Shakespeare was ever connected. Thirdly, that Theobald (who, had he been aware that its production synchronizes with the sup-Fletcher and Shakespeare were supposed to posed collaboration of these two authors have collaborated in a play on this subject, in The Two Noble Kinsmen (probably would have eagerly welcomed the suggestion) 1613) and 'Henry VIII.' (1613). Fourthly, indignantly denied the correctness of their The knowledge we now possess as all these facts fit in with the statement by view. Theobald that for the play he published on to the production of Cardenio' and as to this very subject Shakespeare was to some its entry for publication shows us that those who disbelieved in the Shakespearian authorextent responsible. Against these arguments for the sound-ship of the play put forward an argument towards the ness of Moseley's attribution are to be set that really tends with us two-the play was not included in any acceptance of the idea of Shakespeare's edition of the works of Shakespeare, and participation (for, if Fletcher be admitted it was not included in either of the collec- to be present in 'Double Falsehood,' we tions of plays published under the joint have made a long step towards the identification of the play with Cardenio,' and names of Beaumont and Fletcher. Moseley towards the connexion of was the publisher of the Beaumont and consequently Fletcher folio of 1647, but presumably he Shakespeare with it); and it further shows did not obtain possession of this play till us that Theobald vigorously repulsed an later, since he did not present it for regis- argument that we cannot now but regard as favourable to his cause. tration till some six years afterwards; E. H. C. OLIPHANT. and the folio of 1679, though it contains an additional 18 plays, including one for which neither author was in any way responsible, does not contain one which had not already appeared in print. Similarly, too late for inclusion in the first two

Melbourne.

(To be continued.)

folios of Shakespeare, the play's exclusion THE NEW ENGLISH DICTIONARY': from the folio of 1664 is of no significance when we consider that the 7 additional plays included therein (all of which, with one

CHANGES IN ACCENTUATION, &c.

exception, the critics are practically unani-IN the following notes on the 'N.E.D.' the mous in rejecting) had all of them been words are cited as accented in the Dicpublished earlier in quarto. The publishers tionary. may not have been able to obtain possession of Moseley's manuscript, and may even have been ignorant of its existence.

But, while I have exhausted the arguments, other than aesthetic, against the identification of Theobald's play with the work of Shakespeare and Fletcher, I have by no means exhausted the arguments in favour of such identification. It is to be understood that Theobald had no knowledge that Cardenio' had ever been produced (his sincerity on that score is scarcely to be questioned), and that he was ignorant that the names of Shakespeare and Fletcher had ever been connected in regard to a play on the subject. Had it been otherwise, can we suppose that he would have failed to make much of the fact? Again, we have the interesting circumstance that Theobald's enemies and critics-ignorant, be it remembered, of any reason to suppose that Fletcher had any connexion with the play-pointed out that the colouring, diction, and characters were nearer to the style and manner of Fletcher than to those of Shakespeare, and the further circumstance

once

A'ccess. A'ccess the word "early" be-
came, says the Dictionary. Yes; in Milton,.
in Dryden. But Shelley still has acce'ss—of
course, Shakespeare had, always
Wordsworth also once.
a'ccess.
Alli'es.-There is difference, not only in
conversational use, but in poetry. Shelley
already had

Have been abandoned by their faithless a'llies.
The Arnaut, Servian, and Albanian a'llies.
Now, Gerald Gould's 'Monogamy,' 1918,

Taking for a'llies music and good wine.

Lady Sarah Lennox, 1760, noted that her king "laid the accents on the first syllable of Allys and Revenues, which is after the Scottish pronunciation.' (Generally, of course, Scottish and Irish accenting, if differing from English, is older, and later on in the word.)

The Dictionary frequently cites-as former dictionaries oited-poets, against the only accenting it allows. And poets of to-day.

My service to Mr Naylor and Wife,* who I heare of have a boy. Tell them I wish them much joy of it.

Pray send mee what newes currantt from Ballasore or Hugly and let mee know where Mr Smith is to reside.

I heare hee is for

of its arrivall; it went with the Factory
bookes. Pray in your next let mee know if
it came to your hand. I had [illegible]
Chest [sen]t mee from my Brother in
England, which has laine [at] Hugly this
5 months. Twas sent to Mr Bagnold to
[send] forward (who dying) suppose tis
forgotten [and] they know not whose tis.
If it bee not already sent, if it shall come to
your Factory, please dispeed it to mee by
the primo boates. Tis a sad thing to live
thus out of the world as wee doe here that
in 10 Months time wee cannot receive any [Endorsed] For Mr Richard Edwards
thing sent us from our Freinds. I am
afraid the Contents of it (which I yet know
not) are spoiled with so long lying in the

Godownes.*

I would desire you to send mee a good strong silke bridle, such a one as Mr Read had once from your Factory, also 2 set of strings for horse maine[s], handsome colours (of about 2 rups. ps. each). I have seen them in Ballasore good ones of the [? finer sort]. Pray send them by the Primo Cossid that [illegible] they are ready, they being for a Freind that [? sent a] peon for them and place their costs to my account. I have great need of a ps. Mulmull† and Cossaes which formerly wrote to you for. I hope you remember to purchase them for mee.

