worth 300,000l. which he would give to no perfon living, but left it fo as not to be inherited till after the fecond generation. His counfel reprefenting to him how many years it must be before this could take effect, and that his money could only lie at intereft all that time, he expreffed great joy thereat, and faid, they would then be as long in fpending as he had been in getting it.' But the Chancery afterward fet afide the will, and gave it to the heir at law." The will was contefted by his heirs, and fet afide, at leaft in part, by a decree of Lord Chancellor Talbot, who held the feals from Nov. 29, 1733, till his death in February, 1736-6; from whence it clearly appears, that Mr. Hopkins must have died fome time before that noble Lord, but at what precife period I am unable to say*. He left no iffue, and the perfons who obtained the principal part of his vaft eftate, I understand to have been the three following: 1. John Hopkins, who was, at the time of his relation's death, in the humble fituation of a farmer's fervant, but came into the poffeffion of a revenue of several thousand pounds per annum, and refided at Brittons, near Dagenham, in Effex; he left a daughter+ (who died 1787), the wife of Benjamin Bond, efq. a Turkey merchant, by whom he had iffue one fon and heir, of the fame names, to which he has added that of Hopkins, and is now member of parliament for Ilchefter, and proprietor of the eftate of Pain's Hill, in Surrey; he has been twice married, and, if I mistake not, has only one daughter. 2. Sir Richard Hopkins, knt. alderman of Lime-ftreet Ward from 1724, in which year he was fheriff of London, till 1735; he had a villa in Capworth-ftreet, Low Layton, in the iron gate of which his arms ftill are, or lately were, to be feen. 3. A man of the name of Hopkins, who kept a filverfmith's fhop at the corner of Waterlane, Fleet-ftreet, was employed by him as his agent or manager in his life *Mr. Hopkins died April 25, 1732; his will may be seen in our fecond volume, p. 832. He obtained the name of Vulture Hopkins, from his rapacious mode of acquiring his immenfe fortune. EDIT. † Another of his daughters married the only fon of the late Wm. Hallet, efq. of Canons, whofe daughter married the only fon of Sir Wm. Dolben, bart, and petfeites a large proportion of this fortune, which was alto hared between his other two daughters. A third daughter was wife to --D.ckenlon, etq, time, and was one of the legatees under his will. I have thus given you a few trifling and imperfect hints upon the fubject, wifhing thofe who have more knowledge to furnish you with any additional information that will be acceptable. Yours, &c. E. I Mr. URBAN, pair of one of our finest monuments of Gothic architecture, SALISBURY cathedral, in the first year of the reign of Hen. VI. 1423. Your learned readers will find the original in Rymer's Fœdera, x. 267; wherefore I forbear giving you the king's writ at large, but shall state only the fubftance of it, which fets forth that, whereas the ftone belfrey, ftanding almoft in the center of Salisbury cathedral (campanile petrolum flans quafi in medio ecclefiæ cathedralis Sarum), of the foundation and patronage of the kings of England, was in fuch danger of ruin, that, if not fpeedily repaired, it would fall, and deftroy the whole church, and do other mifchief and damage: and whereas the revenues for repairing both church and fteeple were only a small annual income, appropriated to that purpose by Richard Metford, the late bifhop, and nothing more, from the fit foundation of the church to the prefent time; the members of the church applied to the king for leave to augment the faid income by donations of lands and tenements. The king grants to the dean and chapter leave to take and hold the fame, with the advowfons of churches to the amount of gol. per annum, as well for the purpofes of repairs, as for anniverfaries commemorating the donors, or to any other ufes appointed by the donors, notwithitanding the flatute of mortmain. With this let us compare the following brief: "Mar. 1, 1738. Whereas it hath been reprefented unto us, that the abbey or parochial church of St. Paul in Malmjbury, is a very beautiful, large, and ancient fabrick, being built about of ground, and is adorned in various parts 1100 years fince, and covers 60 perches of it with curious work of different orders; that the church, at the diffolution of monatteries, in order to preferve fo venerable a firucture, was purchafed by the aldermen of the faid borough, and, notwithstanding the parishioners have, from time to time, expended feveral large turns of money in Tupport of te the faid fabrick, yet the fame is now become very ruinous through length of time, particularly the South walls are greatly decayed and bulged, and feveral of the arches, together with the roof, are become very rotten, and in great danger of falling into the church; the North walls are alfo fhattered with many cracks and flaws, and not without danger even in the foundation, and feveral pinnacles are already fallen in; that the parishioners have, by a former collection by virtue of his Majefty's letters-patent, collected the fum of 470l. 15s. 11d. which fum is vefted in the three per cent. Confolidated Annuities, until they have authority to collect a further fum for the repair of the faid church; which, by the oath of James Darley, an able and experienced architect, who has viewed the church, and eftimated the charge of taking down a part, and repairing the fame, will amount to 24411. 