NOTES AND QUERIES. [9 th s. XL JUKE 13, urc.
saw what a large trade was done in the sale of beer and sheeps' trotters and bread to the seated pittites between the acts. That man of the world, Don Juan, said, not that " The play's the thing," but All human history attests That happiness for man the hungry sinner Since Eve ate apples, must depend on dinner [or supper ?J.
HENRY GERALD HOPE.
LONDON APPRENTICES : THEIR DRESS (9 th S. xi. 207, 316). In the year 1582, the luxury of dress having greatly increased among people of all degrees, but particularly apprentices, the Court of Common Council, apprehending such custom might prove of dangerous con- sequence, passed an Act for regulating their dress in future, in which it was enacted as follows :
"That no apprentice whatsoever should presume to wear any apparel but what he received from his master. To wear no hat, nor anything but a woollen cap without any silk in or about the same. To wear neither ruffles, cuffs, loose collars, nor other thing than a ruff at the collar, and that only of a yard and a half long. To wear no doublets but what were made of canvas, fustian, sackcloth, English leather, or woollen, without any gold, silver, or silk trim- ming. To wear no other coloured cloth, or kersey in hose or stockings, than white, blue, or russet. To wear no other breeches but what should be of the same stuffs as the doublets, and neither stitched, laced, or bordered. To wear no other surtout than a cloth gown or cloak, lined or faced with cloth, cotton, or baize, with a fixed round collar, without stitching, guarding, lace, or silk. To wear no pumps, slippers, or shoes, but of English leather, without being pinked, edged, or stitched ; nor girdles or garters, other than of cruel, woollen, thread, or leather, without being garnished. To wear no sword, dagger, or other weapon, but a knife : nor a ring, jewel of gold nor silver, nor silk, in any part of his apparel, on pain of being punished at the discre- tion of the master for the first offence ; to be publicly whipped at the hall of his company for a second offence ; and to serve six months longer than speci- fied in his indentures for a third offence."
And it was further enacted " that no apprentice should frequent or go to any dancing, fencing, or musical school ; nor keep any chest, press, or other place, for keeping of apparel or goods, but in his master's house, under the penalties aforesaid." W. Harrison's 'New and Universal History, Description, and Survey of London, and Westminster, and the Borough of South wark,' book i. chap, xxviii. p. 217.
J. HOLDEN MA.CMICHAEL.
JJUsrt Haulms. NOTES ON BOOKS, &c.
The Works of Charles and Mary Lamb. Edited by E. V. Lucas. Vol. I. Miscellaneous Prose. 1798- 1834. (Methuen&Co.)
THAT Mr. Lucas has been engaged upon a new edition of Lamb has been known for some time in
the literary world, and might reasonably have been inferred from an intelligent study of our columns. The first volume of this has appeared in very hand- some and attractive guise from Messrs. Methuen. That the edition auspiciously begun will for some time supplant all others is probable, since, apart from all other merits, it includes many essays and poems not previously identified. A system of annotation more thorough than has previously been judged necessary has been adopted, and a larger space has, we are instructed, been assigned to the letters of Mary Lamb, no less important and at times no less delightful than those of her brother. When complete the work will be in seven volumes, thus arranged: I., now before us, 'Miscellaneous Prose ' ; II., ' Elia and Last Letters of Elia' ; 111., 'Books for Children'; IV., 'Dramatic Specimens and the Garrick Plays'; V., 'Poems and Plays'; and VI. and VII., ' Letters.' To these most will add on their appearance two volumes containing a life of Lamb by Mr. Lucas, announced as in pre- paration.
Of the 560 pages of which the first volume is constituted well on to one-third is made up of notes, which are always helpful and at times especially edifying. Mr. Lucas owns to an appre- hension that this amount may be regarded as exces- sive. We are receding, however, rapidly from the times of Lamb, and a considerable portion of the contents of the volume has been before the public for a century. It is inevitable that allusions which were easily comprehended by Lamb's contemporaries should become obscure. When Lamb, for instance, discoursing under the head ' The New Acting,' men- tions Russell's Jerry Sneak, his readers knew what he was talking about as well as if a more modern critic were to talk of Sothern's Dundreary. At the present moment a man must turn to Brewer's ' Dictionary of Phrase and Fable ' to find out that Jerry Sneak is a character in Foote's 'Mayor of Garratt,' and to the ' Dictionary of National Bio- graphy ' to learn that Samuel Thomas Russell was an actor of the first half of the last century whose greatest part Jerry Sneak was. Full as they are, Mr. Lucas's comments are not exhaustive. When, for instance, in the same article with which we are already dealing ('The New Acting'), we find Lamb saying of the actresses of his day that " instead of playing their pretty airs upon their lover on the stage, as Mrs. Abington or [and] Mrs. Cibber were content to do, or Mrs. Oldfield before them, their whole artillery of charms is directed to ensnare whom ? why the whole audience," Lamb is simply recalling Colley Gibber's description of Mrs. Mon- fort's [Mountfort's] Melantha in ' Marriage-a-la- mode,' in which occurs the phrase "her whole artillery of Airs, Eyes, and Motion," perhaps the most sparkling criticism ever written.
Mr. Lucas's notes are abundantly illustrated, the designs reproduced including not only many plates from Hogarth to which reference is made in the essay 'On the Genius and Character of Hogarth,' but Poussin's ' The Plague at Athens,' Sir Joshua's 'Holy Family,' 'Death of Cardinal Beaufort,' and 'Count Ugolino,' Correggio's 'Vice,' Da Vinci's 'Creator Mundi,' and Wilkie's 'Saturday Night.' Facsimiles are also given of the early editions of C. & J. Oilier and of Lee and Hurst. The 1818 edition of the former is, indeed, the basis of the text adopted.
We note that Mr. Lucas unhesitatingly attributes to Lamb a hand in the Falstaff letters. We do not