_Rectitudines Singularum Personarum_ (Vol. iv., p. 442.).--In reply to the inquiries of H. C. C., let me refer him to pp. xi. and xxv. of the preface and list of MSS. in vol. i. of the _Ancient Laws, &c. of England_, edited by Mr. Thorpe, under the direction of the late Record Commission. He will there find that the real MS. site of that document is stated to be in the library of Corpus Christi, Cambridge, and to be of the date of the tenth century. It is not stated upon what ground so early a date is assigned to it; but as so competent a judge as the editor seems to give that date without any expression of doubt, we may presume that there is satisfactory proof of the fact. I do not observe the document mentioned in Wanley's catalogue, and Nasmith's more recent one is not at hand to refer to. The matter contained in it does not (at least in my judgment) _necessarily_ indicate so early a date, inasmuch as parallel, and even identical, rights and customs, connected with the _status_ of persons and tenure of land, were in active existence at a much later period of our history. It would certainly be more satisfactory to know the precise grounds, whether extrinsic or intrinsic, on which the date has been fixed. With regard to the old Latin version, I will not undertake to vindicate it except against _one_ of the criticisms of H. C. C. He objects that _læden_ is translated _minare_. The word "minare" is used in the translation twice, once for _driving_, and once for _leading_; and I question whether the translator could have found a more appropriate word to serve this double purpose than the authentic verb _menare_ or _minare_, from which the French _mener_ has been derived. I cannot so easily justify him for translating "bôc-riht" by "rectitudo testamenti;" yet as the power of testamentary disposition was one of the most signal attributes of bôc-riht, I cannot say that he has much misrepresented the import of the original word. The document, which is evidently a private compilation, seems to be a custumal, or coustumier, of a district, or some considerable portion of the country. The German lawyers would call the collection a landrecht in one sense of that term, or, as the translator has called it, a "landirectum." The heading is by no means an appropriate one. Whether the writer intended to compile a code of the customs and obligations of land tenure, free and unfree, coextensive with the Saxon name, or merely to represent those of a certain district with which he happened to be acquainted, is a matter open to question. H. C. C. is perhaps not aware that the document has been examined, corrected, translated into German, and made the subject of a very masterly dissertation, by Dr. Heinrich Leo, of Halle. It is frequently referred to by Lappenberg in his _Anglo-Saxon History_, and became known (at least in the translation) to Sir H. Ellis in time to make copious extracts from it in the second volume of his _Introduction to Domesday_. E. S.