4s. exclufive of the forefaid fum and the old materials-A brief to collect from houfe to house. Trustees: Sir James Tilney Long, bart. Thomas Eftcourt Creswell, Charles Welly Coxe, Thomas Eftcourt, efq. Rev. Thomas Pollock, LL.D. Edm. Wilkins, efq. high-steward, the aldermen and capital burgeffes, the minifter and churchwardens for the time being, William Stevenfon and William Hilditch, gents. Feb. 26, 28 Geo. III." Does it not give you pleasure, Mr. Urban, to see the good management of the people of Malmbury, and their zeal to repair their ancient and venerable church, which mourns the lofs of its munificent abbots? If Popery had no better views, at leaft it adorned the kingdom with fome of the fineft temples, wherein, if God was not ferved with all the fimplicity and fpirituality of Chriftianity, or the Genevan ftrici nefs of devotion, impreffions were certainly made on the moft unthinking and uninformed minds. But, not to make the church of Malmbury a party to religious diftinc. tions, let us hope the zeal of its parihioners, who purfue the idea of the good aldermen at the diffolution, in faving it from total deftruction, though they were obliged to pull down all the Eaft or choir part to fave expence, will not pafs unrewarded, and that the furviving part, or nave, may yet be faved from the fate that has befallen the cathedral of Hereford, and the ftuple of Ealt Grinted, and now threatens that of Sutton in Surrey, for which laft a brief is in circulation. The brief for As you, Mr. Urban, are a promoter Mr. URBAN, June 17. Mto the worthy Tradefman who [AY I be permitted to give a hint has fet apart his profits for fome charitable purpose), or rather to adopt one of a pathetic writer, in one of your late numbers, in favour of those unfortunate * I could tell you an inftance where the officiating minifter, not the rector or vicar, refufes to read briefs, as unfit to be read in churches, and leaves them to the clerk, whey to his credit, reads them very well. Strange inconfiftence in a high-churchman! as if any thing relative to the church was improper to be read in it. But fo unguardedly do bigots reafon! 4 Aldheim, Duns Scotus, William of Malmibuy. The burial ¡lace of K. AthelLittle ftan was here. Hittle beings, doomed to ignorance, filthinefs, and the confequent difeafes of body and mind, the Chimney-fweepers? The fum he has depofited will be a happy and liberaf beginning. I think 1 can anfwer for my Jex; they will not be backward on the occafion: and fure ly Howard and Lettfom, fo benevolent of their talents as well as purfes, would form the plan. At least a Sundayfchool in London may be appropriated to thefe, who cannot fhare the benefits of our numerous inftitutions. Yours, &c. EUSEBIA. SUMMARY OF THE PROCEEDINGS IN PARLIAMENT, SESS. V. Debates in the Fifth Seffion of Parliament. (Continued from p. 420.) MR. Thursday, February 14. R. Fox, after the Commons had returned from Westminster-hall, informed the Houfe, that he had then in his hand a pamphlet, which contained grofs libels, not merely upon individual members, but upon the whole legifla tive body collectively; it interfered particularly in the proceedings of the Houfe in a trial actually pending; and ought not, in juftice to the individual who was the fubject of that trial, to the Houfe, and to the Legiflature, to be paffed over unnoticed. As this libel embraced fo many objects, he would adopt the precedent laid down last week, of fending it to the Attorney General, with inftructions to profecute the printer or publisher: but, firft, he read several paffages from the pamphlet, and moved, that it was the opinion of that Houfe, that they were falfe and infamous libels upon the House and upon Parliament; and this motion, he faid, he would follow up with another, for the Attorney General to profecute. Mr. Pitt faid, that, from what he had heard the Right Hon. Gent. read, he did not doubt but the majority of the Houfe would agree that the pamphlet was libellous; but, as it was a very recent publication, which few of the members had yet had an opportunity of feeing, he thought it would be best to let it lie upon the table, that they might have time to confider of it; and, on a future day, the Houfe might take it into confideration. Mr. Fox agreed to this; but obferved, that, as the pamphlet might be read in half an hour, it did not require much time for a gentleman to determine whether it was libellous or not; he would therefore move, that it fhould lie upon the table this day, and be taken into confideration to-morrow. It was ordered accordingly. GENT. MAG. June, 1788. The pamphlet is intituled, "A View of the Charges exhibited against Warren Haftings, Efq." The Houfe, in a committee, heard Mr. Farrer refpecting the charges againft Sir E Impey. The Hon. Gent. proceeded with flight interruptions, occafioned by converfations on the admiffibility of a few papers which he offered as a part of his evidence, until he came to the sentence paffed upon Nundcomar, and the refufal of petitions to refpite the judgement. On the closing of his narrative, it was moved, that the chairman fhould report progrefs, and aik leave to fit again; which being agreed to, and the Houfe refumed, the chairman reported progrefs, and the committee was ordered to fit again on Monday. Adjourned. Friday, February 15. This day Mr. Fox refumed the fubject of the complaint he had made yesterday of the libellous pamphlet, previously to his making a motion, that the following paragraph of the pamphlet might be read: "That no abilities, however great; no fituation, however exalted; no fervices, however beneficial and meritorious; not even the smiles of the Sovereign, and the approbation of the people; could fcreen a British subject from impeachment." Mr. Fox then moved, "that the pamphlet contained a libel, highly reflecting on his Majefty, and upon the proceedings of this Houfe, and is an indecent interference with refpect to the profecution now depending on the impeachment of Warren Haftings, efq." Mr. Pitt admitted very readily that the pamphlet contained grof's libels upon individual members of the House, and upon the Houfe itself; but he could not difcover any thing in the paragraph that had been just now read, which, by fair interpretation, could be conftrued into a libel upon his Majesty. He therefore moved, that the words in the motion, |