Mr. URBAN,

May 14.
YOU will herewith receive a South-

You will here with receive of Han

Nope, a parish fituated in the North end of Buckinghamshire.

The church (Plate II.) is reckoned one of the finest pieces of Gothic architecture in the country. The fteeple is 186 feet high; and the length of the church, including the chancel and fteeple, is 131 feet, 6 inches, the breadth being 60 feet, 7 inches, both admeasurements being taken within the walls. It has a nave and two ailes; and the ailes are fupported each by three pillars. In the fteeple are five exceedingly good bells. I cannot learn any thing fatisfactory concerning the antiquity of the church; but it is unqueftionably very antient. The living is a vicarage, worth no more than between 70 and Sol. per annum. The Rev. Henry Davies is the prefent incumbent. The corporation of Lincoln are patrons of the living, and have received an allotment of land inftead of tithes; which, till the parish was inclofed, which took place about 20 years ago, were paid in kind.

Hanflope is faid to derive its name from the Saxon word baën, fignifying high, and fope, a defcent. How far this etymology may be juft, I know not; but its fituation certainly favours the fuppofition, as it ftands on the fummit of a hill, and there is a gradual descent from it on all fides. It

is five miles diftant from Newport Pagnell, and about the fame diftant Stony Stratford. Formerly there was a market kept here;, but it has been difcontinued for many years, the place having fallen much into decay. An annual fair is, however, ftill held here on Holy Thurfday for cattle, &c.; and the feaft in commemoration of the dedication of the church is obferved

pal employment of the females, and, indeed, is the only manufactory in the

neighbourhood. Though the village is

built on an eminence, it is not reckoned healthy; one caufe of which may be attributed to the water, which is unwholefome both in the fprings and ponds: the fedentary lives of many of the inhabitants may be alfo affigned for another caufe, lace-making obliging them not only to fit, but alfo in a bending pofition, which, no doubt, is unfriendly to health. Add to this, in winter thefe people affociate together in clofe rooms, to keep themfelves warm, firing being very dear; and thus of courfe breathing a very impure atmosphere; the confequence of which is, they in general look pale and fickly.

The following epitaph upon a ftone in the church-yard feems, however, to contradict what has been just advanced refpecting the unhealthiness of the place:

"In memory

of JOSEPH Cox, fen.
who Jeparted this life the
11th January, 1759,
aged 92 years.
Alfo, ELIZABETH, his wife,
died March 15, 1762,*
aged 101.

Their defcendants, at her death,
were to children, 62 grand-children,
and 102 great-grand-children;
in all 174."

On a flat ftone, in the nave, is a brafs piate, with the following infcrip

tion :

"MARMORE SUB HOC REQVIESCIT COR-
PUS MARIE,

FILIE THOME BICHMORE, EXPECTAN◄
TIS RESVR-

RECTIONEM GLORIE, QVE HAC EVITA

DISCESSIT

ULTIMO DIE IANUARII AN'O DOMINI 1602, CVM

on the fift Sunday after St.. James's SEXTVM ANNVMÆTATIS COMPLEVERAT. day.

The whole parish is about four miles in length, and nearly the fame in breadth, and contains about 1200 inhabitants. There is very little common-ground. The foil in general is a ftrong clay, and well adapted. for producing all kinds of grain; confequently confiderable quantities are grown here.

Edward Watts, efq. of Hanflopepark, is lord of the manor.

Lace-making conftitutes the princi-
GENT. MAG. June, 1799.

CHRISTUS SOLVS MIHI SALUS." On a white marble flab, fixed in the wall of the church, is the following account of the feveral benefactions to this parish.

minifter and churchwardens, 2001.

"Richard Miles gave, by will, charged annu lly on a meffuage or tenement, clofe or pafture ground, and premises, in Hanflope, to be diftributed weekly in bread amongst twelve poor widows, paid by his executor, 51. 4s.

"Mary Newman gave, by will, land and tenements, vefted in the minifter and churchwardens, the annual rent, to be diftributed amongst poor widows, 31. 3s." WILLIAM ROBINSON LAWFORD.

