IS&X.MU.U.UM.] NOTES AND QUERIES. 225 1656, K., P. ' The Surfeit To A.B.C.' London, Printed for Edw. Dod at the Gun in Ivy-lane (Bodleian, Malone 497), p. 58. As if one in future age should make all England in ages past to be a Bartholomew-Faire, because Ben. Johnson hath writ it. Or that the condition of all our English women may be drawn out of Shackespeers merry wifes of Windsor. 1660. Montelion, 1660, Or, The Prophetical Almanack, sig. B 5v. [Shakespear and lack Falstaff are named in the calendar for May 4 and 2 respectively. They are named again in Montelion, 1662, sig. B 4v.] 1661. ' Merry Drollery. . . . Collected by W. N., C. B., R. S., J. G.,' p. 59. If I lye, as Falstaffe saies, I am a Jew. 1667. Jordan, Thomas. ' Money is an Ass,' Act III., sc. i., p. 24. What sayes the Poet, that most true doth write Who ever lov'd, that lov'd not at first sight. [Perhaps rather a borrowing from
- A. Y.L.I.,' III. v. 82 f., than a re-
ference to Marlowe.] 1700. Ward, Edward. ' To the Pious Memory of the Most Sublime and Accurate Mr. John Dryden.' The London Spy, II. vi. 7. Satyr and Praise flow'd Equal from his Pen Dramatick Rules, no Shakespear better knew. HYDEB E. ROLLINS. New York University. KNIGHTHOOD FEES. IN ' The Court and City Register,' 1747, p. 13, is a list of Fees due from all that receive the Honour of Knighthood. TO the Earl Marshal of Eng. . . . . 3 K.s Heralds & Pursuivants at Arms 8 Lyon King at Arms Gent. Ushers of the Privy Chamber Gentlemen Ushers daily Waiters Great Master Assistant Grooms of the Privy Chamber Gent. Ushers Quarter- Waiters Knight Harbinger Gent, and Yeom. Harbinger Serjeants at Arms To the Robes Office Pages of the Bed-Ch. King's Barbers Wardrobe-Office Serjeant and Office of the Trumpet Gentlem. of the Cellar and Buttery Sewers of the Bed-Ch. Grooms of the Chamb. Serjeant Porter Porters at the Gate Keepers of the Council Chamber Master Cook Yeomen Ushers Yeom. of the Mouth Closet Koopor of the Books, &c. Surveyor of the Ways Surveyor of the Dresser, &c. Pages of the Presence 13 10 10 on 00 05 00 (K) 06 06 00 00 00 00 06 00 12 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 16 10 10 10 10 To the s. d. Drum-Major .. .. .. .. 13 King's Footmen 2 00 Kings Coachmen . . . . ..0100 Corporals of the Guards of the King's Body . . . . . . 5 00 Register of the College at Arms . . 1 08 2 There is also to the Six Pages of the Bed Chamber, if Knighted within the Verge thereof , more .. .. 3 00 Total .. .. 95 11 2 If the items are correctly printed the total should be 95 Is. 2d. In ' The Court and City Kalendar,' 1759, p. 101, the heading is ' Fees paid by all that receive the Honour of Knighthood.' The differences between the two lists are few. In the 1759 list " Groom of the Privy Cham." instead of " Grooms," &c. ; " Ser- jeant at Arms " for " Serjeants," &c. ; " Yeomen of the Mouth " for " Yeom.," &c. ; " Closet-keeper " for " Closet Keeper of the Books," &c. : " Corporals of the Body Guards " for " Corporals of the Guards of the King's Body." Besides the verbal differences, to the Drum-Major is assigned 13s. 4rf. instead of 13s. ; and to the Corporals of the Body Guards 5 10s. instead of 5. The total is given as 95 Is. Qd. To make this correct the extra 4rf. must be included and the extra 10s. excluded. In 'The Court and City Register,' 1760, " The Second Edition corrected to the 1st of February," this list of fees does not appear, neither have I found it in any later or in any ' Royal Kalendar. ' Whether this means that the fees were abolished in 1759 (or early in 1760), or only that it was d. 4 j issue
o not thought worth while to continue issuing it, I do not know. It appears from certain passages in ' The Knights of England,' by Wm. A. Shaw, Litt.D., 1906, that the fees were not, at all events, at all times recoverable. This record . . . frequently comprised knights who had not paid their fees to the College. (Vol. i., Introduction, p. xlvi.) The College would only register a knighthood when the knight paid his fees (which amounted to 108L), and even then it could only register such knighthoods as were transmitted to it by cer- tificate from the Lord Chamberlain's office. As many knights absolutely refused to pay the fees, and as the Lord Chamberlain's office may easily have omitted to transmit such certificates, it is self-evident that the register of knights at the Heralds College is an imperfect record at best. (Ibid., p. xlix.) Certain it is that many knighthoods never were gazetted at all (probably in consequence of non-payment of fees, or again by reason of the
