ill was brought forward.

C.H. COOPER.

_"Never did Cardinal bring good to England"_ (Vol. ii., p. 424.).--Your
correspondent O.P.Q. refers to Dr. Lingard's _History of England_, in which
this exclamation of the Duke of Suffolk, on the adjournment of the legatine
inquiry into the validity of the marriage of Henry VIII. and Catharine of
Arragon, is termed an "old saw," and remarks that he should be glad to know
if this saying is to be met with elsewhere, and what gave rise to it.
Before we enter upon the inquiries suggested by O.P.Q., it seems to me that
we have to consider a previous question--what authority is there for
terming it an "old saw." Dr. Lingard refers to "Cavendish, 434.; Herbert,
278." as his authorities for the whole paragraph. But Herbert does not
contain anything of the kind and Cavendish relates the matter very
differently:

"With that stepped forth the Duke of Suffolk from the king, and lay his
commandment spoke these words with a stout and an hault countenance,
'It was never merry in England,' quoth he, 'whilst we had cardinals
amongst us!'"--Cavendish's _Wolsey_, pp. 232, 233, Singer's edition.

Is Dr. Lingard the authority for these words being an "old saw", or has he
merely omitted to give a reference to the place from whence he really
derived them?

BERUCHINO.

_Pandects, Florentine Edition of_ (Vol. ii., p. 421.).--Your correspondent
R.G. will find copies of the Florentine edition of the Pandects of 1553,
both in the British Museum and in the Bodleian library at Oxford. It is
described in the catalogues of both under the title of _Pandecta_.

C.L.L.

_Master John Shorne_ (Vol. ii., p. 387.).--Mr. Thoms, in his curious notes
on this personage, has expressed much regret that fuller details relating
to a representation of _Magister Johannes Schorn_ at Cawston, Norfolk,
communicated to the Archaeological Institute by the Rev. James Bulwer, had
not been preserved in the _Archaeological Journal_. I believe that the
omission was solely in deference to Mr. Bulwer's intention of giving in
another publication the results of his inquiries, and those persons who may
desire detailed information regarding Master John will do well to peruse
Mr. Bulwer's curious memoir in the _Norfolk Archaeology_, vol. ii. p. 280.,
published March 1849, where representations of the figure at Cawston, and
of another at Gateley, Norfolk, are given. There seems to be no evidence
that Sir John, although in