_The Vellum-bound Junius_ (Vol. iii., p. 262.).--Your correspondent MR. HAGGARD tells us, that from the time he read the private correspondence between Junius and Woodfall he has examined all book catalogues that came in his way, in the hope of finding a copy, or the copy, "bound in vellum"--so bound by Woodfall, for and at the express desire of Junius. Of course the edition so bound was "the author's edition," as Junius calls it, the edition of 1772, printed by H. J. Woodfall. At last, says MR. HAGGARD, "_the long-wished-for object appeared at the Stowe sale_;" but though, he bid eight pounds, he was not so fortunate as to obtain it. Thus far all is simple and clear enough. But then MR. HAGGARD subsequently informs us (Vol. iii., p. 307.) that the reason of his "being so desirous to procure this copy" was, because it was "not only bound in vellum, but was printed on that article"--that is, as I understand it, because it was _not_ the copy bound by Woodfall for Junius. I am at a loss to reconcile these statements. However, as I observe by the periodicals that MR. HAGGARD'S first statement is getting into circulation, and that it now assumes this form--that the vellum-bound copy of Junius presented by Woodfall to Junius was sold at the Stowe sale, I think it right to state, that the Stowe copy, printed on and bound in vellum, was, as I am informed on good authority, not the edition of 1772--not a Woodfall edition at all--but the common illustrated edition, printed more than thirty years after, by Bensley, for Vernor and Hood. V. B. J. _Sept_ (Vol. v., p. 277.).--Dr. Ogilvie's derivation is absurdly far-fetched. _Sept_ is notoriously from the Latin _septus_ or _septum_, _inclosed_, _an inclosure_, and it is applied to one kindred or family living in or round the inclosure in which they herded their cattle. See Spenser's _Ireland_; see also Cole's _Dictionary_: "SEPT, an inclosure; the multitude of the same name in Ireland." In ancient Rome certain classes of voters were called _Septs_, from the _septa_ or _inclosures_ in which they were arranged. C. _Many Children_ (Vol. v., p. 204.).--I am indebted to the Rev. J. Sanford, orderly preacher at the Rolls chapel, for the subjoined curious statement, which you may add, if you please, to the instances of female fecundity already recorded in your pages. The Marchese Frescobaldi, the representative of one of the most ancient Florentine families, is still possessed of a portrait of his ancestress, Dionora Salviati, wife of Bartolomeo Frescobaldi of the same house. She gave birth to fifty-two children, never less than three at a time; and there is a tradition in the family that she once had six, and that twelve were reared. The portrait was painted by the celebrated Bronzino, who died in 1570, and has recorded the remarkable circumstance in the following inscription placed under the picture, and in some degree has thus made himself responsible for the authenticity of the story:--