Page:Notes and Queries - Series 9 - Volume 1.djvu/119

 ,.

S. I. FEE, 5,

NOTES AND QUERIES.

Ill

icaven even for the moths and worms

mplies. Tennyson says : " We trust tha

lot one life shall be destroyed," &c. "Th

vish. that of the living whole, no life inaj

ail beyond the grave," &c. On the abov

supposition we must be prepared to admi

/hat the poet has in view the whole brute

ireation, from the earliest geological period

the end of time from "dragons of th

)rme" down to the countless millions o

nsects, and even microscopic animalcula (fo:


 * io exception can be made) ; and that he

attributes to men generally (Ivi. 1) the wist

that all these may have a more complete life

hereafter, such wish extending to the fierces

beasts of prey as well as to the most loath

some of vermin. May we not well ask, with

the Master of Balliol, " Would not that be an

extravagant view to take 1 "

The very words " beyond the grave " seem to me to limit the wish to our own race a wish springing, as Tennyson says, from that which is Divine within us, man having been made in the image of God. This is "the larger hope," the ultimate restoration o1 humanity, so that no human life will in the end prove to have been a failure. This good dream (liv. 5) is crossed by " evil dreams " lent by nature (Iv. 2), and his trust is for the moment shaken but in canto Ivi. he indig- nantly refuses to believe that man, being sue! as he is, can share in the utter destruction, both of individual and type, that seems to overtake the brute creation. And surely the last line, "Behind the veil," &c., seems to indicate that he is not wholly in despair, even if we are forbidden to assume any Scriptural allusion. C. C. B. seems to think that no hope is expressed ; but the line, " O life, as futile, then, as frail," is surely not the conclu- sion reached, but the conclusion thatwww&Jbe reached were the preceding supposition to be admitted, "then" having strong emphasis. C. LAWRENCE FORD, B.A. Bath.

PRINCE FINLEGH (8 fch S. xii. 508). In the first volume of Skene's 'Celtic Scotland' occurs the following passage :

" Findlaec, the son of Ruadhri, who appears in the bagas under the name of Finleikr Jarl, and whose slaughter, by the sons of his brother Mael- brigdj m 1020, is recorded by Tighernac as Mormaer of Moreb, is termed in the Ulster annals ' Ri Albain ; and Tighernac, in recording the death of his successor Malcolm, the son of his brother Mael- brigdi, and one of those who slew him, in 1029, terms him Ri Albain.' There can, therefore, be little doubt that the King Maelbaethe, who submitted to King Cnut, was Macbeth, the son of Findlaec, who appears under the same title which had been borne by his cousin and his father."

From this it appears that Finlegh, Find- laec, or Finlach, as he is variously called) was the father, not the nephew, of Macbeth ; that he was succeeded by his nephew Mal- colm, who was himself slain in 1029. Nothing is said of his having been the founder of the Forsyth, yet I think he must be the Finlegh whom RED CROSS is inquiring about, as I can find no other prince of that name men- tioned in history. Is there not some mistake about Malcolm? No Malcolm of Scotland died in 1004. Malcolm I. was slain in 954. Malcolm II. came to the throne in 1005, and died in 1034. JEANNIE S. POPHAM.

Llanrwst, North Wales.

SUPPORTERS (8 th S. xii. 408 ; 9 th S. i. 36). I regret that in my reply I misquoted Burke, who distinctly says of the arms in Elizabeth's time, " sinister the red dragon" &c.

ETHEL LEGA-WEEKES.

' ON A SUNSHINE HOLYDAY ' (9 th S. i. 100). While I was naturally delighted to see so appreciative and pleasant a notice of ' On a Sunshine Holyday ' in ' N. & Q.,' i must ask you kindly to allow me to point out that the writer of that book and others under the same pen-name, "The Amateur Angler," is my father, Mr. Edward Marston.

R. B. MARSTON.

" THE BILL, THE WHOLE BILL, AND NOTHING BUT THE BILL " (8 th S. xii. 309, 432). The claim made for Rintoul as the inventor of this phrase can be amply sustained, and it was, "ndeed, publicly put forward by the modern Spectator's first editor himself within a very Drief period of its invention.

The Spectator, in its ' News of the Week ' >f 12 March, 1831 the Saturday before the 'ormal introduction of Lord John Russell's irst Reform Bill referred to the comments ipon the delay which had taken place between
 * he moving for leave and the introduction,

and said :

" We believe we can furnish a key to the mystery, t is the wish and the resolution of the Ministry o pass the Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing but the Jill. It was necessary, therefore, that not an 'if lor an ' and ' should be unconsidered ; and that in ts details and in its wording the measure should be ,s impregnable to captious or technical opposition is in its principle it is impregnable to rational ttack."

In point of fact, the measure had not even ,t that moment been completely drafted; and ertain vacillations upon details of it on the >art of the Grey Cabinet caused the Spectator o exclaim on 16 April :

"The phrase, 'The Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing ut the Bill,' first used by ourselves, is no longer at tie service of Ministers."