own afferted knowledge, that the whole of Mr. Forfyth's fiatements contained. "nothing more than the truth?”

Other reafons for declining all farther investigation given by Dr. Lettfom are, that he gave his atteftation to Mr. Forfyth only with a view to promote enquiry to farther illuftration, and to promote knowledge of Horticulture; and that the facts which induced him to give his atteftation are before the publick. But, furely, to atteft that there are no grounds of doubt or for farther enquiry is rather an odd way of promoting farther enquiry; and to decline bringing forward any proofs to fupport politive atteftation does not appear to me to be the best way of promoting an advancement in our knowJedge in horticulture, or in any other branch of science. What the facts are which the Doctor ftates to be before the publick, on which he grounds his atteftation, I wish he had informed us. I know that as found trees as any in his Majefty's dominions have been fhewn, and affurances given that fuch trees were formerly hollow; and that folid blocks of timber have been produced, and alerted to have been afforded by trees once hollow. Such affertions Dr. Lettfom appears to have believed. I do not entertain a doubt but that he did moft firmly believe them; and I fincerely lament that he did not bring them before the publick as matters of belief, inftead of facts within his own. knowledge.

As the Doctor has mentioned the Horticultural Society, and promifed fome benefit to the publick from that inftitution, which he fates to have been promoted by Mr. Fortyih, I hope he will endeavour to vindicate the character of his late friend, by producing before that Society fome proofs of the existence of fuch found pieces of timber obtained from hollow trees as Mr. Forfyth ftated to be in the poffeffion of himself and friends. As a member of that Society, I will attend any meeting of it in the month of February next year, when I propofe being in town; and if the Doctor can produce but one foot of timber in which the union and incorporation between the new and old wood defcribed by Mr. Forfyth has taken place, I promife to fign and permit the publication of a full admiflion of the truth of Mr. Forfyth's affertions, and of the propriety of Dr. Lettfom's aueltation. THO. AND. KNIGHT,

Mr. URBAN, Colchester, Oct. 31.

N

your Magazine for Auguft laft, p. -705, there are fome remarks made by Mr Neild upon the Houfe of Correc tion in Colchetter Cafile, which re quire fome obfervation. I wish not to call in queftion the motives which urged that gentleman to infert thole remarks; but, as he profeffes to be a fearcher after truth, I think he will be pleafed to have any errors, which may have efcaped him, in his benevolent defigu, pointed out by any one who has a better opportunity of making a more accurate inveftigation. I have, therefore, taken the liberty (as a Magiftrate acting in the County of Effex, and an appointed Vifitor of the faid Houfe of Correction for twelve years pali) to rect fy fuch miflakes as feem to me to require it.

Mr. Neild's Letter to Dr. Lettfom is dated Oct. 12, 1801. In deferibing the dimensions of the prifon, he fays as follows: A large room with a fire place 20 feet by 14; on one fide a room with a window; on another fide two rooms at a right angle with the former, a window in the farthermoft. Thefe rooms are about 13 feet fquare; the partitions are iron grates for light and air from the window at each end."

It is true, that these three rooms anfwer the defcription here given, as to their fuperficies. I muft oblerve that they are full 12 feet high; there is alfo a fourth room upon the fame floor, which he has forgotten to mention, that is 30 feet by 14, and more than 12 feet high; there are not only grated windows in each of these rooms, but allo glafs ones, which are always put up when neceffary. He obferves, that there is no decent feparation of the fexes;" now this remark ftruck me, very forcibly, for there are two very excellent rooms above ftairs for the ac commodation of the females, while the males are confined below, and of courfe they cannot poffibly have any communication with each other. Surely Mr. Neild could never have seen thefe rooms. For his information, therefore, I beg leave to fay, that the keeping-room is 28 feet fquare, and 10 feehigh, with a fire place in it; that the room over that is a fleeping-room, 20 feet by 10, and 10 feet high, The males and females have feparate privies, kept clean and wholefome by a run of water which is conducted through them at least once in every week.

Mr,

Mr. Neild obferves, "that there is no water;" how he could make this miftake I am at a lots to conjecture, for there is a pump of excellent water, which yields a great abundance, and the prifoners are properly fupplied with it. Mr. Neild further obferves, that "the wards are dark, and feldom white wafhed." Now, Mr. Urban, I affure you, that the wards are remarkably light, and that the walls are regularly white-washed once in every year. The allowance of bread is accurate, and. furely very fufficient but Mr. Neild has forgotten to mention the quart of beer which is allowed to every prifoner once a day. JAMES ROUND.

