16
NOTES AND QUERIES.
[2nd s. NO 1., JAN. 5. '56.
was built where it is, was that, the old church
bein<jr in decay, the Burdett of that day offered to
build a new church at any place the inhabitants
chose, provided they would draw the materials for
building it ; this they declined to do, and there-
upon he built it in the place most convenient to
himself, near Foremark Hall, and most inconve-
nient to the greater part of the parishioners,
many of whom have a mile to plod their weary
way to church on a Sunday. The old church
stood at the eastern end of the village of Ingleby.
C. S. GREAVES.
make this communication, and which I trust will not be
deemed obtrusive. T. L. MERRITT.
Maidstone.
PHOTOGRAPHIC CORRESPONDENCE.
On Concave Field for Photographic Pictures (1 st S. xii. 516.) Having read, carefully, MR. BOWMAN'S new method of taking photographs, I am sorry to find that, for three reasons, it must be incorrect. With your per- mission I will point them out. First, describe an arc, and draw its chord, which divide into any number of equal parts : from the centre of the circle, of which the arc is a segment, draw through the points of division on the chord to the arc, when it will be evident that the measures on the arc become less as they recede from the middle of the arc. This being the case, it is plain that, were a building divided by horizontal lines at equal dis- tances apart, they would become nearer to each other as they approached the top. Or, if a church with a spire were the object, the spire would be much Iqwer than it should be. In this particular, then, this new method is a failure.
Next : supposing a building to be divided by perpen- dicular lines, whether at equal distances or otherwise, they would be represented in the photograph by curved lines, tending to the top and bottom of the diameter of the circle of which the curve of photograph were a seg- ment. This will be evident by considering the light. im- pinging on the curve, as a plane, from the centre of circle to the curve. And the lines in the photographic curved plane would be much like the gores or lines of latitude on a globe. This, is a second cause of failure. MR. BOWMAN has not said whether the chord of the arc is to be vertical or horizontal ; but this would merely alter the results rotatively. I have concluded that the chord is to be vertical : were it horizontal, then those lines, which might be horizontal in the object, would be curves approaching each other, &c. ; whilst the perpen- diculars would, retaining perpendicularity, fail to repre- sent justly spaces equally drawn or placed on the object.
The third failure is, that there can be only one line strictly in focus, viz. that depicted by the plane of light which is in the same plane as the radius of the circle ; because, lines from that centre to any other part of the photographic plane, will be longer than the radius.
It is, nevertheless, true, that were the photograph kept in the same condition as whilst in the camera, and it were viewed through a pinhole at the centre of the circle, then, as far as the lines were concerned, all would be cor- rect; but still, the want of focus would be apparent. Were the photographic plane a portion of a hollow sphere, then every point would be in focus; but this must be viewed from the centre, and through a pinhole. But, as such a surface would be utterly impracticable, it is out of the question.
Believe me, Sir, I should have felt great pleasure, if this new and ingenious method had been satisfactory; but as it is otherwise, I thought it due to photography to
to fi?ltn0r tfltirrirtf.
Thomas Bewick, Wood Engraver (1 st S. xii. 510.)
If W. L. N. (Bath) is inclined to become the
executor of Bewick's compassionate bequest, by
endeavouring to raise a fund for the purpose of
representing, in good woodcuts, interesting native
objects in the animal kingdom, accompanied by
letterpress descriptive of the benefits conferred on
man by some objects of rustic persecution, such as
toads, all British snakes except the viper, &c. &c.,
I know not any place in the kingdom where he
would be more likely to meet with support than
Bath. I shall myself be very happy to support
him with an annual subscription of twenty shil-
lings, till all our friends shall be represented and
recommended for their good works to the protec-
tion of our species.
This done, I would subscribe for the pictures of our enemies, whether quadrupeds, birds, reptiles, or insects, and in the letterpress of these I would describe the ingenuity they display, and the most merciful means for their destruction. Perhaps the venerable Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge would admit such prints, when pub- lished, on their Catalogue, and allow them equal favour with the elephants, tigers, and other beasts of which they have the copyright, the use of hanging which on the walls of national and Sun- day schools I never could understand. And per- haps the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals might lend their aid to the cause, instead of confining their views to the sufferings of quad- rupeds alone. GEO. E. FKERE. Royden Hall, Diss.
General Wolfe (I 5t S. xii. 312.) Should not the date of Miss M. Deverell's publication be 17.81, and not 1731 ? She was one of six sisters who lived at a house at Nailsworth, now called " The Deverells." Miss Mary was also the au- thoress of a volume of Sermons. The initials "ED." were no doubt those of the elder sister Elizabeth, who resided at Bath. JNO. S. BURN.
Copyright in privately printed Books (1 st S. xii. 495.) As a question of strict property (which involves copyright), there is, I apprehend, no difference between manuscript and print. It cannot be doubted that the property of the Patriot King remained in Bolingbroke as com- pletely, after Pope had had it, by his desire, pri- vately printed, but carefully reserved from publi- cation, as when it was in MS., and that the Court of Chancery would have prohibited a piratical re- production of it. The question as to copyright (though founded on the doctrine of property) in-
