to the
convent of the Benedictines. Mr. Porter, the prior, was a
prisoner at the time in his own convent."

The above I took down from Mr. Fitz-Simons' own mouth, and read it to
him, and he said it was perfectly correct. Sir W. Follett told me he
thought Mr. Fitz-Simons was a runaway Vinegar Hill boy. He told me that
he was a monk.

PITMAN JONES.

Exeter, Aug. 1850.

* * * * *

FOLK LORE.

_The Legend of Sir Richard Baker_ (vol. ii., p. 67.).--Will F.L. copy
the inscription on the monument in Cranbrook Church? The dates on it
will test the veracity of the legend. In the reign of Queen Mary, the
representative of the family was Sir John Baker, who in that, and the
previous reigns of Edward VI. and Henry VIII., had held some of the
highest offices in the kingdom. He had been Recorder of London, Speaker
of the House of Commons, Attorney-General and Chancellor of the
Exchequer, and died in the first year of the reign of Queen Elizabeth.
His son, Sir Richard Baker, was twice high-sheriff of the county of
Kent, and had the honour of entertaining Queen Elizabeth in her progress
through the county. This was, most likely, the person whose monument
F.L. saw in Cranbrook Church. The family had been settled there from the
time of Edward III., and seem to have been adding continually to their
possessions; and at the time mentioned by F.L. as that of their decline,
namely, in the reign of Edward VI., they were in reality increasing in
wealth and dignities. If the Sir Richard Baker whose monument is
referred to by F.L. was the son of the Sir John above mentioned, the
circumstances of his life disprove the legend. He was not the sole
representative of the family remaining at the accession of Queen Mary.
His father was then living, and at the death of his father his brother
John divided with him the representation of the family, and had many
descendants. The family estates were not dissipated; on the contrary,
they were handed down through successive generations, to one of whom, a
grandson of Sir Richard, the dignity of a baronet was given; and
Sivinghurst, which was the family seat, was in the possession of the
third and last baronet's grandson, E.S. Beagham, in the year 1730. Add
to this that the Sir Richard Baker in question was twice married, and
that a monumental erection of the costly and honourable description
mentioned by F.L. was allowed to be placed to his memory in the chancel
o