are here commonly us'd by women to shelter them from Rain: Also, a wooden Frame cover'd with cloth or stuff, to keep off the sun from a window. Parasol (Fr.), a small sort of canopy or umbrello, which women carry over their Heads, to shelter themselves from Rain, &c. Gay mentions umbrellas in his Trivia, or Art of Walking the Streets of London, published 1712 : Good housewives all the winter's rage despise, To guard from chilling showers the walking maid. That it was, perhaps, an article of curiosity rather than use in the middle of the seventeenth century, is evident in the fact of its being mentioned in the "Museum Tradescantianum, or Collection of Rarities, preserved at South Lambeth near London, by John Tradescant." 12mo. 1656. It occurs under the head of "Utensils," and is simply mentioned as "An Umbrella." Lt. Col. (afterwards Gen.) Wolfe, writing from Paris, in the year 1752, says :— The people here use umbrellas in hot weather to defend them from the sun, and something of the same kind to secure them from snow and rain. I wonder a practice so useful is not introduced in England (where there are such frequent showers), and especially in the country, where they can be expanded without any inconveniency. The introduction of this article of general convenience is attributed to Jonas Hanway, the Eastern traveller, who on his return to his native land rendered himself justly celebrated by his practical benevolence. In a little book with a long title, pub lished in 1787, written by "John Pugh," are to be found many curious anecdotes related of Hanway, and apropos of umbrellas, in describing his dress Mr. Pugh says,—" When it rained, a small parapluie defended his face and wig; thus he was always prepared to enter into any company without impropriety, or the appearance of negligence. And he (Hanway) was the first man who ventured to walk the streets of London with an umbrella over his head after carrying one near thirty years, he saw them come into general use." Hanway died 1786. PHONETIC PECULIARITY. It is a very curious phonetic peculiarity, that we have in the English language a large number of monosyllabic words ending in sh, all of which are expressive of some violent action or emotion. The following are a few which have occurred without search, in alphabetical order: "Brush, brash, crash, crush, dash, gash, gush, hash, gnash, lash, mash, pash, push, quash, rush, slash, mash, squash, splash, thrash. HIGH CHURCH AND LOW CHURCH. A Universal History of Party; with the Origin of Party Names, would form an acceptable addition to literary history. Such names as Puritan, Malignant, Evangelical, can be traced up to their first commencement, but some obscurity hangs on the mintage-date of the names we are about to consider. As a matter of fact, the distinction of High Church and Low Church always existed in the Reformed English Church, and the history of these parties would be her history. But the names were not coined till the close of the seventeenth century, and were not stamped in full relief as party names till the first year of Queen Anne's reign. In October, 1702, Anne's first Parliament and Convocation assembled: From the disputes in Convocation at this period, the appellations High Church and Low Church originated, and they were afterwards used to distinguish the clergy. It is singular that the bishops were ranked among the Low Churchmen (see Burnet, v. 138; Calamy, i. 643; Tindal's Cont., iv. 591).— Lathbury's Hist. of the Convocation, Lond. 1842, p. 319. Mr. Lathbury is a very respectable authority in matters of this kind, but if he use "originated" in its strict sense, he is probably mistaken, as I am tolerably certain that I have met with the words several years before 1702. At the moment, however, I cannot lay my hands on a passage to support this assertion. The disputes in Convocation gave rise to a number of pamphlets, such as A Caveat against High Church, Lon. 1702, and The Low Churchmen vindicated from the unjust Imputation of being No Churchmen, in Answer to a Pamphlet called "The Distinction of High and Low Church considered:" Lond. 1706, 8vo. Dr. Sacheverell's trial gave additional zest to the dudgeon ecclesiastick, and produced a shower of pamphlets. This is the title of one of them: Pulpit War, or Dr. S―l, the High Church Trumpet, and Mr. H-ly, the Low Church Drum, engaged by way of Dialogue, Lond. 1710, 8vo. To understand the cause of the exceeding bitterness and virulence which animated the parties denominated High Church and Low Church, we must remember that until the time of William of Orange, the Church of England, as a body-her sovereigns and bishops, her clergy and laity-comes under the former designation; while those who sympathized with the Dissenters were comparatively few and weak. As soon as William was head of the Church, he