_Quotation in Locke_ (Vol. vi., p. 386.).--The words "Si non vis intelligi non debes legi" were, I believe, the exclamation of St. Jerome, as he threw his copy of Persius into the fire in a fit of testiness at being unable to construe some tough lines of that tough author. I set down this reply from memory, and am unable to give the authority for it. W. FRASER. _Pic-nic_ (Vol. vi., pp. 152. 518.).--The Query of A. F. S. (p. 152.) as to the etymology of _pic-nic_ still remains unanswered. The Note of W. W. (p. 518.) merely refers to the time (1802) when pic-nic suppers first became fashionable in England. Under a French form, the word appears in a speech of Robespierre's, quoted in the _British and Foreign Review_ for July, 1844, p. 620.: "C'est ici qu'il doit m'accuser, et non dans les _piques-niques_, dans les sociétés particulières." An earlier instance occurs in one of Lord Chesterfield's letters (No. 167.), dated October 1748. JAYDEE. _Discovery at Nuneham Regis_ (Vol. vi., pp. 386. 488. 558.).--Nuneham Regis was granted to John Dudley, Duke of Northumberland, in the seventh year of King Edward VI.; but as it was forfeited on his attainder, in the first year of Queen Mary, and immediately granted by her to Sir Rowland Hill, knight, and citizen of London, from whom Sir Thomas Leigh, knight, and alderman of London, almost immediately acquired it; and as he exercised the right of presentation to the vicarage in the first year of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, there is no probability of the body of John, Duke of Northumberland, being removed from the Tower of London to Newnham. The letters T. B. on the clothes on the body at Nuneham are distinctly worked in Roman capitals, like those on a common sampler. I have seen them. J. S.S. _Door-head Inscriptions_ (Vol. vi., p. 543.).-- "Sit mihi nec glis servus nec hospes hirudo." "From servant lazy as dormouse, Or leeching guest, God keep my house." MR. WOODWARD tells us that he quotes this inscription "from memory:" it is so very pertinent that it seems a pity even to hint a correction, but, as I read it, it seemed partly familiar to me, and I find something so like the latter part of it in two ancient authors, that I am tempted to inquire whether he may not have omitted _one letter_, which alters the sense as given above, and yet gives a sense as good. Among the Symbols of Pythagoras, I read the following: "[Greek: Omôrophious chelidônas mê echein]." "Domesticas hiru_n_dines ne habeto." To the same effect (but, strange to say, without any reference to Pythagoras' dictum), we find it in the _proverbia_ of Polydore Virgil (A.D. 1498): "Hiru_n_do suscipienda non est." and the exposition is the same in both: "Hirundo garrula semper, _i.e._ garruli et tumigeri homines recipiendi non sunt."