Page:Notes and Queries - Series 10 - Volume 7.djvu/595

 10 8. VII. JUNE 22, 1907.] NOTES AND QUERIES.

491

4 THE KINGDOM'S INTELLIGENCER.'

(10 S. vii. 148, 238, 270, 395.)

THE first number of The Parliamentary Intelligencer, comprising the Sum of Foreign Intelligence with the Affairs now in agitation in England, Scotland, and Ireland, for Infor- mation of the People, " Published by Order," was dated 31 Dec.-7 Jan., 1659/60 (Nichols, 4 Literary Anecdotes,' vol. iv. p. 52). The first number of Mercurius Publicus was dated 29 Dec.-5 Jan., 1659/60. A copy is in Wood's collection at the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. Both were "in a dis- guise," Royalist, and private enterprises. The first was written by Giles Dury, and the second by Henry Muddiman, for the express purpose of supporting General Monck, and in opposition to the official Parliament (or Cromwellian) papers The Publick Intelli- gencer and Mercurius Politicus both of which were written by the salaried State journalist Marchamont Nedham. (Pepys's remark about Muddiman on 9 Jan. was a clear mistake, probably due to this secrecy, as the latter had " never writ anything of this sort before.") When the Long Parlia- ment was dissolved Monck's Council of State " discharged " Nedham, and sanc- tioned The Parliamentary Intelligencer and Mercurius Publicus. The order is prefixed to The Parliamentary Intelligencer, No. 14, Monday, 26 March-2 April, 1660. This did not stop Nedham, who actually continued his papers until 12 April Mercurius Politi- cus, No. 615. Copies are in both the Ash- molean and British Museums. Fox Bourne (' English Newspapers,' vol. i. p. 24) is therefore totally wrong. The Council of State, apparently on finding that Nedham still continued, then ordered the Stationers' Company to see that no other papers than Muddiman's and Dury's were put forth on Mondays and Thursdays. As this does not appear in the first order printed, the direction was probably given on 9 April, which will explain the error as to date in Whitelocke's ' Memorials.' Copies of Mer- curius Publicus from No. 15, 5-12 April, 1660, to No. 33, 13-20 Aug., 1663, inclusive, are in the British Museum. The last number of the paper for 31 Aug., 1663 is in the Ashmolean.

Copies of The Parliamentary Intelligencer from No. 14 above mentioned to the last number, No. 53, 24-31 Dec., 1660, inclusive, are also in the British Museum. Nos. 21

and 25, however, are missing. After No. 26 of this paper for 11-18 June, 1660, Giles Dury " giving over," Muddiman became sole official journalist until the end of August, 1663. The paper then stopped for a week, and No. 27 appeared for 25 June-2 July. There is to be found in it an account of the origin of the papers, which identifies the writer. The reason for changing the name of this paper to The Kingdom's Intelligencer with No. 1, 31 Dec., 1660-7 Jan., 1660/61, will be found stated in the last of the one and the first of the other. The printed Catalogue in the British Museum has not the slightest justification for attributing the latter paper to Sir John Birkenhead ; nor are Prof. Masson (' Life of Milton ') and Mr. Fox Bourne able to adduce any proof that he had any connexion with the Restora- tion newsbooks, other than as licenser. There is ample evidence to the contrary.

The Kingdom's Intelligencer will be found complete in the British Museum to No. 34, 17-24 Aug., 1663. Sir Roger L'Estrange's Newes and Intelligencer are complete in the British Museum to the Newes, No. 9, 28 Dec., 1665. For the month of January, 1665/6, they are to be found in the Ashmolean. There are no gaps in these two papers, except for the solitary number entitled Publick Intelligence, after which they started afresh. But with the year 1664 these two papers were paged and numbered together, irrespective of their titles, as if one paper.

There are many copies in existence of the much (and justly) criticized No. 1 of The Intelligencer for 31 Aug., 1663, many libraries having this number when they have few others.

There is an error in my first reply to W. J. C. (ante, p. 270). Nedham was a salaried " author," and so were the writers of the Gazette. The Mercurius Publicus, Parliamentary and Kingdom's Intelligencers, Newes, and Intelligencer were, however, the property of their writers.

The third paragraph of the catalogue of the Hope Collection is entirely wrong.

The Parliamentary Intelligencer, compre- hending the Sum of Foreign Intelligence, No. 1, Dec. 19-26, 1659, given in Nichols's list, promptly came to an end, and is not the same as the other Parliamentary In- telligencer started in the following month.

The Gazette, of course, is in the British Museum ; and so is Current Intelligence, except Nos. 2 and 24 to the end.

The British Museum collection of the papers of the period (Burney Collection) is, I believe, the most complete in existence,