class="poem">

[2] Epigram 2, line 14

he gives, to neglect of the rhyme with 'yeare'

[3] Epigram 3, line 5, for 'fry' he stupidly reads 'cry.'

[4] Epigram 13, line 9, for 'sectaries' he gives nonsensically 'scituaries.'

[5] Epigram 15, line 3.

he transmogrifies into

[6] Epigram 26, line 11, he substitutes 'sweete' for 'hot' oblivious of the rhyme with 'petticoat.'

[7] Epigram 36, line 19, for 'rarifie' he reads 'ratiffie'[!]

[8] Epigram 41, line 2,

he gives thus

[9] Epigram 43, line 3, for 'Paris-garden' he has 'Parish-garden;' and so on ludicrously, with numerous proper names.

Any one capable of perpetrating such stupidities as these, ought not in my opinion, to be allowed to displace a text printed for the Author, more especially his cannot for a moment be allowed to over-bear the third edition, our text.

From a confused inscription on the first page of the MS. its probable writer is ascertained. It is as follows "Ex spoliis Richardi Wharfe, ex...... It is much trouble and much.... Ex spoliis R. W." Underneath is the book-plate of John, Duke of Newcastle. The general title runs "Epigramma in Musam, like Buckminster's Allmanacks servinge generallie for all England: but especiallie for the meridian of this famous Cittie of London." I regret that besides these (mis-called) 'improvements,' so admirable an Editor should have modernized throughout, the ORTHOGRAPHY equally of Marlowe and of Davies: and all the more, that in his 'Notes' he adheres to the original orthography whenever he quotes from his wealth of illustrative extracts. The annotation condemns the text. Without any hesitation therefore, I have set aside Mr. Dyce's reprints, and returned (as supra) to Davies' own text and orthography, saving a slight reduction of capitals and italics. None the less do I owe thanks to Mr. Dyce for his kind permission kindly given, to use any 'Notes' that might be deemed interesting. Those that I have taken are marked with his initial, D. I have to add another important correction of Mr. Dyce. After describing the Harleian MS. he observes "Though it is of a date considerably posterior to the first appearance in print of Epigrams by I. D., perhaps all the pieces which it exhibits are from the pen of Davies. (page 353.) Homer nods here: for on reading these additional 'Epigrams' thus assigned to Davies, I at once discovered that they consisted merely of a like blundering transcript of the "Satyricall Epigrams" of Henry Hutton, Dunelmensis, that were appended to his "Follie's Anatomie or Satyres" (1619.) The oversight is the more noticeable in that all these were reprinted in 1842, (edited by Rimbault), for the Percy Society, whereof Mr. Dyce was one of the most effective members of Council.

I confess that it was far from a disappointment to find that the 'Epigrams' of Davies were not to be increased to the extent they would have been had I accepted Mr. Dyce's opinion, and failed to discover the Hutton-authorship of nearly all those in the Manuscript, additional to his acknowledged ones. Nevertheless in the Appendix to our reprint of the 'Epigrams' I give certain additions from this Manuscript, that are found neither in Davies's nor Hutton's publications, but which seem to me to have the ring of Davies in them. The remainder—prefixed and affixed—may well be left in Manuscript. See the Memorial-Introduction for more on these Epigrams. G.

Epigrammes.

Ad Musam. 1.

Of a Gull. 2.