9* s. VL DEC. 22. i9oo.] NOTES AND QUERIES. 495 render it desirable. The fullest extract from his will was in the Daily News, 26 September I think I never saw a will that seemed tx me to do everything it ought not to such a extent as this one. It seems to me that then are no circumstances whatever which shouk allow parents entirely to disinherit thei children. However, it is not forbidden in England, though it is in other countries, do not think a man ought even to be allowet to pass over his children in favour of hi grandchildren. By the trusts in Ashbee' will the dead hand will (or may) rule the land for seventy years to come. The impolicy of this has, to some extent, been recognizec in the Thellusson case. MR. MARCHAM says that Ashbee's public spirit is too linl<- fol lowed. I was taking the contrary view thai London, at all events, is being overdone, unless there is full power for the authorities t< " lend " or give things to provincial museums •which I am afraid there is not. The nation has, during the last few years, been the recipient or property of the value of upwards of five millions sterling, now stored in London. I think I ought to add that my observations on the disinheriting questions are purelj neutral. I have not had the pleasure ol seeing Mr. Ashbee's children for many years RALPH THOMAS. " LIG-DEWES " (9th S. vi. 429).—This word is apparently the same as "ligdur," a word still used in Kent for long gaiters reaching to the thighs. A. L. MAYHEW. Oxford. LITTLE LONDON (9th S. vi. 125, 373, 385).— There is the site of an old royal lodge near King's Langley, Hertfordshire, still known by the name of Little London. The lodge is mentioned in the Patent Rolls of 1360 and 1372. See Archceologia, xlvi. 307-8. JOHN EVANS. MARGARET OF BAVARIA (9th S. vi. 369, 453). —I think MR. PIERPOINT will find that Betham has misled him, and that Margaret of Cleves was Jean's second and childless wife. C. S. WARD. Wootton St. Lawrence, Basingstoke. MAX MiiLLER AND WESTMINSTER ABBEY (9th S. vi. 446).—The Daily Chronicle of 30 October was quite wrong. Max Miiller's lecture in the Abbey certainly "came off.' It was delivered on the evening of 3 Decem- ber, 1873, preceded by "From Greenland's icy mountains," and followed by the 'Old Hundredth.' The professor read his discourse at the lectern. The choir was not in attend- ance, and the Dean and other clergy present wore their black college gowns and hoods. I may add that the lecture was entitled ' Mis- sions,' and not' The Religions of the World.' OSWALD HUNTER-BLAIR, O.S.B. Max Miiller did certainly lecture in West- minster Abbey :— "3 December, 1873. Day of Intercession for Foreign Missions, Prof. Max Miiller delivering a lecture on the subject in Westminster Abbey in the evening."—Irving, ' Annals of our Time,' under above date. W. CROOKE. Langton House, Charlton Kings. [Other replies received.] WILLIAM MORRIS AS A MAN OF BUSINESS (9th S. vi. 406).—I would like to resolve C. C. B.'s " puzzle," if I may. The first part of it, "that neglect of detail is one of the secrets of success," I might properly leave to Mr. Mackail to defend—if it really needs defence or explanation. It is surely abund- antly true of all great workers. Morris saw clearly what he wanted, and made straight for it. The success he aimed at was that of the artist, not what is usually meant by success in business. I do not know if C. C. B. was thinking of this sort of success when he speaks of the value of exactitude and system—most useful qualities in the organizer of a great manufacturing industry, but not those which would have very much served Morris's purpose. His object was, not to establish a business which, once set in motion, would go on automatically, but to overcome certain difficulties inherent in the Droduction of decorative art at the present lay—difficulties for which the factory system s largely responsible. The only force he could rely on was his own genius. What he wanted had to be done during his life. We lave seen great results, in other fields, accom- >lished lately with much the same " neglect )f detail" which Mr. Mackail had in his mind n speaking of Morris's method. Had Lord Roberts insisted that every soldier should
- arry a clean pair of socks in his knapsack,
and that a good supper should be waiting lim at the end of the day, Cronje might not low be at St. Helena. Morns neglected lothing that went toward the accomplishment >f his main purpose. With regard to the curious speech " which has helped to confuse our correspondent, I would venture to sug- est that Mr. Mackail seems sometimes to ave taken his author too literally. As a matter of fact Morris never had fifteen clerks, nd I doubt whether at any time there were more than two or three engaged upon the ccounts. It is quite certain that, at any
