284 NOTES AND QUERIES. p* s. iv. OCT. 7. m The allusion in the first line is no doubt to 1 The Campaign,' which has been felicitously called "a gazette in rhyme," every item of which is to be found celebrated in this third volume of the ' Music Anglicanse.' As to the second line, history, alas! records no feats of statesmanship achieved by "Mr. Secretary Addison " which are worthy of celebration by the Muse. JOHN T. CURRY. HORACE WALPOLE AND HIS EDITORS. (Continued from p. 244.) ON p. 202, vol. ii., of Wright's collected edition of Horace Wai pole's 'Letters' (London, 1840) the editor introduced a note on the surrender of Bergen-op-Zoora. The greater part of the note consists of an avowed quota- tion from Coxe's 'History of the Pelham Administration.' Cunningham, however, in his edition of Horace Wai pole's 'Letters,' published in 1857 (vol. ii. p. 96), has, by an oversight, attributed this note to Walpole, who is thus made responsible for a quotation from a work published thirty-two years after his own death. In Horace Walpole's letter to Conway of 29 Aug., 1748 (Cunningham's edition, vol. ii. p. 124), occurs a note on General Honey wood, which is wrongly attributed to Walpole. This note does not appear in the quarto edition of Horace Walpole's 'Works' (1798), in which this letter, with Walpole's own notes, first appeared ; nor in his 'Private Correspondence,' gu Wished in 1820. It is to be found for the rst time in Wright's collected edition (1840). Owing to Wright's omission to distinguish it as his own note, Cunningham accepted it, without further examination, as Walpole's. In Horace Walpole's letter to Conway of 23 June, 1752 (Cunningham's edition, vol. ii. p. 290), mention is made of a " Mr. Obnir." This letter first appeared in Wright's edition of 1840. No other mention of "Mr. Obnir" occurs throughout the whole of Horace Wal- pole's printed letters. " Obnir " doubtless is a misreading for O'brien — Percy Wyndham O'Brien, afterwards created Earl of Thomond — a "person of quality" whose name is occasionally mentioned by Walpole. In a letter to Montagu of C June, 1752 (Cunningham's edition, vol. ii. p. 287), Wal- pole writes that " the Prices and your Aunt Cosby dined here from Hampton Court. The mignonette beauty looks mighty well in his grandmother's jointure." Here, again, "Prices" is doubtless a misreading for Rices. The " mignonette beauty " was George Rice, who was the son of Montagu's first cousin, Mrs. Edward Rice, nte Lucy Trevor (see vol. ii. p. 163, where ho is mentioned both as a mignonette beauty" and as "your cousin Rice "). In his letter to Bentley of 5 Aug., 1752 (Cunningham's edition, vol. ii. p. 298), Wal- pole mentions "Grammont's Princess of Babylon." This person, as Wright states in his note, was Lady Muskerry. Her maiden name, however, was not, as he also states, Macarthy, but De Burgh. She was the daughter and heiress of Ulick de Burgh, Marquis of Clanricarde, and married Charles Maccarty, Viscount Muskerry, eldest son of Donougn Maccarty, first Earl of Clancarty. On the same page mention is made of " la Monsery" in conjunction with Mile. Hamil- ton, afterwards Comtesse de Grammont. This evidently is a misreading for "Muskerry." Grammont touches on the departure of Lady Muskerry and Mile. Hamilton from Summer- hill, en route for Tunbridge Wells, and also speaks of the former as "la Muskerry" ( Memoires do Grammont,' Paris, 1851, pp. 264-5). This misreading " Monsery " first appeared in the quarto edition of Horace Walpole's 'Works'(1798), and has been per- petuated by successive editors. In his letter to Conway of 5 May, 1753 (Cunningham's edition, vol. ii. p. 331), Horace Walpole is made to relate a story of " Lady Harrington." The name is left blank in the quarto edition of 1798, and in the 'Private Correspondence' published in 1820. The blank was first filled in as "Lady Harrington " by Wright in his edition of 1840. The name supplied by Wright is incorrect; at this time there was no such person as Lady Harrington. Viscount Petersham, husband of the lady here in question (Lady Caroline Petersham), did not succeed his father as Earl of Harrington until December, 1756. That the mistake is not Walpole's is evident from his subsequent mention of this lady (previous to her father- in-law's death) as Lady Caroline Petersham, with which name the blank ought to be filled in. These remarks apply also to a mention of " Lady Harrington in Walpole's letter to Bentley of 24 April, 1755 (Cunningham's edition, vol. ii. p. 435). HELEN TOYNBEE. A curious mistake occurs ante, p. 244, but on whom the blame is to be laid I cannot say, whether upon Walpole or his editors. Speak- ing of Ashton being about to preach in the College Chapel at Eton, Horace Walpole observes: "The last time I saw him here, [he] was standing up funking over against a conduit to be catechised." 1 he word is pro- perly a conduct, a name which was locally given to the chaplains of Eton College.
