An allusion to William Lilly’s predictive almanacks, shewing that this Catch was not much earlier in date than Hilton’s book, 1652. Lilly was the original of Butler’s “Cunning man, hight Sidrophel” in _Hudibras_, Part 2nd, Canto 3. Compare note, p. 353. Page 361 (Appendix), line 5. For misprint _alterem_, read _alteram_. Page 394 (Appendix), _New England, &c._ References should be added to the _Rump_ Coll., 1662, i. 95, and _Loyal Songs_, 1731, i. 92. “Isaack,” is probably Isaac Pennington. Hampden and others were meditating this _journey to New England_, until stopped, most injudiciously, by an order in Council, dated April 6, 1638. We here give our additional Note, on the “Sessions of the Poets,” reserved from p. 376. § 3.—SESSIONS OF POETS. We believe that Sir John Suckling’s Poem, sometimes called “A Sessions of Wit,” was written in 1636-7; almost certainly before the death of Ben Jonson (6th August, 1637). Among its predecessors were Richard Barnfield’s “Remembrance of some English Poets,” 1598 (given in present volume, p. 273); and Michael Drayton’s “Censure of the Poets,” being a Letter in couplets, addressed to his friend Henry Reynolds; and the striking lines, “On the Time-Poets,” pp. 5-7 of _Choyce Drollery_, 1656. The latter we have seen to be anonymous; but they were not impossibly by that very Henry Reynolds, friend of Drayton; although of this authorship no evidence has yet arisen. Of George Daniel’s unprinted “Vindication of Poesie,” 1636-47, we have given specimens on pp. 272, 280-1, and 331-2. Later than Suckling (who died in 1642), another author gave in print “The Great Assizes Holden in Parnassus by Apollo and his Assessors:” at which Sessions are arraigned Mercurius Britannicus, &c., Feb. 11th, 1644-5. This has been attributed to George Wither; most erroneously, as we believe. The mis-appropriation has arisen, probably, from the fact of Wither’s name being earliest on the roll of Jurymen summoned: “_Hee, who was called first in all the List,_ _~George Withers~ hight, entitled Satyrist;_ _Then ~Cary~, ~May~, and ~Davenant~ were called forth,_ _Renowned Poets all, and men of worth,_ _If wit may passe for worth: Then ~Sylvester~,_ _~Sands~, ~Drayton~, ~Beaumont~, ~Fletcher~, ~Massinger~,_ _~Shakespeare~, and ~Heywood~, Poets good and free,_ _Dramatick writers all, but the first three:_ _These were empanell’d all, and being sworne_ _A just and perfect verdict to return_,” _&c._ (p. 9.) George Wither was quite capable of placing himself first on the list, in such a manner, we admit; but it is incredible to us that, if he had been the author, he could have described himself so insultingly as we find in the following lines, and elsewhere:—