infrequently spelt with two l's, - as, for instance, in "Paradise Lost," book iv. 1. 543, 1st and 2d editions; and Dr. Everett said that he had heard this in his boyhood mentioned as a very vulgar pronunciation of the mineral. It is so spoken of in Greville's "Diary." Yet there can be no doubt how the mineral should be spelt. Alabaster is a Greek word, used frequently for the mineral, but still oftener for an ointmentbox made of it; and this sense a small box for holding liquids - Dr. Everett thought was its real sense, originally, perhaps, an inkstand, from an Eastern word for ink. It undoubtedly should have but one l. On the other hand, the proper name seems to be an alteration of Arblaster, that is, Arcubalistarius, "a cross-bow man," which still exists in England in the form Larbalestier, and will be remembered in the history of the Seminole war in the form Ambrister, which is of German origin, from Armbrust, the German for "cross-bow." It is very possible that the two words corrupted each other at the transition stage from Middle to Late English, Arblaster getting its first I from Alabaster, and the mineral its second from the proper name.

Mr. HAYNES replied, that the Latin verse was inscribed by Sidney in an album in Denmark, some time in 1659 or 1660, but that there is a discrepancy in the original authorities as to the place where this album was kept. Thomas Hollis, in his edition of Sidney's works (p. 10, ed. 1772), quotes, from "Familiar Letters written by John late Earl of Rochester and other Persons of Honour and Quality," the following passage from a letter written to Sidney by his father, the Earl of Leicester: "It is said that the University of Copenhagen brought their Album unto you, desiring you to write something therein; and that you did scribere in albo these words,

'Manus hæc inimica tyrannis

Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem,'

and put your name to it." But Lord Molesworth, in " An Account of Denmark as it was in 1692," published in London in 1694, tells the story at greater length, and states that the lines were written in the Album of the King's Library, and that they were afterwards torn out by Terlon, the French Ambassador (Preface, sub fin.).

As bearing upon the question of their authorship, it may be said that an anonymous correspondent of "Notes and Queries" (3d ser. vol. ix. p. 197, March 10, 1866) states that the first line is to be found in a patent granted by Camden (Clarencieux) in 1616, when Sidney was only five years old, so that this one could not have been original with him. Mr. Haynes was inclined to the opinion that the other was his own composition, and agreed with Dr. Everett as to its questionable Latinity in the sense in which it was intended to be understood.

Dr. GREEN made the following remarks:

At the last meeting of the Society, allusion was made to Chief Justice Sewall's custom of distributing books and tracts among his friends. Whenever anything was printed that seemed to him to meet the public need, in a moral point of view, he was sure to supply himself with a goodly number of copies, and bestow them as occasion required. The conversion of the Jews always lay near to his heart, and often directed the channels of his generosity. In his Diary, under the date of October 3, 1720, he speaks of giving away "Mr. Willard's Fountain open'd with the little print and verses." The incomplete title here given refers to "THE | Fountain Opened: | OR, The Great Gospel Priviledge of having | CHRIST exhibited to Sinfull Men, | WHEREIN | Also is proved that there shall be | a National Calling of the | JEVVS | from Zech. XIII. 1. | By Samuel Willard, | Teacher of a Church in Boston. | Boston in New-England, | Printed by B. Green, and J. Allen, | for Samuel Sewall Junior. 1700." pages iv, 210, sm. octavo.

The expression "little print and verses" used by Judge Sewall is somewhat obscure, but it is cleared up by an examination of a copy of "The Fountain Opened" now in the library of the Society. Bound in at the beginning of the book, opposite to the title, is a small folded sheet, of which the two inner pages contain the printed matter alluded to by the Judge. It is of a different kind of paper from the body of the volume, and is dated May 12, 1720,- twenty years after the publication of the book. Two of these verses appear in the Diary, in the entry of November 21, 1700, when Sewall writes that he composed them that evening, showing that they are his production. The fly-leaf of this Willard volume

has been torn out; but from a stub still left, and bearing a few words in Sewall's well-known handwriting, it is evident that this particular copy once belonged to him, and by him was given to a friend. The two printed pages are as follows:

Dr. MOORE referred to a letter of the apostle Eliot, recently brought to light by the Rev. Dr. Charles A. Briggs, and soon to be published by him, which gives a description of New England in 1650. He then read a paper respecting the validity of the Salem court for the witch-trials in 1692, and traced from the beginning the contemporary opposition which led to the abandonment of the court before its assigned work was completed, and the transfer of its business to a new tribunal authorized by the Legislature, which promptly checked the delusion. The design of the paper was to show that the whole constitution and proceedings of the court first established by the arbitrary will of the Governor were in violation of the fundamental law of Massachusetts. The opinion of Hutchinson was quoted, showing that so well informed a man as he did not hesitate to say, in 1767, that "a little attention must force the conclusion that the whole was a scene of fraud and delusion." The writer regarded it as an attempt to break down the great principles of the common law of Massachusetts by introducing the “law and custom of England.”

Mr. GOODELL spoke briefly in reply; and Dr. EVERETT said that the question of legality or illegality of Stoughton's court is likely to be unsettled for some time, appeal being made to the very words of the charter by both parties. But it is not right to cloud this issue by impassioned attacks on the action of the court. Nobody wishes to maintain that its proceedings were reasonable or humane; but a court may be stupid and tyrannical, yet perfectly legal. The constitution of the Court of King's Bench was just as legal when Sir Matthew Hale main

tained the reality of witchcraft, or when Jeffries perpetrated his atrocities, as when Sir John Holt dismissed charges of witchcraft and treated prisoners with fairness. Suppose that, when the representatives of the victims of 1692 had in vain appealed for redress, Governor Burnet or Governor Shute or Governor Belcher had called a special commission to hear their petitions and afford restitution; we should now be treated to panegyrics on the righteous governor who nobly maintained the office of the King of England to render full and speedy justice to all his subjects. It is analogous to the celebrated letter quoted by Macaulay from Lord Sunderland to "Mr. Penne." The stanch defenders of William Penn deny that it can have been written to him, because it is addressed to some one who was engaged in a dishonorable transaction about the ransom of the Taunton girls; but if the letter had informed "Mr. Penne" that in consequence of his intercession, his Majesty had been graciously pleased to extend his free pardon to the poor girls, "Mr. Penne" would have been eagerly identified with William, in spite of spelling, style, and all other alleged difficulties. Sir William Phips either had or had not authority to constitute the court. But how the court, when constituted, exercised its jurisdiction is a second and wholly irrelevant question.

John Eliot's Description of New England in 1650.1

In May, 1884, I was making researches for the present volume in the Hunterian Museum of the University of Glasgow, when my attention was called by the curator, Professor John Young, M.D., to a number of uncatalogued books and pamphlets. Among the pamphlets he showed me a few manuscripts. Among these I found the letter of Eliot which is now for the first time given to the public. Professor Young kindly gave me permission to use it, and Mr. John Young, B.Sc., one of

1 By the kindness of Professor Charles A. Briggs, D.D., of Union Theological Seminary, New York, we are permitted to reprint this valuable letter, which was discovered by him and is included in the Appendix to his work entitled "American Presbyterianism: Its Origin and Early History." It is contemporaneous with and supplementary to Samuel Maverick's account of New England in 1660, which was published in the last volume of Proceedings (pp. 231-249), and contains information respecting ministers and magistrates which is wanting there. Great pains have been taken to give this letter exactly according to the original; and Dr. Briggs writes: "It has been thrice compared; and the last revision was made from slip proof, which was compared with the manuscript in Glasgow."-EDS.