Mr. URBAN, Fishguard, July 5,1797.
A
S fo much has been faid about
roundels in your Magazine, I fend
you a drawing of one; which, though
coming from the hands of a young
Antiquary, juft 11 years old, I hops
will not be unacceptible, whofe anti-
quity I can trace to Queen Elizabeth's
time. Like the lamps of the antients,
roundels feem to have been differently
infcribed, according to the different
places and families to which they be-
longed. The moitos of this, as wel
as the others in my collection, are all
of a pious or fentimental kind. That
which I now fend you I read in mo-
dern English thus:

"Content thyfelf with thine eftate,
And fed no poor wight from thy gate;
For why, this counfel I thee give,
To learn to die, and die to live."

The diameter of the drawing (fig. 2.) is exactly half the fize of the ori ginal. Should you be inclined to notice this in your valuable Publication, I hope my little cabinet will furnish fomething more worthy your attention, when in future I may become

Your occafional correfpondent.
JOHN FENTON.

Mr. URBAN,

May 11. Mr. Nichols's Hiftory of Hinck ley are memoirs of eminent perfons, natives of that place, or clofely Connected with it. I fend you an original letter to the Rev. Francis Brokeby, B. D. (of whom fome memoirs are there given), some time Fellow of Trinity college in Cambridge, who published, in 1712, au Hiftory of the Government of the Primitive Church; fhewing that the Church, in the first ages, as it has been ever fince, was governed by bishops, or officers fuperior to prefbyters, and who afterwards wrote the Life of the celebrated Mr. Henry Dodwell. Mr. Brokesby being a Non-juror, the following ap

pears to be written to him* for his own as well as Mr. Cherry and Mr. Dodwell's opinions, who were then at Shotte brooke. HINCKLEIENSIS, }

"Dear Sir, Oxon, Nov. 12th, 1710. | "The Cafe in View and Further Profped are books I am very well acquainted with; but am at a loss to know why my ! good friends refer me thither for fatisfac tion upon a matter which I cannot find is at all confidered there, nor, `I believe, any where else in print by Mr. Dodwell: nay, which is fo far from being considered there, that both thofe treatifes proceed all along upon the fuppofition of the very contrary, viz. that the fucceffion was no continued, but that only prefbyters were left. I always apprehended that, if it appeared to be matier of fact that but one bishop was left wid competent authority to govern the Church after the deceafe of the laft non-refigning forvivor of the deprived bishops, the cut would be reckoned very different from Spect. Such a fucceffion, if it be indeed that in The Cafe in View and Further P matter of fact, is what, I dare fay, Mr. Dodwell was not aware of when he wrIE those two treatifes. At the fame time, I confefs that, if the objection of this parti cular were taken away, I do not fee the any other is fufficient to excuse a man's not going to church. Your whole reafoa ing, till you come to the fuppofa! of the deprived bishops baving agreed in giving the new biskops a power equal to that of the b Shop of N. rubich was to be exercised after the death of the last non-refigning survivor of the deprivid bifbops, would be very good, it did not still proceed upon the contrary fuppofal, viz. that the deprived Fathers did net ordain bishops into vacant fees, or at least ordain them coadjutors co-ordinate with themfelves: whereas that is the thing in question, viz. whether they did not do fo, if the matter of fact, as related by Mr. Sleaper and by Mr. Driver, be true. You term that relation only a fuggestion; where(to Mr. Driver by Dr. H. himself, and to as they stand by it as what was told them in his prefence) for certain matter of fui, Mr. Sloaper either by Dr. H. or for ebody You give a reafon why fuch a bardly be imagined, becaufe, by granting jucă thing can a power, the deprived Fathers might have precluded themselves from closing the sebija i◄ their life-time if they bad a mind to it. if that which is very difficult to be imag ned is matter of fact, whatever the deprived bishops precluded themfelves from, £ will be matter of fact ftill. Suppofe they

But

had filled vacant diocefes as formerly cif

tributed. I mean, for inftance, the docefe of Canterbury upon Abp. Sancroft's death, death, &c. I do not fee but they would the diocese of Peterborough upon Bp. W ́bate's

Qu. Who was Mr. Parker the writer?

thus

thus as much have precluded themselves from lofing the fchifm in their life-time if they bad a mind to it, as in the cafe now afledged according to Mr. Sloaper's and Mr. Driver's relation. In the next place you fay, this porver could not have been granted avithout an unanimous confent of all the deprived bishops, in that, if any one bad flood out, this would bave rendered the grant invalid, because be might have infifled on his own right. But what right could one bishop have had to invalidate the act of all his colleagues, or of only a majority, at least acting fynodically? Are not things rightly carried in fynods unless by a nemine contradicente? Befides, is urged that there is as good proof that Bp. Ken approved the confecrations as that he did not. It is affirmed that it appears under his band, and that Col. Tuften's lady declares his lordship told her at the Bath, when she asked what the must do as to church-communion after the death of the deprived bishops, that the need not be concerned, for that the fucceffion was continued. The archbishop died before, but had approved the defign. You further alledge, that the power pretended to by the new bishops could no otherwise be conferred on them but by confecration.