Pray present my humble service to Mr Vincent and desire him to send mee 6 or 8 seer of shott of 2 or 3 sorts (if hee has not disposed of that hee had when I was there), and what hee shall demand for it please to satisfie him. Also if you have any store of English powder by you, please to send mee 4 or 6 Ounces, it being for priming, and you will much oblige mee. If the money you have of mine in your hand bee not sufficient to pay for all these things I write for, let mee know and I shall order you the Overplus, or if you shall have occation for any thing here, shall send it you.

Excuse my being so toedious, it being seldome I have oppertunity of sending to you, unless will send a [cossid] on purpose, which you know would cause Crutch.t Have not more at present save presentation of my kind respects to your selfe, Mr Marshal, etca. freinds with you, and subscribe Your reall freind and servant SAML: BULLYVANT

Godown,

a warehouse, probably derived from Malay gadong, a storeroom, through Tel. gidangi, Tam. kidangu, a place where goods lie. + Malmal, muslin.

this place desigened.† If so, pray lett mee know in your next. You may inquire it as from your selfe nott mentioning my name.. Mr Carpenter not yet arrived. Idem

S. B.

Merchant In Cassimbuzar

[Beneath this is written] Sir, pray send a
silke reine, or 2 extraordnary if one should
breake.
S. B.

LETTER XCV.

John Billingsley to Richard Edwards. (O.C. 3771.)

"citizen

[John Billingsley, son of John Billingsley,
and goldsmith, London,' was elected writer
on Nov. 13, 1667, and was thus a contemporary
of Edwards in the Company's service. He
sailed in the Unicorn, and arrived in India
on Sept. 10, 1668. From "the Coast" he
proceeded to Bengal, and was employed at the
factories of Hugli and Balasor. On Feb. 9,
1671, he was married at Hügli, but the name
of the bride is not given. In their General
Letter of Dec. 31, 1672, the Bengal Council
recommended Billingsley for encourage-
ment"
and advancement, he " having now
served your Worships five years in one station
and in this time having taken much paines
in keeping your Registers and other bookes of
accounts.' In December, 1676, Billingsley,
having attained to the rank of merchant
by nine years' service, signed a bond for 2,000l.,
giving as one security his father John Billingsley
of "
Whitechappell.' He was now Second at.
Balasor, where he had built a house, and no
longer keept under every favoured of the
great ones,' as he complained to Edwards in
1674. But further promotion was denied him,
for he was one of the earliest victims of the
epidemic of 1677. Administration of his goods
was granted to his father on Sept. 3, 1678.
See' Court Minutes,' vol. xxva, p. 45, vol. xxvi.
pp. 62, 67, 87, vol. xxxii. p. 73; Factory
Records,' Hugli, vol. iv., Kasimbazar, vol. i.;
'Letter Book,' vol. vi. p. 275; Harl. MS..
4254, fol. 13; 'Diaries of Streynsham
Master,' ed. Temple, vol. ii. pp. 18, 72; P.C.C..
Admons.]

* John Naylor, the Company's silk dyer at Kāsim bāzār.

†There was no truth in this report, as on A dilemma. The more usual spelling of this Smith's dismissal from Dacca in Jan., 1873, he obsolete expression is "crotch."

had been ordered to come to Hugli.

valued at 5800 pagodas, and stated that they were taken by the Dutch in retaliation for the seizure of their " Vingerlah Yaucht" (yacht for Vingurla, near Goa). In February the number had increased to five ('Factory Records,' Fort St. George, vol. xvii.), but seven seems to be an exaggeration. There appears also to be an inaccuracy as regards the "ship that Mr. Lock and Mr. Winter was in," for Sir Edward_Winter had already sailed to England in the Bombay Merchant in January, 1672. Edward Lock, who was "second to Sir Edward Winter" in 1668, may have been in the captured vessel, but I have found no corroboration of the statement.

Return from Japan, which was to have gone to *This report was only partially correct. The Surat to be laden for England, was for several months thought to have fallen into the hands of the Dutch, but it was subsequently ascertained that she was left at Taiwan (Formosa) on Nov. 19, 1672, "to stay till the next Monsoon Book, vol. v. p. 63). No ships were taken by the Dutch off Surat, but the Hannibal and Experiment were both seized near Malacca. The Recovery, belonging to Matthew Gray, President of Surat, escaped the Dutch off Ceylon, but the Philip and Ann, another privately owned vessel from Bombay, was, on her return from Siam, also taken off Malacca (O.C. 3743, 37€), † Muhammadans.

The French, who took St. Thomé, near Madras, in 1672, were repeatedly attacked by the forces of the King of Golconda, but had not, at this date, been compelled to relinquish their conquest.