1605, notwithstanding the intermediate appearance of it in The Passionate Pilgrim."

May I inquire if any new light has been thrown upon this disputed song since the publication of Mr. Collier's Lyric Poems in 1844?

The song is addressed to Cynthia, and, as Mr. Collier says, is not unworthy of Shakspeare's muse. As it is not of any great length, perhaps it may be thought worthy of insertion in "N. & Q."

J. M. G.

Worcester.

Mr. Collier's "Notes and Emendations:" Passage in "All's Well that Ends Well."—

Such is the text of the first folio. Mr. Payne Collier, at p. 162. of his Notes and Emendations, informs us that the old corrector of his folio of 1632 reads volant for "violent," wound for "move," and still-piecing for "still-peering."

Two of these substitutions are easily shown to be correct. In the Tempest, Act III. Sc. 3., we read:

What is still-closing but still-piecing, the silent reunion after severance? What is to wound the loud winds but to wound the air that sings with piercing?

But as to the third substitution, I beg permission through your pages to enter a caveat. If

we had no proof from the text of Shakspeare that violent is the correct reading, I fancy that any reader's common sense would tell him that it is more an appropriate and trenchant term than volant. "What judgment would stoop from this to this?" Volant, moreover, is not English, but French, and as such is used in Henry V.; but happily, in this case, we have most abundant evidence from the text of Shakspeare that he wrote violent in the above passage. In Henry VIII., Act I. Sc. 1., we have the passage,

In Othello, Act III. Sc. 3., we have the passage,

These passages prove that violent is a true Shakspearian epithet for velocity. But how exquisitely appropriate is the epithet when applied to the velocity of a ball issuing from the mouth of a cannon: and here we have full confirmation from Romeo and Juliet, Act V. Sc. 1., where we read:

I trust that Mr. Collier will not, in the teeth of such evidence, substitute volant for violent in correcting the text of his forthcoming edition.

C. Mansfield Ingleby.

Birmingham.

GENERAL MONK AND THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE.

A document has recently come into my possession which may perhaps be deemed worth preserving in the pages of "N. & Q." It is a letter from the University of Cambridge to General Monk, and, from the various corrections which occur in it, it has every appearance of being the original draft. Unfortunately it is not dated; but there can, I presume, be little doubt of its having been written shortly before the assembling of the parliament in April, 1660, which led to the Restoration, and in which Monk sat as member for the county of Devon. The words erased in the original are here placed between parentheses, and those substituted are given in Italics:

My Lord,

As it hath pleased God to make your Excell^cie eminently instrumental for the raising up of three gasping and dying nations, into the faire hopes and prospect of peace and settlement, so hath He engraven you (r name) in characters of gratitude upon the hearts of all (true) to whom (cordially wish) the welfare of this church and state (are) is deare and pretious. (Out) From this principle it is that our University of Cambridge hath, with great alacrity and unanimity, made choyse of your Excellency with whom to deposite the(ire) managing of theire concernments in the succeeding Parl^t, w^ch, if your Excell^cy shall please to admitt into a favourable (interpretation) acceptance, (you will thereby) you will thereby (add) put a further obligation of gratitude upon us all; w^ch none shalbe more ready to expresse than he who is

Your Excell^cies most humble serv^t,

W. D.

[Endorsed]
To the L^d General Monk.

Who was "W. D."? Was he the then Vice-Chancellor?

Leicestriensis.

Minor Notes.

Curiosities of Railway Literature.—Has "Bradshaw" had any reviewers? If not, an example or two from this neighbourhood, of the absurdities which reappear month after month in the time-tables, may show the necessity of them. A Midland train proposes to leave Gloucester at 12.40 p.m., and reach Cheltenham at 1 p.m. The Great Western Company advertise an express train, on the very same line, to leave two minutes later and arrive five minutes earlier. It is therefore obvious, that if these trains were to keep their proper time, the express must run into the slow coach in front. The Great Western Railway Company have also, in a very unassuming manner, been advertising a feat hitherto unparalleled in the annals of railway speed,—the mail from Cheltenham at 8.20 a.m. to leave Gloucester at 8.27; that is to say, seven miles, including starting, slackening speed at two or three "crossings," stopping, starting again, all in seven minutes! Let the narrow gauge beat this if it can.