EDW.  HAWKINS.

Cowley or Cowleas.

Your correspondent W. asks the etymon of “Cowley;”—­probably “Cow leas,” or Cow pasture.  In ancient records it is written “Couelee.”  I have before me a survey or “extent” of the Hospitalers’ lands in England, including those formerly belonging to the Templars.  In this record, as in most that I have seen, it is written, “Templecouelee,” and it is entered as a limb of the commandry of Saunford or Sandford.

L.B.L.

Cowley or Coverley—­Statistics of Roman Catholic Church—­Whelps—­Discovery of America.

I can answer pretty confidently the query II. in Number 4, p. 59, about the etymon of Cowley, for I have, on a farm of my own, two denominations of land, called Ox-ley and Cow-ley, and I believe that both these names are common all through England.  Like Horseley, Ashley, Oakley and a thousand other leas or leys distinguished from each other by some local characteristic. Coverley was probably not Cowley, but, like Woodley, Orchardleigh, &c., derived from its local position.

In answer to the query as to the statistics of the Roman Catholic Church, p. 61.  Number 4, I think I may say there is no such general work, though the Propaganda of Rome was said to register something of that sort.  The information is only to be picked up from various and (as far as I know) all imperfect publications.  The least so that I can just now refer to is the Statistics of the Roman Catholic Church of Ireland, in Thom’s Dublin Almanack—­a very curious and useful compilation.

In reply to the inquiry as to a priest’s wife, p. 77 Number 5, I would suggest that married persons may have separated, and retired each into the celibacy of a convent, yet might join, when necessary, in a legal conveyance; but I should examine closely the word deciphered clericus.

To J.J., who inquires about “Whelps,” and refers to Howell’s Letters, sect. 5 p. 9, I beg leave to suggest more precision in his future references.  The passage is in one (viz. the viii.) of the 42 letters of the 5th section; but in the last and best edition (Lond. 1754) it is p. 204.  I note this to inculcate the necessity of accurate references and mention of the edition quoted.  As to the query itself, I can answer that the “whelps” were a class, perhaps I might say a litter, of light men-of-war of the fifth rate, which were so called, perhaps, after one named the “Lion’s Whelp,” in Queen Elizabeth’s navy, and distinguished by numbers, as “1st Whelp,” “2nd Whelp,” and so on to at least “10th Whelp,” which is to be found in a list of the navy in 1651.  She was of 180 tons, and carried 18 guns and 60 men.  It seems not easy to account for this class of vessels having been rated so high as 5th rates, but I suppose they were a favourite and favoured class.