144
NOTES AND QUERIES. [9 th s. VIL FEB. 23, 1901.
manner, and never redeeming its faults of
plagiary by any qualifying touches of original
treatment, except such as are often of the
most ridiculous character. The author, in-
deed, does not stop to consider whether or
not Spenser's descriptions will apply to things
in his play, but steals with the haste of a
bungling robber. I have also shown that * Seli-
mus ' is copied in ' Locrine ' in the same bold
fashion as Spenser is, and that Marlowe,
whilst taking images from 'The Ruines of
Rome,' agrees with 'Selimus,' and differs from
' Locrine,' in his phrasing. Neither will it be
overlooked that I have not been able to show
that ' Locrine ' was under any obligation for
material to 'The Faerie Queene.' If the two
plays were by one writer, we should catch
glimpses of Spenser's great poem in both ;
the absence of such material in ' Locrine '
renders the theory of a common authorship
a psychological impossibility.
I turn now to the joint relation of ' Seli- mus ' and Marlowe with Spenser.
As was usual at that time, ' Selimus ' was printed without its author's name being men- tioned in the title-page. It was allowed to remain in neglect until the late Dr. Grosart took it in hand, and included it amongst the works of Greene in his " Huth Library," 1881-6. It has since been made accessible in Dent's " Temple Dramatists," 1898.
Dr. Grosart saw that the play was a work of uncommon power ; and as he had traced in it two passages that are quoted in ' Eng- land's Parnassus ' as being by Greene, he hastily assumed that Greene was the actual author of the play. Unfortunately for this conclusion there is nothing in ' Selimus ' to suggest Greene ; and, as a matter of fact, its atheism, its bold advocacy of the doctrines of Machiavelli, its style, and its phrasing are totally dissimilar to anything that can be found in that writer's known work.
Again, the editor of 'England's Parnassus,' which was printed in 1600, and consists of quotations from English literature up to that year, was not always correct in his assign- ments of passages that he quotes. He actually gives to Greene three passages that belong to Spenser, and he makes similar mistakes in regard to other authors. Moreover, it must be borne in mind that several years had elapsed between the deaths of Greene and Marlowe and the publication of 'England's Parnassus'; and as Marlowe and Greene were friends and inseparables, it is excusable that the author of the anthology should attri- bute his ' Selimus ' quotations to Greene instead of to Marlowe. Of course, too, the absence of the author's name from the title-
page is a circumstance that would lend itself
to such an error of attribution.
CHARLES CRAWFORD. (To be continued.)
THE FAMILY OF SIR FRANCIS MITCHELL.
I SEE in an old volume of your most interesting paper that some one asks about Sir Francis Mitchell, his ancestors and descendants. Sir Francis was dis-knighted and fined for malpractices in 1621, the House of Commons having revenged itself on him because it could not reach Bucking- ham and the King, who were really behind Mitchell and were getting the chief share of profits from the monopolies.
There were two sons or grandsons of John Mitchell, of Essex, Francis and Lawrence. Francis was made Clerk of the Market in May, 1603 ; Lawrence was made Bailiff of the Market in 1608. In 1612 Francis Mitchell married Cicely, daughter of H. Wentworth, Esq., of Essex. He was then described as of Theydon Garnon, Essex. Mr. Wentworth married again, and his wife, by will dated 1630, leaves money to " Francis, Philip, and Cicely, children of her late daughter-in- law Cicely, wife of Francis Mitchell, Com- missioner." This settles the names of the children of (Sir) Francis. In 'Inquisitions,' Essex, 1634, Sir Francis is shown as the brother of Lawrence Mitchell, who is his executor.
The writer of the memoir of (Sir) Francis has mixed him up with quite a different Francis Michell. The other Francis was the son of Humfrey Michell, of Old Windsor, Berks, and of Dorset, M.P. first for Poole arid then for Windsor, Surveyor of Windsor Castle, 1570 to 1598. This Francis of Old Windsor became secretary to Lord Russell, the great Lord Deputy of Ireland, and went with him to Ireland in 1594. There are constant references to him in State papers, and he was subsequently employed on diplo- matic missions abroad by Lord Salisbury. This Francis had a son, entered at Gray's Inn in 1613 as " Humfrey, - son and heir of Francis Michell, Esq., of Old Windsor" (who had entered Gray's Inn himself on 13 August, 1590). Francis married the daughter of Humfrey Speccott, of Speccott, Devon, and his son, the younger Humfrey, is mentioned in the will of his grandfather, Humfrey Michell M.P. for Windsor) dated 1598. The direct descendants of Humfrey of the Old Windsor family went to Ireland. John Michell, of the younger branch of Humfrey's family, was M.P. for Windsor in the eighteenth
