Page:Notes and Queries - Series 9 - Volume 2.djvu/171

 9<" s. ii. AUC, 27,

NOTES AND QUERIES.

163

Sir Edward Seymour, the Speaker, described as "entering the House as member for Gloucester, 1661," should read " for Hindon," for which he sat 1661-8. His other returns were : co. Devon, 1678-9 ; Totness, 1679-81 ; Exeter, 1689-90, 1690-5 ; Totness, 1695-8 ; Exeter and Totness (preferred Exeter), 1 698- 1700 ; Exeter, 1700-1, 1701-2, 1702-5, and 1705 until decease in 1708.

Sir Francis Seymour, afterwards Lord Seymour of Trowbridge, sat for Marlborough in the Long Parliament, not Wilts.

Sir Thomas Seymour, afterwards Lord Seymour of Sudley, was M.P. for Wilts 1545- 1547.

Sir William Sharington (died 1553) was M.P. for Heytesbury, 1545-7 ; Bramber, 1547- 1552 ; and Wilts from January to April, 1552. Sir Robert Sheffield, Speaker, was M.P. for London in 1495, 1496-7, and 1502, and probably for co. Lincoln in 1511-12 and 1514-15.

Sir William Shelley, Justice of the C.P., 1527-49. "In 1523 he is erroneously said to have been returned to Parliament for London." This is not an error. He repre- sented London in the Parliament of that year, but not afterwards.

Sir Thomas Shirley of Wiston(died 1612). " He was elected M.P. for Sussex in 1572, and again in 1592, while he sat for Steyning in 1584, 1601, and 1603." This is wrong as to 1584, to which Parliament he was returned for Sussex, the M.P. for Steyning being his son of the same name.

Sir Cloudesley Shovell was first returned for Rochester in 1695, not 1698.

Sir Bartholomew Shower, Recorder of London, was M.P. for Exeter, 1698, 1700-1, and 1701 until decease.

Robert Shute, Justice of the Queen's Bench, sat for Cambridge in two Parliaments, 1571 and 1572-83.

Sir Henry Sidney, the Lord Deputy, was returned for Brackley, 1547-52 ; co. Kent, March, 1553, 1563-7, 1571, and 1572-83.

Henry Sidney, Lord Romney. In addition to his return for Bramber in 1679-81, he represented Tamworth in 1689, until created a peer in the same year.

Sir John Skeffington, afterwards second Viscount Massereene, represented Down, Antrim, and Armagh in Richard Cromwell's Parliament, 1659. He was fourth baronet, not fifth, succeeding his cousin Sir William, third baronet, in April, 1652. His father, Sir Richard Skeffington, who was M.P. for Staf- fordshire in the Long Parliament, died June, 1647, and so did not survive to inherit the baronetcy. He had been knighted in 1624, The baronetages and accepted autho-

rities are all wrong in the succession to this aaronetcy, by inserting one baronet too many.

Major-General Philip Skippon, by a clerical rror, is said to have represented Lyme in the two Parliaments of 1654 and 1656. -It should be Lynn, i.e., Lynn Regis.

Sir Henry Slingsby (beheaded 1658) was M.P. for Knaresborough in 1625, as well as in the two Parliaments of 1640. W. D. PINK.

Leigh, Lancashire.

THE SKELTS. At the time MR. WALTER HAMILTON'S interesting note appeared in 7 th S. x. 343, I intended to point out that he was in error in stating that Skelt " started " the idea of the Juvenile Theatre. As there is no collection of his prints accessible to the genei'al public, this is a mistake that any one is likely to make. In my note on West's prints for the Juvenile Theatre (4 th S. xii. 463*) I say, " Among those who destroyed the busi- ness and did a good trade, Skelt of the Minories, I should say, was foremost." Instead of being satisfied with simply correct- ing MR. HAMILTON'S statement at the time, I wanted to write an article dealing with all the Skelts; but years have gone by, and now that it is too late, I do what I ought to have done before. I say too late because I find the statement that Skelt started the idea has got into a biographical dictionary.

There were four Skelts. M. (I believe Matthew) first started. He took another into partnership, and their prints are published by M. & M. Skelt. Then one of these M.s left, and the prints again appear as published by M. Skelt. This M. took a B. (Benjamin, I believe) into partnership, and their prints are published by M. & B. Skelt; then M. goes out and the prints are published by B. alone, who, I presume, " burst up " like the explo- sion in ' The Miller and his Men '; but then we have some salvage from the general wreck published by " E. Skelt " without any address. As neither books nor prints are dated, it took me several years before I was able to evolve these facts. E. Skelt is said to have died about 1890 in a good situation. It is clear that he never had sufficient capital to carry on the print business, as very few prints bear his name.

When the Skelts were sold up I do not know, but W. Webb had Skelt's plates in ' Aladdin,' and sold them with Skelt's name taken out and his own inserted ; but whereas Skelt printed from the copper-plates, Webb had them put on, and printed from, the stone, a very inferior thing. These 'remarks refer


 * See also S"> S, ii, 63 ; th S. i. 90, 454,