58
NOTES AND QUERIES. [9* s. m. JAN. 21, m
the authorities of Victoria Embankment
would probably include in one condemnation
with such idioms as "a friend of mine" or
" the committee are sitting."
R. J. WALKER.
The craftsman who bore this nickname is by no means so mysterious a person as MR. THORNTON seems to imply. The passage from Bishop King is a quotation from Cicero, ' Acad. Prior.,' ii. 120. Myrmecides constructed an ivory chariot which a fly could cover with its wings, and a ship which bore the same relation to a bee. See Pliny, ' Nat. Hist.,' vii. 21. J. P. GILSON.
38, Great Ormond Street, W.C.
MAJOR JOHN ANDR : COL. WILLIAMS (9 th S. ii. 528). In 1876 I attended a William Joseph Andre. He died of consumption on 21 August of that year, aged thirty-six. He was a nephew, he told me (probably a grand- nephew), of Major John Andre'. He had been living in College Street, Chelsea. I saw his son, who was still living in Chelsea, as late as 1883. Both father and son were, I believe, employed in connexion with some tennis club, in what capacity I did not know.
J. FOSTER PALMER.
8, Royal Avenue, S.W.
PICTURE BY MURILLO (9 th S. ii. 128). A condensed account of the history of this picture 'La Vieja' is given by Curtis in his exhaustive work on Velasquez and Murillo, under No. 448 of the works by the latter- artist. W. ROBERTS.
Carlton Villa, Klea Avenue, Clapham.
THEATRE TICKETS AND PASSES (9 th S. ii. 348, 416). Perhaps MR. A. W. WATERS may like to be referred to the Picture Magazine, vol. iii., p. 148 (1894), where he will find twenty-six illustrations of tickets to public theatres and other places of amusement. The following, among others, are given : Covent Garden, 1762 and 1817; New Theatre, Covent Garden, 1809; Drury Lane, 1776 and 1790; Theatre Royal, 1671, 1684, and 1755 ; Queen's Theatre, 1684 and 1695 ; King's, 1791 ; The Grotto, 1764 ; Marybone, 1766 ; New Theatre, Good- man's Fields ; Italian Opera Pantheon, 1790 ; Royal Haymarket, 1778 ; Cromwell's Gardens, Brompton ; Royal Circus ; and Ranelagh House. If your correspondent is unable to see this book, I shall be very happy to lend him my copy. C. H. C.
South Hackney.
ARCHITECTURAL NICHES (9 th S. ii. 409 ; iii. 32). My thanks are due to two of your correspondents, who, as well as another
who wrote to me direct, suggest that the
"niches " described by me might perhaps be
putlog holes. There are plenty of instances
of indubitable putlog holes about the place,
but I think that if your readers could see the
sketch to which my eyes now turn, they would
agree that the little cavities in question can
have served no such purpose, their great
number, regularity, and proximity to each
other militating against such a theory. I
count thirty in the uppermost row close
under the office line. A course or two of
stones lower than this comes another row of
about as many ; and there are seven or eight
rows, interrupted here and there by small
windows (apparently later insertions). The
stones composing the wall are of about the
size that I nave ascribed to the niches, with
now and again a large " riser," neat ashlar
work. I have been asked, Might doves have
been the intended occupants? these being
somewhat smaller than pigeons ; but I think
there would not be room for one to turn round
in, leave alone for two, Avhen nesting.
ETHEL LEGA-WEEKES.
MAELSTROM (9 th S. ii. 285, 451). The book in which this word is printed maelstrom, as I observed at the latter reference, is Mr. Silva White's * From Sphinx to Oracle,' just pub- lished. The blunder is at p. 2.
F. ADAMS.
106A, Albany Road, Camberwell.
HEBREW NUMERALS (9 th S. ii. 288, 335, 436). I do not know why CANON TAYLOR should think my request unreasonable. On such a subject his name is undoubtedly of high authority ; but how can his statement be reconciled with the following, from Prof. Driver : " The supposition that letters were used for numerals in the sacred [Hebrew] autographs is destitute of foundation " ?
PERTINAX.
NOTES ON BOOKS, &c.
Armorial Families. Compiled and edited by
Arthur Charles Fox-Davies. (Edinburgh, T. C.
& E. C. Jack.)
THOUGH put forward as a third edition, Mr. Fox- Davies's 'Armorial Families ' is practically a new work. It is thoroughly consonant with his previous labours, and it maintains and defends the opinions previously enunciated, carrying them to their legiti- mate and inevitable conclusions. It is, moreover, necessarily no less uncompromising and aggressive than previous works, and while wholly defensible in view is likely to create in many quarters the maxi- mum of annoyan ce and controversy. The unpalatable truths Mr. Fox-Davies felt called upon to advance
