Aug. 12. 1854.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



129 



Bernard Mandeville. — On Thursday, July 11, 

 17*23, a presentment was inserted in the Evening 

 Post against Mandeville's Fable of the Bees. Will 

 any of your readers kindly inform me the result ? 

 and, also, whether any farther proceedings were 

 taken ? Will you also inform me where I can ob- 

 tain the best information respecting Mandeville 

 and his works? I have read the article in the 

 Penny Cyclop., which is scarcely comprehensive 

 enough. C. H. (2) 



[It does not appear that any farther proceedings were 

 taken against Mandeville, after the presentment of the 

 Grand Jury of Middlesex to the Judges of the King's 

 Bench. If there had been, Mandeville would have no- 

 ticed them in the collected edition of his Works, 4 vols., 

 1728, where he has reprinted, from the London Journal of 



July 27, 1723, " A Letter to the Right Hon. Lord C ," 



severely animadverting upon his Fable of the Bees ; toge- 

 ther with his " Answer to the Letter," and the present- 

 ment to the Grand Jury. The best account of the author 

 is contained in Nouveau Dictionnaire Historlque, par 

 Jacques George de Chaufepie, torn, iii., edit. 1753. Con- 

 sult also his Life, by Dr. Birch, in the General Dictionary ; 

 Loicnger's Common-place Book, vol. ii. p. 306. ; and Chal- 

 mers's Biographical Dictionary. ] 



Quotation. — Can you oblige me by saying where 

 to find the line — 



" All men think all men mortal but themselves ? " 



J. M. 

 [In Young's Night Thoughts, Night I., the 37th line 

 from the end.] 



Precedency of the Peers of Ireland in England. 

 — I have an 8vo. volume in my possession, printed 

 in Dublin without the author's " knowledge or 

 concurrence," in 1739, entitled The Question of 

 the Precedency of the Peers of Ireland in England 

 fairly stated. As appears from the title-page, it is 

 " A Letter to an English Lord, by a nobleman of 

 the other Kingdom," Who was the author ? He 

 adopts as his motto, "Alieni appetens, sui pro- 

 fusus." " Largitor rapti " would have been more 

 concise. Abhba. 



[This work is bv Sir John Perceval, first Earl of Eg- 

 mont. Obit May 1, 1748.] 



l&.t)^\it€* 



THE DUNCIAD. 



C. asks, at Vol. x., p. Q5., whether an edition of 

 The Dunciad, 1727, has been seen ? The follow- 

 ing extracts will probably prove that no such 

 edition ever existed. In a letter addressed by 

 Swift to Gay, Nov. 27th, 1727, he asks, "Why 

 does not Pope publish his 'Dulness?'" Again, 

 " I hope to see Pope's ' Dulness ' knock down the 

 Beggar's Opera, but not till it hath fully done its 

 job." 



Lord Bolingbroke, in a letter to Swift, not dated, 

 but placed after the preceding one, says : " Pope's 



* Dulness ' grows and flourishes — it will be a 

 noble work ; the many will stare at it, the few will 

 smile." 



March 23, 1727^8, Pope tells Swift : " As for 

 those scribblers, for whom you apprehend I would 

 suppress my 'Dulness,' which, by the way, /or the 

 future, you are to call by a more pompous name, 

 The Dunciad, how much that nest of hornets are 

 my regard, will easily appear to you when you 

 read the treatise of the Bathos." 



May 10, 1728, Swift says : " You talk of this 

 Dunciad, but I am impatient to have it volare per 

 ora. There is now a vacancy for fame; the 

 Beggar's Opera hath done its task." 



July 16, 1728, Swift writes : " I have often run 

 over The Dunciad in an Irish edition (I suppose 

 full of faults) which a gentleman sent me. The 

 notes I could wish to be very large in what relates 

 to the persons concerned." 



As Swift, of all men, would be indulged with 

 an " early copy " of The Dunciad (for Lord Bo- 

 lingbroke may have seen portions of the work ia 

 manuscript or in proof only), may we not con- 

 clude from these extracts that The Dunciad cer- 

 tainly did not appear till 1728 ? The Irish edition, 

 " full of faults," may have been what Cleland 

 alludes to in his letter to the publisher, prefixed 

 to the work (4to. and 8vo., 1729), " occasioned by 

 the present (and as Warton or Bowles adds, the 

 first correct) edition of The Dunciad.'^ .... 

 " It is with pleasure I hear that you have procured 

 a correct copy of The Dunciad, which the many 

 surreptitious ones have rendered so necessary." * 



J. H. MAEKIiAND. 



I am glad that my inquiry about the first edition 

 of The Dunciad has excited a correspondent 

 spirit ; but the nature of the replies in Vol. x., 

 p. 109., induces me, in order to save space and 

 time, to repeat that what is inquired after i>, 

 any of the editions stated by Pope to have been 

 published in Dublin and London, prior to one in 

 12mo. published in London by Lawton Gilliver 

 without date. 



I am surprised to find E. T. D. — who writes aa 

 if he had considered the question, and tells us 

 that he " has formed opinions of his own " upon 

 it — doubting my quotation of Pope's assertion, 

 and asking where " Pope has distinctly and re- 

 peatedly stated that an imperfect edition was pub- 

 lished and republished in Dublin and in London 

 in 1727." I am, I say, surprised that any one 

 who has looked ever so superficially into the sub- 

 ject, should not be aware that in a prefatory note 



* An advertisement which precedes this letter in these 

 two editions, says ; " It will be sufficient to say of this 

 edition that the reader has here a much more correct and 

 complete copy of The Dunciad than has hitherto appeared." 