opened the floodgates of Puritanism, and admitted into the Church what previously had been more or less external to it. This element, thus made part and parcel of the Anglican Church, was denominated Low Church. William supplanted the bishops and clergy who refused to take oaths of allegiance to him as king de jure; and by putting Puritans in their place, made the latter the dominant party. Add to this the feelings of exasperation produced by the murder of Charles I., and the expulsion of the Stuarts, and we have sufficient grounds, political and religious, for an irreconcilable feud. Add, again, the reaction resulting from the overthrow of the tyrannous hot-bed and forcing system, where a sham conformity was maintained by coercion; and the Church-Papist, as well as the Church-Puritans, with ill-concealed hankering after the mass and the preachinghouse, by penal statutes were forced to do what their souls abhorred, and play the painful farce of attending the services of "The Establishment." A writer in a High Church periodical of 1717 (prefacing his article with the passage from Proverbs vi. 27) proceeds:— The old way of attacking the Church of England was by mobs and bullies, and hard sounds; by calling Whore, and Babylon, upon our worship and liturgy, and kicking out our clergy as dumb dogs: but now they have other irons in the fire; a new engine is set up under the cloak and disguise of temper, unity, comprehension, and the Protestant religion. Their business now is not to storm the Church, but to lull it to sleep: to make us relax our care, quit our defences, and neglect our safety. . . . These are the politics of their Popish fathers: when they had tried all other artifices, they at last resolved to sow schism and division in the Church: and from thence sprang up this very generation, who by a fine stratagem endeavoured to set us one against the other, and they gather up the stakes. Hence the distinction of High and Low Church.—The Scourge, p. 251. In another periodical of the same date, in the Dedication "To the most famous University of Oxford," the writer says: These enemies of our religious and civil establishment have represented you as instillers of slavish doctrines and principles...if to give to God and Cæsar his due be such tow'ring, and High Church principles, I am sure St. Peter and St. Paul will scarce escape being censured for Tories and High flyers.— The Entertainer, Lond. 1717. If those who have kept their first love, and whose robes have not been defiled, endeavour to stop these innovations and corruptions that their enemies would introduce, they are blackened for High Church Papists, favourers of I know not who, and fall under the public resentment.—Ib. p. 301. The following are a few extracts from Low Church writers (quoted in The Scourge), who thus designate their opponents: A pack or party of scandalous, wicked, and profane men, who appropriate to themselves the name of High Church (but may more properly be said to be Jesuits or Papists in masquerade), do take liberty to teach, preach, and print, publickly and privately, sedition, contentions, and divisions among the Protestants of this kingdom.-Motives to Union, p. 1. These men glory in their being members of the High Church (Popish appellation, and therefore they are the more fond of that); but these pretended sons are become her persecutors, and they exercise their spite and lies both on the living and the dead.—The Snake in the Grass brought to Light, p. 8. Our common people of the High Church are as ignorant in matters of religion as the bigotted Papists, which gives great advantage to our Jacobite and Tory priests to lead them where they please, or to mould them into what shapes they please.-Reasons for an Union, p. 39. The minds of the populace are too much debauched already from their loyalty by seditious arts of the High Church faction.-Convocation Craft, p. 34. We may see how closely our present Highflyers pursue the steps of their Popish predecessors, in reckoning those who dispute the usurped power of the Church to be hereticks, schismaticks, or what else they please.-Ib. p. 30. All the blood that has been spilt in the late unnatural rebellion, may be very justly laid at the doors of the High Church clergy.-Christianity no Creature of the State, p. 16. We see what the Tory Priesthood were made of in Queen Elizabeth's time, that they were ignorant, lewd, and seditious: and it must be said of 'em that they are true to the stuff still.-Toryism the Worst of the Two, p. 21. The Tories and High Church, notwithstanding their pretences to loyalty, will be found by their actions to be the greatest rebels in nature.-Reasons for an Union, p. 20. Sir W. Scott, in his Life of Dryden, Lond. 1808, observes that Towards the end of Charles the Second's reign, the High-Church-men and |