Oh! but, says Mr. Hickson, "in that case the '_s_' would be the sign of the plural." Not necessarily so, no more than an "_s_" to "mean" furnishes a "means" of proving the same thing. But granting that it were so, what then? The word "news" _is_ undoubtedly plural, and has been so used from the earliest times; as (in the example I sent for publication last week, of so early a date as the commencement of Henry VIII.'s reign) may be seen in "_thies_ new_es_." But a flight still more eccentric would be the identification of "noise" with "news!" "There is no process," Mr. Hickson says, "by which noise could be manufactured without making a plural noun of it!" Is not Mr. Hickson aware that _la noise_ is a French noun-singular signifying a contention or dispute? and that the same word exists in the Latin _nisus_, a struggle? If mere plausibility be sufficient ground to justify a derivation, where is there a more plausible one than that "news," _intelligence, ought_ to be derived from [Greek: nous], _understanding_ or _common sense_? A.E.B. Leeds, May 5th. Further evidence (see Vol. i., p. 369.) of the existence and common use of the word "newes" in its present signification but ancient orthography anterior to the introduction of newspapers. In a letter from the Cardinal of York (Bainbridge) to Henry VIII. (Rymer's _Foedera_, vol. vi. p. 50.), "After that thies Newes afforesaide ware dyvulgate in the Citie here." Dated from Rome, September, 1513. The _Newes_ was of the victory just gained by Henry over the French, commonly known as "The Battle of the Spurs." A.E.B. * * * * * THE DODO QUERIES. I beg to thank Mr. S.W. Singer for the further notices he has given (Vol. i., p. 485.) in connection with this subject. I was well acquainted with the passage which he quotes from Osorio, a passage which some writers have very inconsiderately connected with the Dodo history. In reply to Mr. Singer's Queries, I need only make the following extract from the _Dodo and its Kindred_, p. 8.:--