Page:Notes and Queries - Series 11 - Volume 12.djvu/396

 388

NOTES AND QUERIES, [n *?. xn. NOV. 13, 1915.

MEMORIALS : GEORGE Fox (11 S. xii. 338). His tombstone, with simple inscription of name and date, is in the Friends' Burial- Ground, Roscoe Street, Bunhill Row, E.G.

SILVANUS P. THOMPSON. The Athenamm, Pall Mall, S.W.

ANTHONY TWICHENER OR TUCHENOR, WINCHESTER SCHOLAR (US. xii. 340). May he be the son of Richard Twitchener who married Elisabeth Cotterell, sister of Dr. John Cctterell, Archdeacon of Dorset ? Both are mentioned in Dr. dotterel!' s will, which was proved 21 May, 1572, and in a codicil to which he says, " Henry Twichener may obtain the Archdeaconry of Dorset. To my sister Elisabeth [Twitchener], a standing bed in my chamber at Winforde, furnished, wher I used to lie." That he was some connexion of this Cotterell marriage seems to be suggested by his use of the name Cottrell as an alias. See ' History of Lisbon College ' :

"1599. Die 24 Ap. Duacum attjgit Antonius Cottrel, alias Tuchiner, hie multa in Anglia ob Fidem Orthodoxam perpessus, jam tantum alind vitse genus meditatus ; ut canitiem suam Deo arctius devoveat 1 Aprili Londino discessit et per Zelan- diam 8 Apr. Caletum appulsus est, ac demum ad nos veniens in Collegium co-optatus theologize operam daturus."

"1599. Sep. 28. Ad sacros ordines ad minores

quidem et Subdiaconatum, Antonius Cottrell, alias Tuchiner."

Henry Twitchener, referred to above, obtained the Archdeaconry of Dorset, and was installed c. May, 1572, and held the office until 1576 ; he was Vicar of Buckland Newton, Dorset, 1571-4, He is mentioned in Exchequer Depositions, 28 Eliz. 1586, C. 9, Feb. I.D. 2 April, at Salisbury, Easter Term, No. 31, in a suit of John, Bishop of Salisbury, versus Henry Tychyner, Archdeacon of Dorset.

MR. WAINEWRIGHT would oblige the writer by acquainting him with the result of his present research.

HOWARD H. COTTERELL,

Foden Road, Walsall. F -R-Hist.S., F.R.S.A.

I ought to have added to rr>y query at the above reference (1) that Anthony Tuchenor was one of those who were ordered by the Privy Council on 23 Dec., 1586, to be re- examined, " and yf the truthe might not by convenient meanes be gotten of them, then to put them to the torture of the Rack ' ' (Dasent, ' Acts of the Privy Council,' xiv. 271-2) ; and (2) that he was examined before Sir Owen Hoptori on 25 May, 1588 (' Cal. S.P. Dom., 1581-90,' p. 484).

JOHN B. WAINEWRIOHT.

THE EFFECT OF OPENING A COFFIN (11 S.. xii. 300, 363). A retired officer of the City of London Police told me a few years ago that during the restoration of St. Bartholo- mew's, Smithfield, he was present at the opening of the stone coffin of one of the Priors. When the lid was removed they saw for a few seconds the perfectly preserved body of the Prior clad in his vestments, but it crumbled to a mere handful of dust before their eyes.

I understand that when the tomb of Rahere, the founder of the Priory, was opened,, only a small portion of a sandal was dis- covered. R. H. ROBERTS.

In a second-hand catalogue appears the following : " An Account of the Body of King Edward the First, as it appeared on opening his Tomb in the year 1774, 4to y, wrapper, 40 pages, 1775." This would probably give a minute description.

I have a small round box containing hair,, with the following inscription : " King Edward the Fourth was buried in St. George s Chapel at Windsor in 1483. His tomb was opened in 1789, when a Lock of Hair was taken off his Head, of which the enclosed is a portion." Lysons's ' Hist. Berks,' p. 210, refers to the- event, and- states that " the Bishop of Salis- bury communicated an account of the dis- covery to the Society of Antiquaries."

R. J. FYNMORE.

" PODDEN PLACE " AND " UPPER PODDENT PLACE "(US. xii. 277, 348). I beg to thank MR. DOUGLAS for his interesting information about Millman Street. It proves, of course,, that when Bulwer Lytton left Mr. Loaden's in Great James Street, he could not have- gone straight up the whole of the present Millman Street, but only up that portion, which was the original Millman Street, after which he must have turned to the left along New r Ormond Street. MR. DOUGLAS says he- believes the houses in New Millman Street w r ere nearly all let out in apartments, and implies that Millman Street was better inhabited ; but from the ' Post Office Directory ' for 1858 (in the last month of which year ' What will He do with It ? ' was published) it appears that no fewer than five of the eighteen houses in Millman Street were lodging-houses.

The theory that Judd Street is meant by Upper Podden Place does not commend itself to me. It is now longer than it used to be, as the upper part of Hunter Street has- been incorporated with it, though I do not know for what reason. The original Judd;