But the practice of the Roman communion in general agrees with that of the Anglican. (Schmid, iii. 350-2.) Martene quotes from an ancient pontifical an order that the bridegroom should place the ring successively on three fingers of the right hand, and then shall leave it on the fourth finger of the left, in order to mark the difference between the marriage ring, the symbol of a love which is mixed with carnal affection, and the episcopal ring, the symbol of entire chastity. (_Mart. de Antiquis Eccl. Ritibus_, ii. 128., ed. Venet. 1783; Schmid, p. 352.) J. C. R. _The Order of St. John of Jerusalem_ (Vol. vii., pp. 407. 628.).--As my old neighbour R. L. P. dates from the banks of the Lake of Constance, and may possibly not see W. W.'s communication for some time, I in the meanwhile take the liberty of informing W. W. that the order of St. John was restored in England by Queen Mary, and, with other orders revived by her, was again suppressed by the act 1 Eliz. c. 24. J. C. R. {62} _Calvin's Correspondence_ (Vol. vii., pp. 501. 621.).--It may be well to mention that all the letters of Calvin which MR. WALTER quotes, are to be found in the old collection of his correspondence; perhaps, however, the latter copies may be fuller or more correct in some parts. The original French of the lone letter to Protector Somerset is printed by Henry in his _Life of Calvin;_ but, like the other documents of that laborious work, it is omitted without notice in the English travestie which bears the name of Dr. Stebbing. Heylyn's mis-statement as to Calvin and Cranmer is exposed, and the ground of it is pointed out, in the late edition of the _Ecclesia Restaurata_, vol. i. p. 134. J. C. R. _Old Booty's Case_ (Vol. vii., p. 634.).--A friend, on whose accuracy I can rely, has examined the _London Gazettes_ for 1687 and 1688, in the British Museum: they do not contain any report of Booty's case. I thought I had laid Booty's ghost in Vol. iii., p. 170., by showing that the facts of the case were unlikely and the law impossible. H. B. C. U. U. Club. _Chatterton_ (Vol. vii., p. 267.).--We are all very curious in Bristol to know what evidence or light J. M. G. of Worcester can bring to bear upon the Rowley Poems from the researches (as he states) of an individual here to prove not only that Chatteron was not their author, but that probably the "Venerable Rowley" himself was. I had thought in 1853 no one doubted their authorship. There is abundance of proof to show Rowley could not have written them, and that only Chatterton could have done so. BRISTOLIENSIS.