2'"> S. X. Dec. 22. '60.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



487 



We come now to another issue of the first edi- 

 tion — C. It agrees generally with the A. copy. 

 The errors indicated in the errata are found by 

 its direction in this, as in the A and B copies ; 

 the catch-word at p. 22. has the same blunder — 

 " I thanAk " for " I thank " : but there are dif- 

 ferences ; thus, fi'om p. 1. to 16. the pagination 

 is correct, and I presume the letters had, so far, 

 been reprinted, — but no farther, as the next page 

 recommences as before with p. 1 1. Other sheets, 

 however, must have been reprinted, as I find, 

 ii. 13., a whole line omitted. 



The title-page and address to another issue or 

 edition, which I shall call D, appears to be iden- 

 tical with A and C ; but here, again, there are 

 differences. The pagination and the sheet letter- 

 ing of the Wycherley letters are correct through- 

 out : the errors, therefore, in the table of errata 

 are not to be found by the directions there given ; 

 and when the passages referred to are found, the 

 errors have been corrected. We have, indeed, 

 conclusive proof of reprinting, so far as the 

 Wycherley letters are concerned, for pp. 30, 31., 

 contain more lines than the A and C copies, and 

 the reason appears p. 32., where twelve lines are 

 quoted in the note, while only six appear in the 

 A and C copies. Other evidence of reprinting 

 will be found on collation. As a farther help to 

 distinguish this D issue, I will notice that p. 208. 

 is followed by p. 281. 



This early and hurried reprint of the Wycherley 

 and of some other letters, was no doubt conse- 

 quent on the interest excited by the proceedings 

 in the House of Lords. Yet that this D copy 

 was not entirely a new edition, I shall proceed 

 to show by very curious evidence. 



The number of copies delivered to Curll, whe- 

 ther 300, according to his receipt, or 240 as he 

 said ("Narrative," p. 13. note), had reduced the 

 possible supply below the demand, and so far as 

 the Wychei'ley Letters, printed in 1729, were 

 concerned, there was no means of increasing the 

 number of copies but by reprinting, and I have 

 shown that they were reprinted. Other sheets 

 were also reprinted. But be it remembered the 

 " horseload " of copies were all without the import- 

 ant groups of letters to Jervas, Blount, andDigby. 

 Pope, therefore, or Pope's agent, had all those 

 copies on hand, over and above the number of 

 copies of the other letters : and there is proof, I 

 think, beyond question, that the sheets withheld 

 from Curll were used in this D issue. Thus, in 

 the Digby group, p. 135., the catch-word is 

 " therefor " — - the same as in A, B, and C ; in the 

 Blount, at p. 165. "interesting" is spelt " in- 

 teressing," as also in A, B, C ; and in p. 176. we 

 read in all " Unh appiness tha I am obliged ". 

 Here are proofs that the volumes were not 

 wholly reprinted ; further, at ii- 17. and 116., 

 errors remain which were pointed out in the 



errata ; and in the Gay group there are like 

 errors ; as at p. 155., where, owing to the letter 

 s having dropped out, the word is printed 

 " thou and," which is inexplicable, except on the 

 assumption that they were all printed from the 

 same form. It is probable, however, that the 

 Gay group were partially reprinted, because the 

 pagination runs on correctly up to p. 236. ; but 

 then comes the old pagination, p. 155., with the 

 old errors. 



This edition D, may be thus known : The first 

 volume of the Letters begin p. 1. and ends p. 

 286. with "The end of the first volume." In vol. 

 ii. the Letters begin page 3., and end p. 164. with 

 " Finis." 



I have another copy of this issue which differs 

 in minute points, and in which some minute errors 

 have been corrected : thus, the pagination of vol. 

 ii. runs on to p. 246. 



It is impossible, at least I have found it so, to 

 distinguish a reprint from a corrected sheet. It 

 is obvious to me that Pope was " paper sparing," 

 with print as with manuscript; and that every 

 sheet, even when its errors were known, was saved 

 and sold. Another difficulty originates in the 

 fact, that, in a hurried publication, the " copy," as 

 it is technically called, must have been placed in 

 the hands of many compositors ; and the only in- 

 structions could have been to follow " copy," 

 which necessarily led to the perpetuation of errors. 

 I have noticed certain marking peculiarities, and 

 the reader may form his own opinion as to the 

 cause. 



The history of the subsequent issues in 1735 is 

 of less interest, and I shall reserve what I have to 

 say on the subject till next week. D. 



FICHER: A COMMONWEALTH POET. 



Possessing a small collection of inedited poems 

 (principally by authors who flourished in the 

 seventeenth century), which I purpose shortly 

 committing to press, I find amongst them several 

 that are ascribed to one " P. Ficher ; " who ap- 

 pears to have been no ordinary poet, as the fol- 

 lowing specimens of his versatile wit will show, 

 but of whose personal history I know nothing, 

 except the little that may be inferred from his fevr 

 compositions which have come under my notice. 

 From these very meagre materials, I learn that 

 he bore arms under the banner of the Common- 

 wealth, and that he experienced the usual vicis- 

 situdes of warfare whilst serving with his regiment 

 in the north of Ireland during the bloody rebellion 

 in that country in 1641 and succeeding years. 

 Perhaps some correspondent of " N. & Q." is 

 able, and may not be unwilling, to direct me to 

 other sources of information concerning him. The 

 courtesy would be duly appreciated. 



