s, within the present generation, as a genuine
document, and as proceeding from adherents of the Church of Rome. This
re-quotation appears in an otherwise useful little volume of the Religious
Tract Society, entitled _The Bible in many Tongues_, p. 96.; and it may
tend to check the use made of the supposed Advice or Council to state, what
a perusal either of the original in Brown's _Fasciculus Rerum Expetend. et
Fugiend._, or of a translation in Gibson's _Preservative_ (vol. i. pp. 183.
191., ed. 1848), will soon make evident, that the document in question is a
piece of banter, and must be attributed to the pen of P. P. Vergerio, in
whose _Works_ it is in fact included, in the single volume published
Tubing. 1563, fol. 94--104.

So frequently has this supposed Advice been cited as a _serious_ affair,
that the pages of "N. & Q." may be well employed in endeavouring to stop
the somewhat perverse use of a friendly weapon.

NOVUS.

* * * * *

Queries.

BISHOP GARDINER "DE VERA OBEDIENTIA."

It is probable that others of your readers besides myself have had good
reason to complain that Dr. Maitland has cruelly raised the price of this
little book to a bibliomaniacal height, by his inimitable description of
its curious contents and history. (_Essays on Subjects connected with the
Reformation_, xvii. xviii. xix.)

{55}

Some of the things which seem to be indubitable respecting the original
work are these:--1. That it was first printed in 1535. 2. That,
consequently, Bishop Burnet (_Hist. of Ref._, Part I. b. iii. p. 166.:
Dublin, 1730) was mistaken in representing it as having been written in
reply to Cardinal Pole. 3. That there _was_ an octavo edition published at
Strasburg in 1536, and that Goldastus followed it. 4. That there was an
additional reprint of the tract at London in 1603. (Schelhornii, _Amoen.
Hist. Eccles._, tom. i. pp. 15. 849.) But I am anxious to make three
inquiries relative to this really important document and its fictitious
preface.

1. The Roane volume, certainly the earliest in English, professes to have
been printed by "Michal Wood" in 1553. Can we not determine the place of
its origin by the recollection of the fact, that Bishop Bale's _Mysterye of
Iniquyte, or Confutation of Ponce Pantolabus_, was printed at _Geneva_ by
"Mychael Woode" in 1545?

2. With regard to the typographical achievements of the Brocards, is it not
rather an _apropos_ circumstance,