except in page 75. of No. 5 of the "NOTES AND QUERIES."

The words "henno rusticus" (heno rusticus) are found twice, and are
tolerably clearly written in both cases. Of the "rusticus" nothing need
be said; but the first _n_ in "henno" is expressed by a contraction,
which in the MS. _very_ commonly denotes that letter, and sometimes the
final _m_. How frequently it represents _n_ may be judged from the fact
that in the few words already quoted, the final _n_ in "amen," and the
first in "Johannes," are supplied by it. So that {89} we have to choose
between "henno" and "hemno" rusticus (rather a clown than a gentleman,
whatever was his name; and perhaps the treatise, if ever found, will
prove to treat merely on rural affairs). And although it may turn out to
be perfectly true that "homo rusticus" was the thing meant, as your
correspondent suggests, still that is not the question at issue; but
rather, amidst the confusion of tongues and ideas which seems to have
possessed poor Dorne's brain, what he actually wrote, rather than what
he should have written.

Admitting, however, for supposition's sake, that your correspondent is
right, that the man was named Dormer, and the book _Homo rusticus_--is
there any one who will obligingly favour me with information respecting
these, or either of them?

One word more, and I have done; though perhaps you will think that too
much has been said already upon a subject not of general interest; and
indeed I cannot but feel this, as well as how painful it is to differ,
even in opinion, with one towards whom nothing can be due from me but
respect and affection. But the direct inference from your
correspondent's remarks (although it is fully my persuasion he neither
designed nor observed it) is, that my difficulties are no difficulties