Perhaps H. L. has never heard of a helmet being worn over a bascinet. I can furnish him with a _few_ instances of monumental effigies where both appear. He should study the monument in question before he pronounces the use of the word "helmet" to be a mistake.
I would suggest to H. L. that the next time he appears in your pages he had better append his name in full, that those whom he assails may be better able to judge of the value of his criticism.
I will only add that it is hardly fair to "assume" that a man has never studied a subject which has been his hobby for thirty years; and who might be able to prove, by ocular demonstration, that he has "studied" more monumental effigies than H. L. probably ever dreamt of.
_Herschel Anticipated_ (Vol. iv., p. 233., &c.).--It was not Herschel's discoveries relative to the sun's motion, but his theory relative to its physical constitutions, which was anticipated by a person, who was declared to be mad for holding such opinions. Sir David Brewster, in a note to his edition of Ferguson's _Astronomy_, vol. ii. p. 144., says:
"It is a curious fact that the opinions of Dr. Herschel, respecting the nature of the sun, were maintained by a Dr. Elliot, who was tried at the Old Bailey for shooting Miss Boydell. The friends of the Doctor maintained that he was insane, and called several witnesses to establish this point. Among these was Dr. Simmons, who declared that Dr. Elliot had, for some months before, shown a fondness for the most extravagant opinions; and that in particular, he had sent to him a letter on the light of the celestial bodies, to be communicated to the Royal Society. This letter confirmed Dr. Simmons in the belief that this unhappy man was under the influence of this mental derangement; and, as a proof of the correctness of this opinion, he directed the attention of the court to a passage of the letter, in which Dr. Elliot states, 'that the light of the sun proceeds from a dense and universal aurora, which may afford ample light to the inhabitants of the surface (of the sun) beneath, and yet be at such a distance aloft as not to annoy them.' No objection, says he, ariseth to that great luminary being inhabited; vegetation may obtain there, as well as with us. There may be water and dry land, hills and dales, rain and fair weather; and as the light, so the season, must be eternal; consequently it may easily be conceived to be by far the most blissful habitation of the whole system." (See the _Gentleman's Magazine_, 1787, p. 636.)