You will yourself, Mr. Urban, and your readers too, pardon me this slight ebullition of grateful feeling towards an author, who, by his writings, conferred upon me two signal benefits: they first cleared my intellects of an accumulated store, which I misprized as philosophy they, in the second place, taught me sounder doctrine; and the better tenets of that doctrine have grown and ripened into the New English Dictionary.

To proceed. The lexicographer can never assure himself that he has attained the meaning of a word, until he has discovered the thing, the sensible object-res, quæ nostros sensus feriunt; the sensation caused by that thing or object (for language cannot sever them), of which that word is the name. To this, the term meaning should be strictly and exclusively appropriated and this, too, may be called the literal meaning.

The first extension of the use of words from this literal denomination of sensible objects, or actions, or operations, is to supposed or assumed similar or correspondent objects or actions, or operations, in the human mind. This-the mctaphorical application of the literai meaning-may, for the sake of brevity, be termed the metaphorical signification. It is a meaning transferred ;—and here commences the broad distinction of literal and metaphorical language.

From this literal meaning, and metaphorical signification, the next step may be named, the consequential; and hence descend, in broad and rapid course, the applications of words in all their multitude and variety. These appear to be what Lennep intends to denote by translatæ significationes;-he has told us," paucissimas esse proprias verborum significationes ;" and he adds: "e contrario autem, transatlarum significationum copiam immensam, quæ ex propria notione, tanquam ex trunco arboris rami, quaquaversum pateant."

To Etymology, then, the lexicographer must first resort; but he must be cautious and reserved in the pursuit of it. Its use for the purpose of

Lennep, Anal. p. 41. And see Dr. Beddoes, on Mathematical Evidence, pp. 6,7.

a dictionary of a particular language is barely to ascertain the origin, and hence the radical meaning of each individual term in the vocabulary-further inquiry will be indispensable in philological researches to trace the origin of tongues, and the dialects of tongues; but when the intrinsic meaning is fixed, every lexicographical object is firmly secured. This distinction is not sufficiently regarded by ingenious men, who, led away by their passion for a favourite study, are not content to find a good English word followed back to a Gothic original, if they can discern what to themselves appears the fragment of a still deeper root in an Eastern soil. Others again there are

Whose fantasies, still working, Find out another crotchet; and these are not satisfied unless they can discriminate a combination of certain radical letters, to which they have, in their system, assigned an unvarying meaning. This, at best, is too recondite for a Dictionary, and not sufficiently so for Philology. The latter requires them to decompose their mixture, to account for and explain each letter, or elemental ingredient of their composition. They must subject their infallible panacea to the process of analysis.

A little reflection will convince them, both the orientalists and the literalists, that the province of Etymology for the purpose of an English Dictionary is of the limited extent which I have prescribed to it; and that to Philology in general must be resigned the gratification of a curiosity for deeper and more extended research.

While investigating, then, the meaning and consequent usage or application of words, I have considered it a duty incumbent upon the lexicographer to direct his view,-1st, To the etymology and literal meaning ;2nd, To the metaphorical application of this meaning-to the mind;-3rd, To the application consequent or in

It is founded upon Wallis. See his Grammar, and the quotations from him in Dr. Johnson's Grammar, Ch. Of derivation. See further, White's Etymologicon; a book which H. T. pronounced to be evidence in itself sufficient to warrant the issue of a commission of lunacy against the author.

"when heeres hore aren shad vpon my head,"*-I record, not with the zeal of a new convert, but in the soberness of tried and settled conviction the renunciation of those errors of my early faith; the abjuration of a supremacy to which Ijwas enslaved; and an avowal, that though still a calm and reasonable admirer, I have long ceased to deserve the title of a blind and bigoted devotee.

And here, Mr. Urban, you must suffer me to conclude. At a future day I may resume in illustration of my plan. I am, &c.

C. RICHARDSON.

THE following is a note in Lysons's Environs of London,' Part 11. p. 399, referring to the monument of William Nicoll, Esq. of Hendon Place, who died in 1644.

"Anne, daughter of Paul Nicoll, Esq. and grand-daughter of this William, married Sir Charles Hedges, of Finchley, Queen Anne's Secretary; from which match are maternally descended the present Duke of Marlborough, Viscount Bateman, and Sir Cecil Bisshopp."

