, however, now see that Mr. Croker's perplexity, and Mr. Macaulay's strictures on Sir W. Jones's supposed conceit, are altogether founded on a wrong reading of six for seven not the first time that these numbers have been confounded."
But how came Croker to quote an incorrect version, and how came Macaulay to accept it ? I think I can explain. In the 1804 edition of Lord Teignmouth's ' Memoirs,' p. 251, the epigram is printed
Six hours to law ,
(probably the slip being due to the beginning of the previous epigram). But it is cor- rected to Seven in the Errata, which some readers evidently overlooked !
Perhaps others, like myself, have tried to find the passage in Boswell that suggested Croker's remark. It is not there. The note that provoked Macaulay was one of those on the ' Apophthegms, Sentiments, and Opinions of Dr. Johnson ' published by Sir John Hawkins in his edition of Johnson's works, and included in vol. v. of the first edition of Croker's book.
There is yet another curious thing in connexion with these epigrams. In the ' Additions and Corrections ' to his fifth volume Croker offers the following transla- tion of the Latin lines, which, " if less poetical, is at least more exact " :
Six hours to sleep devote to law the same ; Pray four, feast two the rest the muses claim.
Now, if allot be put for devote, this is identical with one of Jones's alternative drafts on the fly-leaf quoted by Amos.
The volume of the * Collectio Salernitana ' mentioned at the latter reference should have been i. EDWARD BENSLY.
GALIGNANI (US. vi. 409, 495). The
references 7 S. xi. 27, 77, 118, 177, 213, 394,
474, may perhaps be of service to MR. FISHER
UNWIN, though they treat only of Galignani's
and of Mr. John Wright's publication of
Lord Byron's works.
HAROLD MALET, Col.
