NOTES AND QUERIES. [9* s. VIL JAN. 12, 1901.
"best" I presume is meant most superior and
influential, but which is the book combining
these qualities ? Surely not any of Carlyle's
books. Superior they are in cleverness, self-
assertion, dogmatism, and needless obscurity
of style ; influential, too, within a certain,
but limited area ; but overtop all others by
either quality they most assuredly do not.
Moreover, influence spells popularity, and
no single book Carlyle ever penned was or
possibly could be popular. If popularity be
the measure of best-ness, then Carlyle never
has had, nor will have, any chance in the
race with Scott and Macaulay and Dickens as
competitors. Their grooves may differ from
his, but the test is there all the same-
superiority of wider influence. Nor is the
test of matter less conclusive. Ruskin
approaches him nearest under this head, and
assuredly the radius of his influence is less
restricted than Carlyle's. Has not society
been captivated from base to summit by
his peerless eloquence, or the simplicity of
his diction, or the wisdom of his ethics?
'The Stones of Venice' has impressed a mul-
titude where 'Past and Present' has in-
terested a group. But I am far from maintain-
ing that even Ruskin's works are the "best " of
the century. They are so of their kind, as
Carlyle's are of his, and Darwin's and New-
man's and Tennyson's are of theirs. But no
one book of any one author focuses in itself all
the excellences of all other books the bril-
liancy of Macaulay, the grasp and range of
Gladstone, the poetry of Keats, and the
supreme use of language of Ruskin. I confine
the inquiry to English nineteenth-century
literature. And yet Sir Walter's thesis
demands^uch predicates. Had he qualified
it as sni yeneris only, I had no dispute with
it ; because he formulates it unequivocally I
demur to it. Unique of its kind 'Past and
Present' undoubtedly is (as is 'Sartor Re-
sartus ') ; the best book of the century it
undoubtedly is not either in matter, influ-
ence, or style. The theory that it is so is as
untenable as the now famous "hundred best
books" contention. The best book, or num-
ber of books, of the century is that, or are
those, which appeals or appeal most to each
reader individually. J. B. McGovERN.
St. Stephen's Rectory, C.-on-M., Manchester.
[Such discussions are, we think, rather futile.]
KEOIMEXTS AT CULLODEN. As the recently published works of Mr. Lang and Mr. Terry give no clue to the modern numerical or territorial designations of the regiments which took part in the battle of Culloden, I have drawn up the following list, which may
prove
useful to some readers of 'N. &
1 (it
Mr.
is noteworthy that both Mr. Lang an
Terry write " Ely th " for Bligh} : Humphrey
Eland's Dragoons, 3rd Hussars ; Cobham's
Dragoons, 10th Hussars ; Lord Mark Ker's
Dragoons, llth Hussars ; St. Clair's Royal
Regiment, 1st Royal Scots, Midlothian ;
Howard's Regiment, 3rd, the Buffs, East
Kent ; Barrell's, 4th, Royal Lancaster ;
Wolfe's, 8th, Liverpool ; Pulteney's, 13th,
Somersetshire ; Price's, 14th, WestYorkshire ;
Bligh's, 20th, Lancashire ; Campbell's, 21st,
Scots Fusiliers, Ayr ; Sempill's, 25th, Scottish
Borderers ; Blakeney's, 27th, Inniskilling
Fusiliers ; Cholmondeley's, 34th, Border,
Carlisle ; Fleming's, 36th, Worcestershire ;
Monro's, 37th, Hampshire ; Ligonier's, 48th,
Northamptonshire. James Wolfe, the future
hero of Quebec, was not in his father's regi-
ment, the 8th, but was at Culloden as a
captain in the 4th Regiment, and employed
on the staff as brigade-major. His account
of the battle is to be found in Wright's * Life
of Wolfe,' p. 84. He has been represented by
some writers as a lieutenant-colonel at Cul-
loden, but he was not even a rnaior until
1749. W. S.
SNUFF. (See 9 th S. vi. 460.) The opinion expressed at the above reference, to the effect that snuffing is "a filthy habit," recalls two passages in the 'Memoirs of Eighty Years,' by the late physician and " parable-poet," Dr. Gordon Hake. At p. 104 he tells a sparkling anecdote, showing how George IV. illustrated the method of cleanly snuff-taking ; and at p. 228 he describes his own "snuff- rnull " one presented to him in 1875 by Rossetti, and now, undoubtedly, duly prized as an heirloom and then defends snuffing with a certain air of scientific reasonableness. He says :
"And would you know the reason of my per- sistence in taking snuff? It not only wakes up that torpor so prevalent between the nose and the brain, making the wings of an idea uncurl like those of a new-born butterfly, but while others sneeze, and run at the eyes and nose, my schneiderian membrane is impervious to weather, or, to be explicit, I never take cold in my head."
As a transcript from experience this has a value of its own, for although, as a matter of course, there is an element of waywardness 'n the passage, it is not mere chaff and lothing more. THOMAS BAYNE.
' DlCTIONAEY OF NATIONAL BlOGRAPHY ' AND
PORTRAITS. The 'D.N.B.' is a model of what such a work should be, and now that it is completed a separate alphabetical index of J ;he persons dealt with, giving their call-