This statement is erroneous. Anne Nicoll was the wife of Sir William Hedges, Knt. Alderman of London, &c. and not of Sir Charles. Sir William Hedges, whose will was proved in 1701, had by a first wife, who was buried at Stratton St. Margaret's in Wilts, together with other children, an elder son William, to whom he left estates in Ireland. His second wife was Anne Nicoll, relict of Colonel John Searle, of Finchley. She survived her husband Sir William, and

Funduntur vertice cani. Boetii L. 1.

"

her will was proved in 1724. She had issue by Colonel Searle two daughters; one, Esther, who died in 1709, and is buried at Tooting in Surrey, having married Sir James Bateman, by whom she had William first Viscount Bateman; the other, Elizabeth, married Thomas first Lord Trevor. She left by Sir William Hedges two sons, John and Charles. John was, I conceive, the individual mentioned in the Finchley Register (see Lysons, Part 11. page 221,) as the Honourable John Hedges, Esq. Treasurer to the Prince of Wales," and who was buried June 28th, 1737. Charles died in 1756, and was buried at Stratton St. Margaret's, having married Catharine, eldest daughter and co-heir of Bartholomew Tate, of De-la-Pré Abbey, co. Northampton, Esq. she died in 1763, and was buried at Stratton, informs us, from Windsor, where she having been brought, as the Register held some place about the Court. They had issue John, Lieut.-Colonel of the 48th Foot, who died s. p. in 1787; Charles, who married Anne, sister to Charles first Lord Bayning and died s. p. 1783; Anne, who married the Honourable William Bateman, M. P. for Gatton, second son of William Viscount Bateman beforementioned, and died s. p.; and Susanna, who married Sir Cecil Bisslopp, Bart. and was mother of the late Lord De la Zouche.

The Right-Honourable Sir Charles Hedges, Knt. the Judge of the Admiralty Court and Secretary of State, died in 1714, in which year his will was proved; and was buried at Wanborough in Wiltshire, not far from Stratton St. Margaret's. He held the manors of Wanborough, Compton, and Highway, in Wiltshire. His widow, Eleanor, died in 1733, and was also buried at Wanborough. Of their childrenAnne married Sir Edward Smijth of Hill Hall in Essex, Bart. and had issue; and William was of Wanborough, and died 1757, having married Elizabeth, daughter and heir of Thomas Gore of Aiderton, by whom he had issue Charles Gore Hedges, who died in 1737, s. p.; Thomas, who died s. p. in 1782, having sold Wanborough; Elizabeth, who married Sir John Shaw of Eltham, co. Kent, Bart. from whom there is no surviving

issue; and Eleanor, who married James Montagu, of Lackham in Wilts.

I am not aware of the exact relationship between Sir Charles and Sir William Hedges; but I suspect them to have been descended from the same great-grandfather. Le Neve's MSS. in the British Museum describe them as brothers, which is decidedly erroroneous, as may be seen by a reference to K. 9, Coll. Arm. The name appears to have been originally Lacy; but by what process it was transformed into the more cacophonous patronymic of Hedges, does not distinctly appear. Yours, &c.

λ.

Mr. URBAN, March 21. IT having been determined to rebuild the Parish Church of Putney, Surrey, your readers will learn with pain, that the exquisite little Chapel built by Bishop West, and attached to the south side of the Church, has been destroyed. Whatever may have been the necessity for enlarging the Church, it must ever be regretted that, on occasions of this kind, any specimen of ancient art so highly valuable as this elegant structure should be removed. If it was urged that the parish was under no obligation to sustain a fabric which was not required for the purposes of parochial worship, it may be replied that this objection would only apply to the expense; and surely, in a parish possessing so many wealthy inhabitants as Putney, a subscription for the proposed restoring and preserving such a structure ought to be easily raised. The remains of the Chapel are at present laid together in the church-yard, and to effect a reconstruction of the edifice would be a task of no great difficulty. I therefore take the opportunity, through the medium of your publication, of inviting public attention to the subject, with the hope that some individual will be found, possessed of sufficient public spirit and love for the arts, to step forward and rescue so fine an example of Tudor architecture from utter destruction. What the Chapel was, may be seen in a publication by Messrs Jackson and Andrews, Architects, in which, with the rest of the detail of this Chapel, is given a plan of the very elegant groined roof, which was executed in stone.

