1834.] ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS IN ENGLISH HISTORY. 197 The Archbishop of Dublin (then Dr. Whately) caused the turf to be pared off part of a rich meadow, digging out one spit of mould afterwards. The sub-soil was then dug out to the depth of about four feet, and carted to a neighbouring sand-hill, from whence sand was brought back, and being thrown into the hole in the meadow, was then covered with the spit of mould previously removed; lastly, the turf was replaced, and the meadow was rather benefited than injured by the substitution of a sandy, for a retentive sub-soil. The soil was spread over part of the sand-hill to the depth of a few inches, and the space so covered was converted into cultivable land. Part of the coast at Eastbourne is covered with pebbles or shingle, and close adjoining is a marsh, consisting of brick earth covered with grass. The success of the above experiment, suggested to Mrs. Davies Gilbert, of Eastbourne, Sussex, that it might be an advantageous employment for the poor, (many of whom had only work on the roads) to cover the loose bare shingle with clay dug from the marsh. She bought six acres of marsh, and employed labourers to pare the sward off part of it, and then dig the clay out of the places so uncovered. The holes made, were nearly filled with shingle, on the top of which some soil was returned, and the sward was then laid on, so that the marsh had apparently sustained no injury. The clay so obtained was spread on the shingle on the beach to the depth of four inches. The whole cost of this process, exclusive of fencing, was at the rate of 167. per acre, and the ground so reclaimed was eagerly hired by the neighbouring labourers for gardens, at the rate of 3d. per rod, or 2l. per acre.—Sent by a Correspondent. ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS IN ENGLISH HISTORY. (In the last number, p. 156.) Answer 1. Henry the Fifth began to reign in the year 1412. A. 2. He gave up altogether the society of his former profligate companions, and ordered them never to appear again in his presence till their manners and practices were completely altered. A. 3. This King took Sir William Gascoyne, the Lord Chief Justice, into his particular favour, and acknowledged that his former conduct had deserved all praise and encouragement, and that he did quite right in sending him (when Prince of Wales) to prison; for that every man, high or low, should be prevented from doing wrong. A. 4. The established religion in England, at that time, was the Roman Catholic, the Pope being considered the head of the Church. A. 5. Lord Cobham was very desirous of bringing about a reformation of religion, that the people might be able to read the Bible. He encouraged them to read it in their own language from a translation which had been made by Wickliff. A. 6. This Lord Cobham was sent a prisoner to the Tower; and some time after that he was burnt to death in a most horrible manner. A. 7. Those who opposed the Roman Catholic religion were generally treated with the most dreadful severity. A. 8. The King thought that it would be wise to busy the people's minds with foreign wars, that they might be taken from their cruel persecutions at home. A. 9. The King declared that he was, of right, the King of France as well as of England. A. 10. He fought the famous battle of Agincourt. A. 11. It was agreed that there should be peace between England and France; that the King of England should marry the daughter of the King of France. A. 12. King Henry the Fifth died in the year 1422, when he was only thirty-four years of age. A. He was a brave and excellent soldier; and other parts of his character are worthy of praise. A. Wickliff was a strong opposer of the corruptions of the Church of Rome. He published a translation of the whole Bible in the English language; he was not sufficiently acquainted with the Hebrew and Greek languages to translate the Old and New Testament from 1834.] DRUNKENNESS COMPARED WITH HOME. 199 these original languages, and therefore made his translation from the Latin Bibles, which were at that time used in the churches. QUESTIONS IN ENGLISH HISTORY. (To be answered in our next.) V. Q. 1. In what year did Henry the Sixth come to the throne? Q. 2. How old was he at the time of his father's death? Q. 3. Who was appointed protector whilst the King was too young to govern? Q. 4. Did the Duke of Bedford carry on the war in France? and was he successful? Q. 5. By what strange means were the English affairs in France entirely changed? Q. 6. Who was Joan of Arc ? Q. 7. What became of her? Q. 8. What was the cause of the dispute, and the long wars between the houses of York and Lancaster? Q. 9. To which family did the crown, in justice, belong? Q. 10. Who was Jack Cade, and what became of him? Q. 11. Who was King Henry's wife? Q. 12. How did this Queen act? Q. 13. Who was