And Mr. Sha

per's and Mr. Driver's account fays it was then conferred. You add, that it could not be done but by making them fucceffers into va cant fees, or making them diocefans. But give me leave to ask why it could not be done by confecrating them co-ordinate with themselves and their coadjutors in an equality of jurifliction with that which they exercifed either in any of their own proper diocefes, or over the whole Church of England, the government of which then entirely refided in them? And why they had not a power, at leaft if they took that method, mentioned in Mr. Sloaper's and Mr. Driver's Relation, of turning all the diocefes into one, of continuing this jurifdiction to them longer than then own lives, and asther ficceffors? And whether, if this was done, they were not hereby made diocefans? Nor do I well apprei end why the deprived Fathers might not give them fuch a power by an act after confecration. A fuftragan is capable of being Imade a diocefan afterwards; and yet, I prefume, it is not neceffary he thould be confecrated again before he can be fo. I fuppofe that it is enough if he has a due commiffion from a fyned of the province, or at least of the nation, to which he belongs, to act as a diocetan. Bishops may retain their fult po er though under an incapacity of exereifing it, as in fchifm; why then may they not receive and hold a full power, though not to be exercifed till af er fuch a time? It before the deprivations, in King Charles's (fuppote) or King James the Second's reign, it should have been agreed at confecration between a di

ocefan confecrated then and the college
that confecrated him, that he should not
exercife the power he received till fo many
years after, but that he should exercife
it in the diocese he was ordained into till
then; might he not, therefore, have ex-
ercifed it when that term of years was ex-
pied? As for the grant aforesaid not being
attefted by infirument, I only ask, whether
it may not be fufficiently attefted without
it? and whether that objection against the
grant would fuffice alone if there were no
other? In the last place you fay, that it
is neceffary that the perfons, to whom this fup-
pofed grant was made, should publicly affert
their claim to this power before any can be
obliged to fubmit to it. To which their ad
herents anfwer, that one of them (Dr. H.)
is ready to affert their claim to it to as ma-
ny as afk him concerning it, or upon whom
the knowledge of it is at all likely to bave
any influence or effect in confcience; that
public mention was made of such a fuc-
celfion in Wefiminfier-ball at Dr. Sacheve-
rell's trial; and that they defire to know,
whether a more public declaration than
the aforefaid was always thought neceffary
from bishops in the primitive church,
where the circumstances of those bishops
were fuch as Dr. H's and Mr. W's, and
what examples and authorities there are in
antiquity to thew it? and how public and
what fort of declaration it must be in their
cafe which is necessary before any can be obli-
ged to fubmit to their claim?

"Let not my very worthy and honoured
frien's, Mr. Brooksby, Mr. Cherry, and
Mr. Dodwell, think that I am thus trou-
ble fome to them upon any other account
than for my own and fome other people's
information, who wait for anfwers and ac
counts of things from me. I heartily thank
you, goo: Sir, for the trouble you fo
kindly undertake in this affair; and I
hope this letter will deferve an answer,
wh ch if it is thought worthy of, I fhall
be glad to receive it as foon as may he.
My humble fer ice to Mr. Dodwell and
Mr Cherry. 1 am, dear Sir, your obliged
and very affectionate friend and ferv. nt,

Mr. URBAN,

"S. PARKER."

May 31.
OUR co refpondent A. M. p 297,
Your or refilleafed at receiving

the following lift of Bampton lecturers
from thei fiift eftablishment.

