"La Guerre Séraphique, ou histoire des périls qu'a courus la barbe des Capucins contre les violentes attaques des Cordeliers. La Haye, 1740, in 12.--_Ce volume se joint à l'Alcoran des Cordeliers._" He also speaks of a work by a certain Spaniard, named Father PIERRE DE ALVA, which, for the vast number of points of _conformity_ between our Lord and St. Francis adduced, and the amazing fecundity of invention and fertility of imagination displayed, completely throws BARTHOLOMEW OF PISA into the shade; it is entitled-- "Naturæ prodigium et gratiæ portentum hoc est Seraphici P. Francisci vitæ acta ad Christi Domini vitam et mortem regulata et coaptata a P. Petro de Alva et Astorga. Matriti, 1651, folio." To conclude with a Query: Is the book called "FIORETTI" an Italian translation of the "BOOK OF CONFORMITIES?" The title would lead one to suppose it. "FIORETTI. Opera gentilissima et utilissima a tutti li fideli Christiani laqual se chiama LI FIORETTI de Misser Santo Francesco asemiliativa a la vita et alla passion de JESU CHRISTO e tutte le soe sancti vertige. Lunardo Longo rector de la giesia de Sancto Paulo de Vincenza, curendo lano. M.CCCCLXXVI. in 4." The second edition bears date, Venexia in caxa di Nicolo Girardengo M.CCCCLXXX. 4to.; the third, Perouse, 1481, 4to. MARICONDA. Feb. 11. 1852. TRADITIONS OF REMOTE PERIODS.--GEORGE III.'S GARTER. (Vol. v., pp. 77. 135.) There is clearly some inaccuracy in the details of my statement, which I am obliged to LORD BRAYBROOKE and to G. for pointing out, and which, perhaps, they may help to clear up. The main fact is admitted: that "_two_ Knights of the Garter covered the period from 1684 to 1820;" and George IV.'s assertion, that "he had given away a Garter that had been given but once since the reign of Charles II.," I myself heard, though I unluckily did not make a "Note" of it. This could apply to nothing but the cases of the Duke of Somerset and George III. Whether George IV. was misinformed as to the details on which he founded his assertion, I know not; but it is unlikely: and that after a lapse of about thirty years I may have confounded the _Regency_ with the _Accession_, and _Lord Moira_ with the _Duke of Buckingham_, I will not deny; for it seems that I have done one or the other, though without any effect on the main point. As to G.'s objection, that of several Garters disposed of on the same day in 1745. The Duke of Somerset's did not fall to Prince George. I have not Beltz to refer to; but it strikes me as possible this may admit of explanation: because, although Prince George was _nominated_ first in the batch, it happened that he was _invested_ the last; indeed not till the day _after_ all the others: so that he might have received the _badge_ of the Duke of Somerset. Your readers are aware that the _badges_ are not the private property of the knights, but are always _returned_ into the hands of the _sovereign_, and that the same badge is