A few words on "Banbury _Cakes_," and I have done. The earliest mention of them I am aware of (next to that in Camden's _Britannia_, published by Philemon Holland in 1608, and already referred to), is by Ben Jonson, in his _Bartholomew Fair_, written 1614; where he introduces "Zeal-of-the-Land Busy" as "a Banbury Man," who "was a _baker_--but he does dream now, and see visions: he has given over his trade, out of a scruple he took, that, in spiced conscience, _those cakes he made_ were served to bridales, maypoles, morrisses, and such profane feasts and meetings." I do not know whether the sale of Banbury cakes flourished in the last century; but I find recorded in Beesley's _Hist. of Banbury_ (published 1841) that Mr. Samuel Beesley sold in 1840 no fewer than 139,500 twopenny cakes; and in 1841, the sale had increased by at least a fourth. In Aug. 1841, 5,400 were sold weekly; being shipped to America, India, and even Australia. I fancy their celebrity in early days can hardly parallel this, but I do not vouch for the statistics. J. R. M., M.A. {311} * * * * * DR. SOUTH VERSUS GOLDSMITH, TALLEYRAND, ETC. (Vol. vi., p. 575.) This remarkable saying, like most good things of that kind, has been repeated by so many distinguished writers, that it is impossible to trace it to any one in particular, in the precise form in which it is now popularly received. I shall quote, in succession, all those who appear to have expressed it in words of the same, or a nearly similar, import, and then leave your readers to judge for themselves. I cannot help thinking that the first place should be assigned to Jeremy Taylor, as he must have had the sentiment clearly in view in the following sentence: "There is in mankind an universal contract implied in all their intercourses; and _words being instituted to declare the mind, and for no other end_, he that hears me speak hath a right in justice to be done him, that, as far as I can, what I speak be true; for else he by words does not know your mind, and then as good and better not speak at all." Next we have David Lloyd, who in his _State Worthies_ thus remarks of Sir Roger Ascham: "None is more able for, yet none is more averse to, that circumlocution and contrivance wherewith some men shadow their main drift and purpose. _Speech was made to open man to man, and not to hide him_; to promote commerce, and not betray it." Dr. South, Lloyd's cotemporary, but who survived him more than twenty years, expresses the sentiment in nearly the same words: "In short, this seems to be the true inward judgment of all our politick sages, that _speech was given to the ordinary sort of men, whereby to communicate their mind, but to wise men whereby to conceal it_." The next writer in whom this thought occurs is Butler, the author of _Hudibras_. In one of his prose essays on the "Modern Politician," he says: