350 NOTES AND QUERIES. [9» s. iv, Oct. gs, m Annandale's Ogilvie, under ' That,' says : By the omission of the relative, that often acquires the force of that which," and this very text of St. John is given as an example. Angus, as I have shown, gives much the same explanation. I may add that the Rheims Version, 1582, nearly thirty years before the A.V., has that which in both clauses. Wiclif, 1380, has in both clauses that that. At first sight this seems to be the demonstrative with the restrictive relative. But there is reason to think that at this older stage of the language the first that may have stood for what, and that the second may be what Maetzner calls " the redundant particle," and Abbott " the conjunctional affix." Examples given are which that, what that, when that, why that, <&c. Of the application of this usage to Shak- speare's instances of that that Maetzner speaks doubtfully. This double that occurs thrice in the A.V. In Num. vi. 21* and Dan. xi. 36 the R.V. changes it to that which, in Zech. xi. 9 retains it. So in Matt. xx. 14 our that becomes that which, while in 1 Sam. xxiv. 19 it is retained by the R.V. The on. which Mk. Wilson quotes, but which does not enter into the question, since 5 alone is the word translated by our that, is actually rendered in the Rheims Version, thus introducing the oratio indirecta. By its omission the A^V. and R.V. seem to favour the oratio recta. The Greek, apparently, may be taken either way. Wiclif wrongly ren- dered it "for,"misled, perhaps, by the Vulgate "quia." 0. Lawrence Ford, B.A. Bath. In Voltaire I have met frequently with the construction on which I remarked : " Louis XIV., en renvoyant le cardinal, 6ta tout pre'texte de rovolte a un peuple las de guerre, et qui airaait la royaute." I have met with it also in Moliere, in Horace, in Washington Irving, and in other distinguished writers besides those whom I mentioned before. In explanation of what I said in my former letter, I would observe that Shakspeare wrote most of his best work after the death of Spenser, and therefore, though partly a contemporary, may be rightly placed amongst those wno immediately followed him. Dryden all through his preface is unmindful of Shak- speare. He says that our numbers were in their nonage until Waller and Denham
- This text seems almost decisive in favour of
demonstrative and relative; for else, after trans- lating the Hebrew relative by that, why should it have Deen thought necessary to supply the first that in italics, unless as the demonstrative ? appeared. This has been said also by others, It is strange how a mistake will be repeated by author after author. The numbers of Waller and Denham were not superior to those of Shakspeare and Milton. The in- correctness of Shakspeare does not eclipse the marvellous beauty of most of his poetry. Waller cannot be said to have come before Milton. He was his contemporary. There are some remarkable mistakes in the preface of Dryden. He acknowledges that he once thought the story concerning Palamon and Arcite to be of Chaucer's own invention. Afterwards he found a reference to it in the ' Decameron.' But even then he did not know that Boccaccio himself had written it. It is Boccaccio's own famous poem of the ' Theseide.' There is little difference between this and 'The Knight's Tale,' and Palamon and Arcite are the names of the heroes in both poems. E. Yardley. This note refers only to one remark by Mr. Wilson at the last reference. He says," I regret that the R.V. has not discarded the masc. which for who." If I mistake not, it was the late Dean Alford who contended— and, as I think, justly—that, when followed by a word beginning with a vowel, which, euphonice causd, is to be preferred to who— e.g., " Our Father which art in heaven." R. M. Spence, D.D. Manse of Arbuthnott, N.B. A Granite Tramway (9th S. iv. 263).—The tramway in Northamptonshire, quoted as being as good now as it was "the day it was finished, more than sixty years ago," seems of somewhat later date than is that still existing in perfect condition upon Dart- moor, near the little border village of Bovey Tracey. It is hard by the cele- brated Hey Tor rocks ("hey," from hmh, high), and connects the quarry close by (from which the granite was procured to build London Bridge) with the Stover Canal at Teigngrace, the latter rather more than six miles away. This is certainly the oldest railway in Devonshire if a line formed of lengths of granite, with grooves in lieu of rails, can properly be so called. Its construction was due to the late Mr. George Templer, who also made the canal in question, which, after a run of two miles, connects itself with the river Teign, a navigable stream that in its turn presently flows into the English Channel. This tramway was opened in 1820 amidst much local rejoicing. A much older tramway or railroad upon
