_Rev. Mr. Sisson's New Developing Fluid_ (Vol. vii., p. 462.).--The REV. MR. SISSON's developing fluid for collodion positives, the formula for which was published in the last Number of "N. & Q.," is merely a weak solution of the protonitrate and protosulphate of iron. It does not, as he seems to think, contain any lead; for the whole of the latter is precipitated as sulphate, which the acetic acid does not dissolve even to the smallest extent: and MR. SISSON will find that an equivalent proportion of the nitrate of baryta will answer equally as well as the nitrate of lead. I have myself for a long time been in the habit of using a weak solution of the protonitrate of iron in conjunction with acetic acid for positive pictures; for, although I do not consider it so good a developer as that made according to the formula of DR. DIAMOND, it produces very good pictures; occupies very little time in preparing, and will moreover keep good for a much longer time than a more concentrated solution would. J. LEACHMAN. 20. Compton Terrace, Islington. * * * * * Replies to Minor Queries. _Vanes_ (Vol. v., p. 490.).--Taking up by accident the other day your fifth volume, I saw what I believe is a still unanswered Query respecting the earliest notice of vanes as indicators of the wind; and turning to my notes I found the following extract from Beckman's _Inventions, &c._: "In Ughelli Italia Sacra, Romae 1652, fol. iv., p 735., we find the following inscription on a weathercock then existing at Brixen; '_Dominus Rampertus Episc. gallum hunc fieri praecepit an. 820._'" L. A. M. _Loselerius Villerius_ (Vol. vii., p. 454.).--I beg to inform S. A. S. that his copy of the New Testament, which wants the title-page, was printed by Henry Stephens the second, at Geneva, in the year 1580. As to it being "valuable," I should not consider him unfortunate if he could exchange it for a shilling. Loselerius Villerius was Pierre l'Oyseleur de Villiers, a professor of Genevan divinity, who came over to London, and there published Beza's Latin version of the New Testament, in 1574. He was not, however, as your correspondent supposed him to be, the editor of the decapitated volume in question; but Beza transferred his notes to an impression completed by himself. S. A. S. has, in the next place, inquired for any satisfactory "list of editions of the Bible." It appears that, so far as he is concerned, Le Long, Boerner, Masch, and Cotton have lived and laboured in vain. The folio Bible lastly described by your correspondent is _not_ "so great a curiosity" as family tradition maintained. The annotations "placed in due order" are merely the Genevan notes.--See {535} the Archdeacon of Cashel's very accurate and excellent work, _Editions of the Bible, and Parts thereof, in English_, p. 75.: Oxford, 1852. R. G.