I have seen an engraving from an old Master (perhaps some of your correspondents may remember the painting itself) in which the mother of Zebedee's children comes forward to beg the boon on their behalf, James and John being represented as boys of seven or eight, one on each side of her. These errors of painters are perhaps excusable when they occurred at a time when the Bible was not in everybody's hands: but what excuse can we make for artist's blunders now? The _Illustrated News_ has lately given us prints from paintings by living artists, in one of which, "Noah's Sacrifice," a couple of fat ducks figure as _clean_ fowl at the foot of the altar; and in the other, the Five Wise and Five Foolish Virgins have increased into two sevens; neither error being apparently noticed by the editor. It is said that no sea piece, however fine, is admitted to our exhibitions if the rigging is incorrect. Would it not be quite as advisable to exclude Scripture pieces with palpable blunders? P. P. _The Ring Finger._--The English Book of Common Prayer orders that the ring should be put "upon the _fourth_ finger of the woman's left hand;" and the spousal manuals of York and Salisbury assign this practical reason for the selection of the said finger: "Quia in illo digito est quædam vena procedens usque ad cor."--Maskell, _Ancient Liturgy of the Church of England_, 2nd edition, Preface, page clv. note: Lond. 1846. Aulus Gellius tells us-- "Veteres Græcos annulum habuisse in digito accepimus sinistræ manus, qui minimo est proximus. Romanos quoque homines aiunt, sic plerumque annulis usitatos. Causam esse hujus rei Appianus in libris Ægyptiacis hanc dicit: quod insectis apertisque humanis corporibus, ut mos in Ægypto fuit, quas Graeci ἀνατομὰς appellant, repertum est, _nervum quendam tenuissimum ab eo uno digito, de quo diximus, ad cor hominis pergere ac pervenire_. Propterea non inscitum visum esse, eum potissimum digitum tali honore decorandum, qui continens et quasi connexus esse cum principatu cordis videretur."--_Noctes Atticæ_, lib. x. cap. 10. Other reasons are assigned by Macrobius; and the author of the _Vulgar Errors_ (book iv. ch. 4.) has entirely overthrown the anatomical fiction mentioned above. Can any one give me any further information than that contained in L'Estrange or Wheatly, or in the authors to which they refer? The fourth finger of the left hand is certainly "the least active finger of the hand least used, upon which, therefore, the ring may be always in view, and least subject to be worn out:" but this is a very unromantic and utilitarian idea. RT. Warmington, Aug. 9. 1851. _The Od Force._--As considerable interest appertains to the earlier manifestations of what is now termed Mesmerism, the following Note may not be altogether unworthy of a place.