The wild, or, as we term him, the humble bee, is not without a share of the superstitions which pertain to his more civilised brethren.  The entrance of one into a cottage is deemed a certain sign of death.

Spiders.—­The small spiders called “money spinners” prognosticate good luck; in order to propitiate which, they must be thrown over the left shoulder.

T.Y.

* * * * *

Minor Notes

The Hon. A. Erskine.—­In J. Reed’s Copy of Boswell’s and Hon. A. Erskine’s Correspondence, 12mo. 1763, was the following note in Reed’s autograph:—­

“The Hon. A. Erskine was fourth son of the fifth Earl of Kelley.  Mr. Boswell told me the 30th of May, 1794, that A.E., having spent all his property, in a fit of despair threw himself from a rock into the sea last winter, and was drowned.  His body was found five days after, when it appeared it was a deliberate act, as he had filled his pockets with stones.”

Gloves.—­The question of F.E. (Vol. i., p. 366.), “Why are gloves not worn before royalty?” having hitherto received no answer, may probably be as difficult of solution as another custom in which a glove figures as a token of defiance.  Perhaps, however, covered hands, as well as a covered head, may have been considered discourteous.  Indeed, we learn frown Cobarruvias, in his Tesoro, that it was so considered in Spain:—­

“ENGUANTADO.  El que entra con Guantes adonde se le ha de tener a descortesia.  El que sirve no los ha de tener delante de su Senor:  ni Vasallo, sea quien fuere, delante de su Rey.”  Fo. 453. b. ed. 1611.

The use of gloves must be of very high antiquity.  In the Middle Ages the priest who celebrated mass always, I believe, wore them during that ceremony; but it was just the contrary in courts of justice, where the presiding judge, as well as the criminal, was not allowed to cover his hands.  It was anciently a popular saying, that three kingdoms must contribute to the formation of a good glove:—­Spain to prepare the leather, France to cut them out, and England to sow them.

I think the etymology of the word glove is in far from a satisfactory state.  It is a good subject for some of your learned philological correspondents, to whom I beg leave to recommend its elucidation.

S.W.  Singer.

Mickleham, July 26. 1850.

Punishment of Death by Burning (Vol. ii., pp. 6, 50, 90.).—­Your correspondent E.S.S.W. gives an account of a woman burnt for the murder of her husband in 1783, and asks whether there is any other instance of the kind in the latter part of the last century.  I cannot positively answer this Query, but I will state a circumstance that occurred to myself about the year 1788.  Passing in a hackney-coach up the Old Bailey to West Smithfield, I saw the unquenched embers of a fire opposite Newgate; on my alighting I asked the coachman “What was that fire in the Old Bailey, over which the wheel of your coach passed?” “Oh, sir,” he replied, “they have been burning a woman for murdering her husband.”  Whether he spoke the truth or not I do not know, but I received it at the time as truth, and remember the impression it made on me.