his name is given to a small
piece of land, now pasture, inclosed within the moat of the ancient
manor of Marwell, formerly Merewelle, in Hants, once the property of the
see of Winchester. It does not appear to have been ever covered by
buildings. What is the meaning or derivation of the term? Does the name
exist in any other place, as applied to a piece of land situated as the
above-described piece? I have spelt it as pronounced by the bailiff of
the farm.

W. H. G.

Winchester.

[Junius and Ray derive it from the Anglo-Saxon lictun,
_coemiterium_, a burying-place. Our correspondent, however, will
find its etymology discussed in the _Gentleman's Magazine_, vol.
lxxviii. pp. 216. 303. and 319.]

_St. James' Market House._--In a biography of Richard Baxter, the
Nonconformist divine, about 1671:

"Mr. Baxter came up to London, and was one of the Tuesday
lecturers at Pinner's Hall, and a Friday lecturer at Fetter
Lane; but on Sundays he for some time preached only
occasionally, and afterwards more statedly in St. James's Market
House."

Where was the Market House situate?

P. T.

[Cunningham, in his _Handbook of London_, under the head of St.
James' Market, Jermyn Street, St. James', tells us that "here,
in a room over the Market House, preached Richard Baxter, the
celebrated Nonconformist. On the occasion of his first Sermon,
the main beam of the building cracked beneath the weight of the
congregation." We recollect the old market and Market House,
which must have stood on the ground now occupied by Waterloo
Place.]

* * * * *

REPLIES.

GRUB STREET JOURNAL.

(Vol. vii., pp. 108. 268.)

REGINENSIS has been referred by F. R. A. to Drake's _Essays_ for an
account of this journal. Drake's account is, however, very incorrect.
The _Grub Street Journal_ did not terminate, as he states, on the 24th
August, 1732, but was continued in the original folio size to the 29th
Dec., 1737; the last No. being 418., instead of 138., as he incorrectly
gives it. He appears to have supposed that the 12mo. abridgment in two
volumes contained all the essays in the paper; whereas it did not
comprise more than a third of them. He mentions as the principal writers
Dr. Richard Russel and Dr. John Martyn. Budgell, however, in _The Bee_
(February, 1733) says, "The person thought to be at the head of the
paper is Mr. R--l (Russel),