GENT. MAG. VOL. V.

The tower of the Church and the chancel have not been taken down; and the main pillars and arches which separated the nave and ailes still remain, and will I apprehend be incorporated in the new Church; the preservation of the Tower is a subject for congratulation, as thereby the appearance of the sister Churches of Fulham and Putney will not be entirely destroyed. A few words on Putney Church will appropriately conclude this article.

The Church was originally a chapel of ease to Wimbledon; and the only clue to the date of its erection is, that it existed prior to 1302. The pillars and arches, with the tower, are not older than the latter part of the fifteenth century; the shields in the spandrils of the western doorway contain the record of some forgotten benefactor; that on the dexter side bears, quarterly, first and fourth, two keys in saltire, second and third, three dolphins naiant in pale; the sinister shield has a merchant's mark. It appears that these shields indicated some individual who was a member of the Fishmongers' Company of London. At the period when the doorway was erected, the Fishmongers were divided into two Companies, the Stock and Salt Fishmongers; the arms of the latter Company appear to have been changeable; they are sometimes described as Azure, three cross-keys saltirewise Or, on a chief Gules three dolphins naiant Argent; at others, the dolphins and the keys change places. As the arms were probably not fixed until the union of the Companies, I think there is no difficulty in attributing the above-described shield to this Company; the more so, as it will be observed that it contains the identical bearings. In the Chancel of the Church was formerly an inscription and brass for Robert West, "Piscator," and Katharine his wife, A.D. 1481. It can never be supposed that an individual who was of sufficient consequence to have a monument in the chancel, was a common fisherman on the adjacent river; that he may have been a member of the Fishmongers' Company is highly probable; and it will, perhaps, not be giving too large a scope to conjecture, to attribute the mark to the Robert West, who was doubtlessly of the same family as 3 C

the Bishop; and, if these conjectures be allowed, it will be seen he was not the only benefactor in his family to the Church.

On each side of the nave are three arches obtusely pointed, and struck from four centres; the piers were very slender, and octagonal in form, with cylindrical columus attached to four of the sides; one of which on the north side, and two on the south, were corbelled at about a third of their height; the residue had regular bases and capitals. The proportions are very slender; and the whole would afford a good model for the architecture of a modern parish Church, the piers interfering very little with the accommodation of the congregation. At the end of each of the aisles was a Chapel, that on the south side being Bishop West's, before noticed, which communicated with the Church by means of two arches on square piers. The corresponding Chapel has been long since destroyed, and its site thrown into the Church. The Chancel has suffered much from alteration; the east window has been entirely destroyed, and the tracery of the others removed,

* The Bishop is said to have been the son of a baker at Putney; might not this have arisen from one who reported the anecdote, mistaking "Piscator," for "Pis

tor?"

the only vestige of its original architecture being a bold torus at the springing of the south window, which seems to indicate the architecture of the thirteenth century. The walls are composed of rubble, with some tile; and a piece of a small column is worked up with the materials, which has been painted red. Traces of painting remain on the parts of the edifice now standing. The wall on the north side of the Chancel has been marked by double red lines into squares, each containing a cinquefoil; the execution is coarse. The semi-pier at the east end of the south aisle has been painted green on three of its sides; the columns red, with black caps and bases.

An ancient tomb, resembling a stone coffin, exists on the south side of the altar, hidden by a seat; and near it is a stone with two figures in brass upon it; which, with the remainder of the monuments, I hope will be carefully preserved. The foundations of the new Church are laid beyond the walls of the old one; it will be in the pointed style, with buttresses, and the material brick. The Chancel is, perhaps, the only portion now existing, which is not worth preserving. It is to be hoped that the impropriator will see, this portion of the sacred edifice appropriately rebuilt. Yours, &c.

E. I. C.

DRAWINGS.

1. Two large Capital Letters illuminated by Dom: Silvestro degli Angeli,

1350.

written by Dom Jacopo Fiorentino 1350. See Vasari in the life of Dom Lorenzo monacho degli Angeli, a painter and scholar of Gaddi, who might perhaps have designed these choral paintings. Vasari, prima parte, p. 229. edit. 1568."

These are very splendid, and in a style not general in France and England till the next century.

2. Two covers of a book; in the inside are set as in frames two Italian illuminations, by Limosino delle Fane, dated 1499.