9"‘S- Vi- 0<>'r- 27.1900-J NOTES AND QUERIES. 333 nan O’Rourke,_ Prince of Breffney, and his wife Dervorghil, so celebrated b Thomas MO0P6_l1] his beautiful melody “The valley lay smiling before me ”'l Some _reader of ‘N . & Q.’ may be able to solve this genealogical difficulty for me, or, better still, perhaps G. C. might wave his magic wand and call up the truth from the shades of mystery. WM. JACKSON PIGOTT. Dundrum, co. Down. Souncs or _ uo'rs'r1oN (9"= S. vi. 229).-In a_ poem by W liam _Lisle Bowles, D.D., en- t1t ed _ ‘ A Sundial in a Churchyard,’ the following verse occurs :- Enough if we may wait in calm content The hour that bears us to the silent sod ' Blameless improve the time that heav’n has lent, And leave the issue to Thy will, 0 God ! EDWIN CLARK. . 211, Lorne Street, Chester. “MZARGIOWLET” (9“‘ S. vi. 209, 275).-[ knew th_is as padge-owlet when a boy in Derbyshire. Little owls, young owls, and big night moths went by this name. Tnos. RATCLIRFR. Worksop. Halliwell, ‘Archaic Dictionary,’ has Mar- gery-Hmalet, an owl; no doubt an exact representative of Cotgrave’s Madgehowlet- a pet name? A. H, PLANTAGRNRT CHAIR (9**' S. vi. 150, 233, 294). -A coronation or installation chair ma be seen in the vestry of York Minster. fc is illustrated in Poole and Hugall’s ‘ Descriptive Guide to York Cathedral (plate 29), pub- lished by R. Sunter, York, 1850. I presume that it is identical with the one mentioned by your correspondents. I cannot account for the statement on p. 150 of ‘N. & Q.’ If, however, another chair is referred to, an exp ana ion res ectin its isa rance is desirable p 8 T.pS);$MoUR. 9. Newton Road, Oxford. Like a well-known contributor, I have my U ° 0 ¢ ¢ Si, disappointments, for it is on record that “the heh buskins of William Kemp,” the Elizabethan Dari clown,” noted for his “nine days’ Morris __ d ddancelvand some confusion with Shakspere owgoas llham the Conqueror,” were kept at U, gahe Norwich Guildhall, but could not be ro- <;m,.luced 111 answer to my inquiry. See 7"‘ xi. gas! 189, which still awaits explanation. A. H. ‘ THR LOST_PLEIAD’ (9"h S. vi. 49, 274).-Did ° not T. H: Chivers write a poem entitled ‘ The Lost PlBl8»(1Hf (See Bayard Taylor’s ‘ Diver- sions of the Echo Club.) Taylor states that the only complete set of Chivers’s works is Cv in the British Museum, but the ;§inted Cata- logue mentions only two. . DAVEY. Adams and Brewer may perhaps be right, for some of L. E. L.’s poems have never been reprinted in the many editions of her poetical works. In 1848 or 1849 a lay called ‘The Lost Pleiad’ was performed) at one of the London theatres. M. N. G. [This play of Stirling Coyne we mentioned.] AGR or ENTRY AT Irms or CoUR'r (9"*‘ S. vi. 107, 195, 278).-In reply to FRANCESCA, who, while thanking me for my former reply, appears to be somewhat sceptical, if not, in- deed, cynical I may state that the admission of “young lads ”to our Inns of Court was the exceFption rather than the rule. According to ortescue, persons of distinction were placed in the Inns of Court not so much to make the laws their study as to preserve them from the contagion of vice. A letter from Sir Robert Southwell, of 5 October 1683, relative to the start in life meditated by the graceless and inconsiderate young spendthrift Sir Thomas (afterwards Lord) Southwell, in which the writer states, “Should he be in the Inns of Court, there is no inspection into any ma-n’s_ morals, more than the advice of a private friend, to which there are twenty young heroes that advise the contrary,” does not, however, say much for the moral influence prevailiplg there at this later Reriod. Brady, in his ‘ isitor’s Guide to nole,’ 1839 . 23 in referring to Thomas, first Lord Buckhurst’s admission to the Inner Temple (temp. Elizabeth), states that it was “then fashionable for every young man of fortune, before he began his trave s, or was admitted into Parliament, to be initiated in the study of the law.” The latter part of the statement is, however, incorrect. twas cer- tainly customary in those days for elder sons of our gentle families to obtain formal ad- mission or be entered of an Inn of Court " for fashion’s sake” (as is well expressed in a private letter of the seventeenth century) ; but if they went there it was more frequent y only for social and residential purposes, to form acquaintances and friendships which might lead to their future advancement, and for an introduction to the world of London life, as well as generally “to gather more of the man,” these Inns having apparently then occupied in a great measure t e place of the modern West- nd clubs. Until about 1869, when the new regulations came into force, comparativel few of those admitted were called to the Bar, although previously to that time a knowledge of the law was not abso-
