Last Suicide buried at a Cross Road.—I have reason to believe that the last person subjected to this barbarous ceremony was the wretched parricide and suicide Griffiths, who was buried at the cross road formed by Eaton Street, Grosvenor Place, and the King's Road, as late as June, 1823. I subjoin the following account from the Chronicle:

"The extreme privacy which the officers observed, as to the hour and place of interment, increased in a great degree the anxiety of those that were waiting, and it being suspected that the body would have been privately carried away, through the back part of the workhouse (St. George's) into Farm Street Mews, and from thence to its final destination, different parties stationed themselves at the several passages through which it must unavoidably pass, in order to prevent disappointment. All anxiety however, on this account, was ultimately removed, by preparations being made for the removal of the body through the principal entry of the workhouse leading into Mount Street, and about half-past one o'clock the body was brought out in a shell supported on the shoulders of four men, and followed by a party of constables and watchmen. The solitary procession, which increased in numbers as it went along, proceeded up Mount Street, down South Audley Street into Stanhope Street, from thence into Park Lane through Hyde Park Corner, and along Grosvenor Place, until its final arrival at the cross road formed by Eaton Street, Grosvenor Place, and the King's Road. When the procession arrived at the grave, which had been previously dug, the constables arranged themselves around it to keep the crowd off, upon which the shell was laid on the ground, and the body of the unfortunate deceased taken out. It had on a winding-sheet, drawers, and stockings, and a quantity of blood was clotted about the head, and the lining of the shell entirely stained. The body was then wrapped in a piece of Russia matting, tied round with some cord, and then instantly dropped into the hole, which was about five feet in depth: it was then immediately filled up, and it was gratifying to see that that disgusting part of the ceremony of throwing lime over the body, and driving a stake through it, was on this occasion dispensed with. The surrounding spectators, consisting of about two hundred persons, amongst whom were several persons of respectable appearance, were much disgusted at this horrid ceremony."

Imagine such scene in the "centre of civilisation" only thirty years ago!

Vincent T. Sternberg.

Andrew's Edition of Freund's Latin Lexicon.—A singular plan seems to have been pursued in this valuable lexicon in one point. Wherever the meaning of a word in a certain passage is disputed, all reference to that place is omitted! Here are a few examples of this "dodge" from one book, Horace:

A. A. D.

Slang Expressions.—It would be curious to investigate farther how some odd forms of expression of this kind have crept into, if not the English language, at least into every-day parlance; and by what classes of men they have been introduced. I do not of course mean the vile argot, or St. Giles' Greek, prevalent among housebreakers and pick-pockets; though a great deal of that is traceable to the Rommany or gipsy language, and other sufficiently odd sources: but I allude more particularly to phrases used by even educated men—such as "a regular mull," "bosh," "just the cheese," &c. The first has already been proved an importation from our Anglo-Indian friends in the pages of "N. & Q."; and I have been informed that the other two are also exotics from the land of the Qui-Hies. Bosh, used by us in the sense of "nonsense," "rubbish," is a Persian word, meaning "dirt" and cheese, a corruption of a Hindostani word denoting "thing:" which is exactly the sense of the expression I have quoted. "Just the cheese," "quite the cheese," i.e. just the thing I require, quite comme il faut, &c.

Probably some of your correspondents could furnish other examples.

E. S. Taylor.

"Quem Deus vult perdere."—In Croker's Johnson, vol. v. p. 60., the phrase, "Quem Deus vult perdere, prius dementat," is stated to be from a Greek iambic of Euripides:

This statement is made first by Mr. John Pitts, late Rector of Great Brickhill, Bucks^[1], to Mr. Richard How of Aspley, Beds, and is taken for granted successively by Boswell, Malone, and Croker. But no such Greek is, in fact, to be found in Euripides; the words conveying a like sentiment are,—

The cause of this classical blunder of so many eminent annotators is, that these words are not to be found in the usual college and school editions of Euripides. The edition from which the above correct extract is made is in ten volumes, published at Padua in 1743-53, with an Italian translation in verse by P. Carmeli, and is to be found in vol. x. p. 268. as the 436-7th verses of the Tragedie incerte, the meaning of which he thus gives in prose "Quando vogliono gli Dei far perire alcuno, gli toglie la mente."

T.J. Buckton.

Lichfield.

P.S.—In Croker's Johnson, vol. iv. p. 170., the phrase "Omnia mea mecum porto" is incorrectly quoted from Val. Max. vii. 2., instead of "Bona mea mecum porto."

White Roses.—The paragraph quoted from "an old newspaper," dated Saturday, June 15th, 1723, alludes to the commemoration of the birthday of King James VIII. (the 10th of June), which was the Monday mentioned as that before the Saturday on which the newspaper was published. All faithful adherents of the House of Stuart showed their loyalty by wearing the white rose (its distinguishing badge) on the 10th of June, when no other way was left them of declaring their devotion to the exiled family; and, from my own knowledge, I can affirm that there still exist some people who would think that day desecrated unless they wore a white rose, or, when that is not to be procured, a cockade of white ribbon, in token of their veneration for the memory of him of whose birth it is the anniversary.

L. M. M. R.