Notes and Queries, Number 21, March 23, 1850. Various

      EARLY STATISTICS.—CHART, KENT

      Perhaps some one of your numerous readers will be good enough to inform me whether any general statistical returns, compiled from our early parish registers, have ever been published. An examination of the register of Chart next Sutton Valence, in Kent, which disclosed some very curious facts, has led me to make this inquiry. They seem to point to the inevitable conclusion that the disturbed state of England during the period of the Great Rebellion retarded the increase of population to an extent almost incredible—so as to suggest a doubt whether some special cause might not have operated in the parish in question which was not felt elsewhere. But, as I am quite unable to discover the existence of any such cause, I shall be glad to learn whether a similar result appears generally in other registers of the period above referred to.

      The register-book of Chart commences with the year 1558, and is continued regularly from that time. During the remainder of the sixteenth, and for about the first thirty-five years of the seventeenth century, the baptisms registered increase steadily in number: from that period there is a very marked decrease. For the twenty years commencing with 1600 and ending with 1619, the number 260; for the twenty years 1620 to 1639, the number is 246; and for the twenty years 1640 to 1659, the number is only 120.

      No doubt this diminution must be attributed partly to the spread of Nonconformity; but I believe that during the Protectorate, the registration of births was substituted for that of baptisms, and therefore the state of religious feeling which then prevailed bears less directly on the question. And even after the Restoration the register exhibits but a small increase in the number of baptisms. For the various periods of twenty years from that event up to 1760, the numbers range from 152 to 195. And pursuing the inquiry, I find that the number of marriages, for any given time, varies consistently with that of baptisms. If any of your reader can clear up the difficulty, I shall feel much obliged for any information which may tend to do so.

      Are the following extracts from the register above referred to of sufficient interest to merit your acceptance?

      "1648.—Richard, the son of George Juxon, gent., and Sarah, his wife, who was slayne 1º Junii at Maydestone Fight, was buryed on the third daye of June, anno predicto."

      "Joseph, the son of Thomas Daye, and An, his wife, who was wounded at Maydestone Fight 1º Junii, was buryed the eleventh daye of June."

      It is hardly necessary to mention, that the fight here referred to took place between the parliamentary forces under Fairfax, and a large body of Kentish gentlemen, who had risen, with their dependants, in the hope of rescuing the king from the hands of the army. After an obstinate engagement, in which the Kentish men fully maintained their character for gallantry, they were defeated with great slaughter.

      "1653.—The third of March, Mr. John Case of Chart next Sutton Clarke, being chosen by the parishioners of the said Chart, to be the Register of the said parish according to the Act touching marriages, births, and buryalls, was this day sworne before me, and I do allow and approve of him to be Register accordingly. As witness my hand.

      "1660.—Marye, the daughter of John Smith, Esq. was baptized on the thirteenth daye of Januarie, 1660, by John Case, Vicar. The first that hath been baptized at the font since it was re-erected by the appoynm't of the said Mr. Smith, being full sixteene yeers paste. One Thomas Scoone, an elder, having, out of his blinde zeale, defaced and pulled it downe, w't other ornaments belonging to the churche."

      Chancery Lane, 7th March.

      BIS DAT QUI CITÒ DAT

      Inquiry has been often made as to the origin of this proverb. Alciatus is referred to generally as the authority whence it was derived. I think, however, it may be traced to Publius Syrus, who lived about forty-four years before Christ. It is equally probable, from the peculiar species of composition in which the thought, if not the exact words are found, that the proverb was derived from another and an earlier source. The object of mimic exhibitions is to impress the mind by imitation. Human life is burlesqued, personal defect heightened and ridiculed; character is never represented in degree, but in extremes. The dialogue of satirical comedy assumes naturally the form of the apophthegm—it is epigrammatic and compressed that it may be pungent and striking. Hence, no species of writing is more allied to or more likely to pass into household words, and to become proverbs among a people of quick retentive powers, such as the Greeks were, to whom we are perhaps indebted for this. I send you the extract from Alciatus; Emblemata, No. 162. Antverpiæ, 18mo. 1584. Apud Christophorum Plantinum.

      Now here we have the proverb clearly enough.

      I subjoin the note upon the lines in which it appears.

      "Bis dat qui cito dat," in Mimis Publii. "Beneficium inopi bis dat, qui dat celeriter." Proverb, Bis dat, &c.

      Referring to the Sentences of Publius Syrus, published, with the additional Fables of Phædrus, from the Vatican MSS., by Angelo Mai, I found the line thus given:

      The same idea, I believe, occurs in Ovid. Query whether it is not a thought naturally presenting itself to the mind, reflected by memory, confirmed by experience, and which some Mimic author has made proverbial by his terse, gnomic form of expression.

      PARALLEL PASSAGES

      I take the liberty of sending you several parallel passages, which may probably appear to you worthy of insertion in your valuable paper.