Mr. URBAN, Colchester, Nov. 12. A FEW days fince, a friend put in to my hands your uteful Publication for Auguft laft, at the fame time obferving, there were in it fome ftrictures upon the House of Correction for the County of Effex at Colchester; and that my name, as the medical attendant thereon, was mentioned. This induced me to perufe the account; and, forry am I to fay, it is very erroneous in many parts. About 14 years fince, upon the fuggeftion of one of the Judges, I believe Lord Loughborough, medical attendants were appointed to the Bridewells in this county, whofe duty it is, not only to vifit the fick, but to examine into the ftate of the prifon, in as far as regards its cleanlinefs and healthinefs, and to make immediate reports, if necellary, to the Magiftrates at their petty fellions, which are holden every fortnight; or, if any urgent circumftances require it, to one of the Vifiting Magiftrates, of which there are always two fpecially appointed, and refident in the town. He is alfo to make a regular report, in writing, to the Magiftrates, at their quarter-feflions holden at Chelmsford, of the fate of health of the prifoners; and not to permit one to be removed for trial who fhall have any infectious difeafe. During the period I have held this office, the number of prifoners confined at any one time has very feldom exceeded fix, except upon very particular occafions, when for a few days French prifoners/ have been fent in on their way to fome other prifon. I do not remember any fever of an infectious nature (more than fevers in general are believed to be) never exifling there above once; and that did not affect more than three per

de

Your correfpondent remarks, "there is no decent feparation for the fexes." I am at a lofs how (if he ever examined the prifon) he could fall into this error; the men are confined on the groundfloor, and the women in chambers over them, where it is not poffible even for them to fee each other. He fays, they have no water. This affertion I beg leave to deny, as they are con ftantly fupplied with excellent pure water; they have alfo a daily allowance of good fmall-beer, unlefs I forbid it, and order a fubftitute. He farther fays, the wards are dark, and feldom whitewalled. On the contrary, I think them light; and they are whitewashed once a year with hot lime, particularly the two rooms in front, which are thofe generally in ufe; the back rooms are never ufed but for perfons who are committed for great crimes, and who are only to remain there until they can be fent to the county-gaol at Chelmsford, which they generally are in a few days. One circumftance I muft beg leave to remark: a few years fince, Mr. Howard paffed through this town in his way to the Continent. He called upon Mr. Matthews, whom he knew, and vifited the prifon in company with that gentleman, and pointed out feve

ral

ral alterations he wished to have made. Thefe were complied with under the direction of the county furveyor. Upon his return home, Mr. Howard again visited the prifon, and expreffed himfelf highly fatisfied with them.

The prefent Vifitors' are the Rev. Mr. Round and John Bawtree, efq.; whole characters for honour, humanity, and attention to the duties of their office as Magifirates, need no eulogium. I-have the less helitation in addrefling the above to you, Mr. Urban, as I have the fatisfaction of having many years been perfonally known to the gentlenen your former correfpondent addreffes his letter to, viz. the humane and benevolent Dr. Lettfom. P. R. NEWELL,

Member of the Royal College of Surgeons in London. P.S. Having no connexion with the Borough Gaol, I am not able to fpeak to the obfervations thereon; but I am informed by two of the Magifirates that the statement is much exaggerated. I hope it is.

Mr. URBAN, High Wycombe, Nov. 9. TH HE Obituary of your Magazine for September laft contains an account of the late Mr. Brand Hollis, p. 888, in which it is intimated, that Mr. Thomas Hollis was induced to give his fortune to one whom he efieemed as a friend, by a quarrel with his relation, Mr. Timothy Hollis. You will permit me to correct this error, by alluring you that there never was any fuch quarrel; and, at the fame time to request you will infert the following particulars in your next. I give them partly from my own knowledge, and partly as what I learned from my uncle, the late Mr. Timothy Hollis of Great Ormond-fireet, and his fifter, the late Mrs. Afhurft; perfons of unquestionable veracity, and who had the best opportunities of knowing what they communicated to me.

I am aware that the publick is not greatly interefted in the affairs of a private family. But, if they are calculated to throw any light upon characters which have engaged public attention, there feems to be a propriety in making them known. Thus confidered, perhaps you may judge what follows to be not unworthy of a place in your Magazine. JOHN HOLLIS.

THOMAS HOLLIS, who left Yorkfhire about the middle of the feventeenth century, to fettle in London, was the common ancestor of the late Thomas Hollis of Dorfetshire and myfelf. Tho. H. the elder fettled in the Minories, and cftablished a trade in what is called hard ware, which trade, under his fons Thomas and John, became very profitable. He had another fon, whofe name was Nathanael, and who, having diffipated his fortune by his extravagance, became unable to make much provifion for a fon of his, who likewife bore the name of Thomas. His uncle, of the fame name, being childlefs, adopted him; but, not content to do thus much, very im perioufly forced him into the trade, much against the inclination of John Hollis, who was the active partner, and, in the words of my informant, "the foul of the bufinefs." Mr. John Hollis objected to the young man, as an obftinate and awkward perfon, more likely to be troublesome than of any ufe; which, indeed, proved to be the cafe. Mr. J. Hollis had a family of eight children. This accounts not only for his fubmiffion to his elder brother (for it feems he did not expect his brother would give his whole pro perty to his favourite); but it accounts alfo for J. Hollis's fuperior exertion, and confequent skill and ability. This favoured nephew, however, having inherited a fortune from one uncle, and fhared the acquifitions of another, died, and left a handfome property to his only child, the late Thomas Hollis, of Dorferfhire. This property accumulated during a minority, and enabled the owner to purchafe the Dorfetfhire eftate, which he deviled to Mr. Brand, Nevertheless, from the above reprefen tation, it appears highly probable that, if his father had not been diftinguifhed by the peculiar and unmerited favour of the family, the late Mr. Thomas Hollis would have been (comparatively) a poor man, and have had nothing (worth mentioning) to give to any

one,