S. Z. Z. S. justly observes that there are two points to be distinguished: first, Cranmer's wish that Calvin should assist in a general union of the churches protesting against Romish errors; second, Calvin's offer to assist in settling the Church of England. He adds, "The latter was declined; and the reason is demonstrated in Archbishop Laurence's _Bampton Lectures_." I neither possess those lectures, nor the volume of Calvin's epistles; but all I have seen of the correspondence between him and Cranmer, in the Parker Society's editions of Cranmer, and of original letters between 1537-58, and in Jenkyns' _Remains of Cranmer_, indisposes me to believe that Calvin made any "offer to assist in settling the Church of England." It appears from Dean Jenkyns' note, vol. i. p. 346., that Archbishop Laurence made a mistake in the order of the correspondence, calculated to mislead himself; and as to Heylyn's assertion, _Eccles. Restaur._, p. 65., that Calvin made such an offer and "that the Archbishop (Cranmer) _knew_ the man and refused his offer," the Dean says: "He gives no authority for the later part of his statement, and it can hardly be reconciled with Cranmer's letter to Calvin of March 20, 1552." The contemptuous expression, he "knew the man and refused his offer," is, in fact, utterly irreconcilable with Cranmer's language in all his three letters to Melancthon, to Bullinger, and to Calvin (Nos. 296, 297, 298. of Parker Society's edition of _Cranmer's Remains_, and Nos. 283, 284, 285. of Jenkyns' edition), where he tells each of the other two that he had written to Calvin from his desire-- "Ut in Anglia, aut alibi, doctissimorum et _optimorum_ virorum synodus convocaretur, in qua de puritate ecclesiasticae doctrinae, et praecipue de consensu controversiae sacramentariae tractaretur." Or, as he said to Calvin himself: "Ut docti et pii viri, qui alios antecellunt eruditione et judicio, convenirent." Your correspondent seems to have used the word "demonstrated" rather in a surgical than in its mathematical sense. Having taken up my pen to supply you with an answer to this historical inquiry, I may as well notice some other articles in your No. 199. For example, in p. 167., L. need not have referred your readers to Halliwell's _Researches in Archaic Language_ for an explanation of Bacon's word "bullaces." The word may be seen in Johnson's _Dictionary_, with the citation from Bacon, and instead of vaguely calling it "a small black and tartish plum," your botanical readers know it as the _Prunus insititia_.