9 th S. I. MAR. 12, '98.]
NOTES AND QUERIES.
213
.n the Musician for 29 Sept., 1897, to which
[ have already referred. There are a fe\\
further notes on John Ferrabosco in the
Musician for 20 Oct., 1897, p. 459. I shoulc
point out that the reference to ' State Papers
Dom., Charles II.,' vol. xxxix., does not show
chat the brothers Alfonso and Henry Ferra
bosco died in the year 1661, but only thai
they were dead in that year. G. E. P. A.
REGISTERING BIRTHS AND DEATHS IN ENG- LAND (8 th S. xii. 109, 214, 435, 511 ; 9 th S. i 131). Birth and death registration became compulsory in 1874 by the Birth and Death Registration Act of that year. Three months is now the outside limit during which births can be registered without fee. After then, up to a period of twelve months from the date of birth, the fee is 5s. Beyond that time, to within seven years, registration may be effected, with the sanction of the Registrar- General, on payment of fees amounting to 10s. No birth can be registered after the expiry of seven years from the date thereof.
A. R. B.
AUGUSTINE SKOTTOWE (9 th S. i. 28, 91). This name figures in early Massachusetts history, also in Virginian, I think. A Capt. Joshua Scottow, who wrote the well-known 'Old Men's Tears/ <fec., a rare bit of New England printing, was one of the founders in 1669 of the historic Old South Meeting House, Boston, which still flourishes. His old gravestone is embedded in the porch of this church. See H. A. Hill's ' Old South Church, 7 2 vols. 8vo., plates, Boston, Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 1894; also Hill's ' Joshua Scottow and John Alden ' (one of the addresses), in 'Old South Memorial Addresses,' 1 vol. 8vo., Boston, 1884. The descendants of the old Boston Scottows, it is said, now call themselves Scott.
J. G. C.
At one of the old farmhouses in the neigh- bourhood of Chesham there were three portraits, said to have been purchased at the sale; one was a full-length of a boy in Roman costume, with a dog; a second was a lady, half-length, also with a dog: the other a half-length, probably the father. They ap- peared to be about the time of Queen Anne, and were said to be portraits of members of the Skottowe family. W. R. HORWOOD. 31, Garden Road, Peckham Rye.
SHAKSPEARE'S GRANDFATHER (8 th S. xii. 463 ; 9 th S. i. 41, 113). Since writing my letter to you, I am sorry to find that ('N. &Q.,' 'Shak- speare's London Lodgings,' 3 rd S. viii. 418, &c.) [ had already answered MR. VINCENT with respect to the bond which he now publishes
as a novelty, and I then stated the charge
which I again make against Mr. Halliwell-
Phillipps, that this bond which MR. VINCENT
has just discovered was well known to him,
and probably also to MR. STOKES (who I am
glad to see now takes upon himself the
responsibility of Mr. Haiti well - Phillipps's
conduct), and was suppressed by them, and
the only reason (I suggest) for such suppres-
sion was to enable them to continue in their
book (quoting from my own letter)
"that delightful episode of the fining of John Shakspere in 1552 for a nuisance, from which they (utterly unwarrantably) drew very unpleasant and untrue deductions respecting his social con- dition and habits."
MR. STOKES now writes that he cannot understand the gravamen of my charge. If he will read my words again carefully, taking them in their ordinary sense, he will, I think, arrive at my meaning, and may perhaps see fit to change his ground. "True," he admits, "Mr. Halliwell-Phillipps knew of the bond and printed it; but he once lost a reference to something or other he gave me, and he could never find it " ; and he adds triumphantly that I have lost the reference to Mr. Halliwell-Phillipps's tract in the British Museum. How does he know that 1 But, if I have, how does that affect the ques- tion ? We all lose references at times, but no man who seeks to enlighten the public should write in forgetfulness of such a fact as this, because it shows either that he could not appreciate its importance, or that he had forgotten what he nad pre- viously written, and which it disposes of.
"Ah, but," says MR. STOKES, "did we not print everything and leave the reader to draw his own conclusions ; and is not that the true scholarly method ? " Undoubtedly ; but that is just contrary to what was done. The complaint is that they did not print this bond ; or why does MR. VINCENT now bring it forward? MR. STOKES speaks of me as not laving given references in my book to Mr. Ealliwefl - Phillipps's work. I did much setter. I gave references to the original records. But how could I refer to suppressed documents ?
I have referred (p. 227 of my book) to the act that Mr. Halliwell-Phillipps, in his Calendar of the Corporation Records of Stratford,' has actually omitted mention of
- he fact that Robert Arden was the son
)f Thomas. MR. STOKES does not deny this ; mt he asserts that Mr. Halliwell-Phillipps nentions the fact elsewhere. Very likely ; mt how does that excuse the omission in the Calendar ?
