HISTORY OF THE COLLEGE OF ST JOHN THE EVANGELIST

by THOMAS BAKER, B.D. Ejected Fellow.

Edited by JoHN E. B.

MaAYOR, MA, Fellow of St John's. Two Vols. Demy 8vo. 245.

‘6 It may be doubted whether there is any MS. in existence which Cambridge men have been more anxious to see committed to the

ress, under competent editorship, than the History of St John's by that Socius Ejectus Thomas Baker, whose life Walpole desired to write..... Îtis perhaps well for Baker’s reputation . . that it was reserved for so peculiarly competent an editor as Mr Mayor to give this history to the world. . . Ifitbe highly to the credit of the Syndics of the Pitt Press to have printed the book, the manner in which he has edited it reflects no less credit upon Mr Mayor.”—Notes and Quertes.

{To antiquaries the book will te ἃ source of almost inexhaustible amusement, by historians it will be found a work of considerable service on questions respecting our social progress in past times; and the care and thoroughness with which Mr Mayor has discharged his editorial functions are creditable to his learning and industry.” —A4#henœum.

The wanrk displays very wide reading,

and it will be of great use to members of the college and of the university, and, perhaps, of still greater use to students of English history, ecclesiastical, political, social, literary and academical, who have hitherto had to be content with ‘ Dyer.’”—Academy.

‘It may be thought that the history of a college cannot be particularlyattractive. The two volumes before us, however, have something more than ἃ mere special interest for those who have been in any way connected with St John's College, Cambridge: they contain much which will be read with pleasure by a far wider circle. Many of the facts brought under our notice are of considerable value to the general historical student. . . . Every member of this ancient foundation will recognize the worth of Mr Mayors labours, which, as it will appear, have been by no means confined to mere ordinary editorial work. . . . The index with which Mr Mayor has furnished this useful work leaves nothing to be desired.”—S$ecfator.

OF THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 7 THE COMMENTARIES OF GAIUS AND RULE OF ULPIAN. (New Edition, revised and enlarged.) Translated and Annotated, by 1, T. ABDY, LL.D., Judge of County Courts, late Regius Professor of Laws in the University of Cambridge,

and BRYAN WALKER, M.A., LL.D., Law Lecturer of St Johns College, Cambridge, formerly Law Student of Trinity Hall and

Chancellor's Medallist for Legal Studies. Crown Oétavo, 165.

‘Without endorsing all that has been uttered from time to time respecting the beauties of Roman law, we readily admit that its study must prove useful to the English legal aspirant, partiy from its intrinsic merits as ἃ system, and partly from the contrast which it presents to the chaotic agglomeration which Sir William Blackstone pronounced to be the perfection of common sense. As scholars and as editors Messrs Abdy and Waïker have done .their work well. . ... For one thing the editors deserve special commendation. They have presented

aius to the reader with few notes and those merely by way of reference or necessary explanation. hus the Roman jurist is allowed to speak for himself, and the reader feels that he is really studying Roman law

‘The number of books on various subjects of the civil law, which have lately issued from the Press, shews that the revival of the study of Roman -jurisprudence in this country is genuine and increasing. The present edition of Gaius and Ulpian from the Cambridge University Press indicates that the Universities are alive to the importance of the movement, and the fact that the new edition has made its appearance within four years from the original production of the book, should encourage the Syndics to further efforts in the same direction. The auspices under which Messrs Abdy and Walker produce their book are a guarantee that it is a scholarly and accurate performance ; and Mr Abdy's practical experience as a County Court Judge supplies a link between theory and practice

in the original, and not ἃ fanciful representa- which, no doubt, has had a beneficial effect tion of it.”—4 /henœum. upou their work.”—Zaw οι» πα,