1780. James Bindinell, D D. pub-
lic orator of the university, late fellow
of Jefus college, and proctor of the
univertity; afterwards vicar of Ne
therbury and Bemifter, Dorfet,

1781. Timo.hy Neve, D.D. chaplain of Merton college, and rector of God. dington and Middleton S.ones, Oxfordshire, late fellow of Corpus Chrifti

college,

college, and afterwards Lady MargaTer's lecturer in divinity, and prebendary of Worcester. He died Jan. 1, 1798.

1782. Robert Holmes, M.A. fellow of New college, afterwards prælector in poetry, rector of Stanton St. John, Oxfordshire, canon of Christchurch, and D.D.

1783. John Cobb, D. D. fellow of St. John's college, and afterwards vicar of Charlbury, Oxfordshire.

1784. Jofeph White, B.D. fellow of Wadham college, Abp. Laud's profeffor of Arabic, and one of his Majesty's preachers at Whitehall, and afterwards D. D. and prebendary of Gloucefter.

1785. Ralph Churton, M. A. fellow of Brazen-nofe college, and after terwards rector of Middleton Cheney, Northamptonshire.

1786. George Croft, D.D. vicar of Arncliffe, York fhire, late fellow of University college.

1787. William Hawkins, M. A. prebendary of Wells, and vicar of Whitchurch, Dorfer, late prælector in poetry, and fellow of Pembroke college. 1788. Richard Shepherd, D. D. F.R.S. archdeacon of Bedford, late fellow of Corpus Chrifti college.

1789. Edward Tatham, D. D. fellow, and afterwards rector, of Lincoln college.

1790. Henry Kett, M.A. fellow of Trinity college, afterwards B. D. and one of his Majefty's preachers at Whitehall.

1791. Robert Morres, M. A. late fellow of Brazen-nofe college.

1792 John Eveleigh, D. D. provost of Oriel college, and prebendary of Worcester.

1793. James Williamfon, B. D. of Queen's college, prebendary of Lincoln, and rector of Winwick, Northamptonshire.

1794. Thomas Wintle, B. D. rector of Brightwell, Berkshire, fome time fellow of Pembroke college.

1795. Daniel Veyfie, B. D. fellow of Oriel college, and one of his Majefty's preachers at Whitehall, afterwards rector of Plymtree, Devon.

1796. Robert Gray, M. A. vicar of Faringdon, Berks, late of St. Mary hall. 1797. William Finch, LL. D. rector of Avington, Berks, and of Tackley, Oxfordshire, one of the city lecurers at St. Martin's Oxford, and late fellow of St. John's college.

1798. Charles-Henry Hall, B. D. prebendary of Exeter, late ftudent of Christchurch, and one of the proctors of the univerfity.

1799. William Barrow, LL. D. of Queen's college, and F.A.S.

George Richards, M. A. late fellow i of Oriel college, and now rector of Lillington Lovell, and one of the vicars of Bampton, Oxfordshire, is elected for the next year.

Lady Moyer founding her lectures in defence of our Lord's divinity, Dr. Waterland was appointed by Dr. Robiafon, Bishop of London, in which Prelate the appointment of the preacher is vefted by her wilt, to preach the first courfe of these lectures, which he performed 1720; and the fame year he published an anfwer to Dr. Whit by's reply; on the fubject of which fee Dr Waterland's art. Biog. Bil Supp. VI. part II. p. 4163, n. D.

The next was D. James Knight, vicar of St. Sepulchre's, London, 1721. Dr. Bishop, minister of St. Mary at Tower, Ipswich, 1726.

Dr. Jofeph Trapp, rector of Har lington, Middlefex, vicar of Chriftchurch, and St. Vedaft, Fofter-lane, 1729, 1730, 1731.

John Browne, M. A. rector of Beby, co. Leicefter, 1730-1, 1732.

H. Felton, chaplain to the Prince of Wales, principal of Edmund hall, and rector of Whitwell, co. Suffolk, 1731.

Charles Wheatley, M. A. vicar of Furneaux Pelham, Herts, 1738.

Glofter Ridley, D D. late fellow of New college, Oxford, canon of Salifbury, and rector of Weston, Norfolk, 1740.

Dr. William Berriman, reЯor of St. Andrew Underthaft, and fellow of Eton, 1741.

Arthur Bedford, chaplain to the Prince of Wales' and to the Haberdafhers company, 1741.

Jeremiah Seed, M. A. fellow of Queen's college, Oxford, and rector of Enham, Oxfordshire, 1743. D. II.