The usual Irish word for _serpent_ is _nathair_; Welsh, _gnadr_; German, _natter_; Anglo-Saxon, _nædre_; Latin, _natrix_; English, _adder_. The epithet _nimhe_, poison, is often added, and a compound word made, _nathair-neimhe_. _Peist_, a word I have before alluded to, is analogous with the Latin _best-ia_, and means a _worm_, a _beast_, as well as a _serpent_. EIRIONNACH. CANONS AND ARTICLES OF 1571. Dearest Sir, Yours of the 4th I showed to Mr. Baker, who desires me to tell you, that the Canons of 1571, with the subscriptions, are (as the Articles) in paper bound up in the same volume of the _Synodalia_, and stand there next to the "Articles of 1571" subscribed by the Archbishop and ten Bishops. I agree with you that the MS. of 1562 was designed to be subscribed without alterations; but your reasons do not satisfy me that the alterations were posterior to the subscription, for notwithstanding the alterations it appeared very plain to the subscribers what they subscribed to, and there needed no memorandum to them that the lines of minium were designed to exclude all that was scored; and the care that was taken to alter the account of the number of lines and Articles of the several pages conformably to the alterations made by the lines of minium was wholly unnecessary, and to no purpose, except the subscriptions were to follow, in the middle of which the subscribers own the exact number of Articles and lines in every page, and therefore this care was necessary that their subscription might be true; but supposing they subscribed before the alterations, the lines of minium were sufficient to show what alterations were to be made in the new copy of the Articles, and not the least occasion for adjusting the number of Articles and lines at the end to the foregoing pages. But both these are but conjectures on your and my part, and the main point does not depend upon them, which is in my opinion, whether this MS. could be designed for the _Publick Record_, and that it was not I think the want of such a memorandum as you speak of, as well as the Archbishop leaving it to C. C. C. as his own property, is a sufficient evidence: though I must confess I am apt to think the postscript in the _Publick Record_ (which I take to be printed from the record in Renald Wolfe's edition of 1563 referred to by your adversary) refers to this MS., and the subscriptions to it of both houses.