proclaimed King instead of King Henry? Q. 14. What, then, became of King Henry the Sixth ? Q. 15. Who was the Duke of Gloucester, and what was his character ? Q. 16. Why were the wars between the families of York and Lancaster called the wars of the roses? Q. 17. Which party wore a white rose, and which a red one? V. THE PLEASURES OF "DRUNKENNESS" COMPARED WITH THE PLEASURES OF "HOME." It was with sincere grief that we read the remarks of Mr. Attwood, in his place in Parliament, on the vice of drunk enness. If his advice were to be followed by all the poor people in the kingdom, the most horrible misery would be the certain consequence. When the awful threatenings of the Almighty Ruler of the world against this vice are considered, we may be sure that there is a good reason why such a crime is forbidden. The God of Mercy knew that the drunkard would spread misery all around him, and unfit himself for the happiness which is promised in the world to come to those who are prepared for it. And is this to be treated as a jest, to be made a subject to delight the corrupt and profane mind of man?-Whilst we were engaged in the above reflections, the following letter was put into our hands. Our correspondent has employed the ironical style on the right side. This sometimes produces an effect when a graver remonstrance might fail. MR. EDITOR, extracts: - May 20th, 1834. I HAVE just been reading my last newspaper, which contains the report of two speeches lately delivered in London. One by Mr. T. Attwood, M.P. the other by the Rev. Hugh Stowell. These gentlemen, who both, I imagine, wish well to the people of England, differ a good deal on a very important subject-a subject which already occupies many pages of your wholesome and agreeable little work-but on which I must request your opinion once more, after you have read the following "Much had been said," says Mr. Attwood, Member for Birmingham, "as to the demoralization of the people arising from their drunken habits; but he must say, that he did not see the great crime in a poor man getting tipsy. (A laugh.) And why, he asked, should not a poor man, after the labours of the week, get tipsy as well as a gentleman?-(A laugh.) The poor labourer might sometimes drink too much, but he would rather see him drink too much than too little.-(A laugh.) Honourable Members might laugh, but nine times out of ten the poor man got too little. (Hear.) This was proved by the statistical tables of Mr. Marshall; for it appeared by them that, about one hundred years ago, considerably more malt was consumed than now, and more spirits and 1834.] DRUNKENNESS COMPARED WITH HOME. 201 wine also. Men, to be sure, got tipsy now: they had ever done so, and would continue to do so-(a laugh.) He did not see any great harm in this. The law proposed a remedy-a fine of five shillings, or an hour or two in the stocks. He did not object to the stocks—(à laugh); for he had put many a man there himself, and he thought it quite sufficient punishment." Now, Mr. Editor, I fear I have hitherto been acting very improperly. In my visits among my poor friends and neighbours, I have occasionally given them the following advice of Mr. Stowell; but I begin to think I ought to recommend to the poor labourer a little more drink, for the sake of his good character, and of adding to the comfort of his wife and family. I begin to think that a man in the stocks, for an hour or two every day, would be quite an ornament to a country village, and a most delightful sight to his friends and family; besides, it would add so much to his own satisfaction, and he would return so cheerfully to his sober companions again, and look them in the face like a man. Another advantage also in "drinking too much, rather than too little" is this, which a poor man should never overlook, he has not only robbed his family of the money which he has spent in drink, but his pocket is freed from five shillings more, by way of fine-such a man must, I think, be happy at home, and he must also soon get rich. But I do not wish, Sir, to influence your mind, and therefore beg you to reserve your opinion until you have read the extract from Mr. Stowell's speech. He seems to wish the poor man's wife to learn another way, to make her husband love his home and be happy :-" Go on," he says to those who think they have the welfare of the poor at heart, "visit the houses of the poor; and when you administer comfort and consolation to the wife, who perhaps is neglected for the alehouse or the dramshop, -teach, oh! teach her those ways by which she may bring her husband back;-tell her, that, if the dramshop is decorated out with tempting splendour, her little parlour may be made to look as neat and more comfortable, in order to induce her husband to remain in it ;tell her, if the dramshop is lighted up and warm, that she should make her little fire blaze the brighter, in order to |