Page:Notes and Queries - Series 9 - Volume 5.djvu/257

 9* S.V. MARCH 31, 1900.] NOTES AND QUERIES.

249

goat is at times kept with sheep "to fight sheep-worrying dogs," or to ensure their health ; I imagine, however, that in the days of old his office was to resist witches. Is there any proof of this 1 G. W.

PRICE PAID FOR CHINA. Is it true, as I have seen it stated, that Augustus II., King of Poland and Elector of Saxony, paid for some old china with two regiments of soldiers'?

H. T. B.

CROWN OFFICE. What was the Crown Office, mentioned in correspondence of the last century ? H. T. B.

[Once more we counsel, Consult 'H.E.D.']

BAR -AT- GIN & Co. This is the name painted over an oyster shop in Little Queen Street, Holborn, on the east side, which is shortly to be demolished to make way for the new road to the Strand. Is it a legitimate name Bar- At-Gin ? Has it any significance ? It has puzzled me for a long time.

S. J. A. F.

" WARGLASS." What is the etymology of this Lancashire dialect word, occurring in such a phrase as "It's o uv a warglass"? The meaning is precisely the same as that of the French word veralas as given by Littre ; but it is stated in his dictionary that the etymology there furnished is not compatible with all the various forms of the word.

ARTHUR MAYALL.

" BE THE DAY WEARY," &c. Can any of your readers tell me the source and authorship of the two following lines? I quote from memory and am not sure if I am quite correct : Be the day weary, or be the day long, At length it ringeth to evensong. Neither Prof. Dowden, of Trinity College, Dublin, nor Prof. Mahaffy, nor any of the professors of literature in Queen's College, Belfast, can recollect the context, though they are all quite familiar with the lines.

GEORGE R. REID.

[The nearest approach to this is in Stephen Ha wes's 'Pastime of Pleasure,' chap. xlii. See 4 N. & Q.,'

MR. ONGLEY. Where could I find mention of the death (probably between 1756 and 1776) of a Mr. Ongley, killed whilst riding in a steeplechase] W. F. H.

Sanatorium, Mundesley-on-Sea, Norfolk.

SIR NATHANIEL RICH. Can any reader of 'N. & Q.' tell me the burial-place of Sir Nathaniel Rich, Knt., who died in 1636? He was a well-known Parliamentarian in those troublous times, though not a member of the

most advanced party, and was one of the earliest promoters of emigration and colonial enterprise. By his will he directed that he should be buried "privately in the night" at the discretion of his executor, Lord Mandevill : but if convenient he desires to be interred "at Stondon, in Essex," where his residence was, and where he was lord of the manor. A monument " not exceeding 50., or 300 marks," was to be erected over his grave. No such memorial exists at Stondon, though others of an earlier date are in good pre- servation. I am led to infer that the burial must have taken place elsewhere.

E. H. L. REEVE, Rector of Stondon. Stondon, Brentwood.

HUBERT DE BURGH. I should esteem it a favour if any of your readers could give me the name of the smith who refused to place fetters on Hubert de Burgh when he was arrested at Brentwood. Z. MOON.

THE PLACE-NAME OXFORD. (9 th S. iii. 44, 309, 389 ; iv. 70, 130, 382, 479 ; v. 69.)

IT is again necessary to state the main question. Can Eoccenford be identified with the west ford of Oxford by tracing the exist- ing natural features described in the boun- daries of Cead walla's grant or by other means? I am of opinion that it can.

I have advanced some stubborn facts, which have been shown to be quite able to take care of themselves. I have brought forward only one theory, viz., the eoc cen or eocce(n) colonial or tribal name-theory for Eoccenford. This, however, is no part of the main argument, over the outer fringe of which MR. STEVEN- SON has hovered, seizing here and there on points not vital to it for his observations.

If the mediaeval people of Oxford, when the O.E. or Anglo-Saxon language had become neglected, chose to believe that the name of the place was derived from a ford for oxen, because the syllable ox or the word oxen was contained in it, and that consequently Eoc- cenford could not possibly be at Oxford, is that any reason why such a conclusion should be considered satisfactory now, or why it should not be tested by modern methocfs of research ?

First consider the extreme improbability of such a derivation. There must have been in Anglo-Saxon England ten thousand places where oxen could walk across a ford, yet, practically, only one such place-name has