262 



KOTES AND QUERIES. 



[Xo. 151. 



flourish is not worth much, but it does leave an 

 impression on my mind that the publication may- 

 have been suggested to him; and the fact that the 

 volume appeared without his name, leads me to 

 believe that he had some doubts as to the pro- 

 priety of one newspaper proprietor and printer 

 piratically making up a volume from another 

 newspaper. Had there been a hint also to Wheble ? 

 Republication — multiplication of copies, — be it 

 remembered, was not only an evidence of power, 

 with which a vain man, any man, might be flat- 

 tered — but it was power, the aim and end of all 

 Junius's labours. He had none of the ordinary 

 stimulants — neither honour, praise, nor profit. 

 But why, it may be asked, should Junius or his 

 fi-iends have suggested these republications to Al- 

 mon or Wheble ? Why not to Woodfall ? Because 

 Woodfal!, for reasons unknown to us, was slow to 

 move in the way of republication. It was only 

 when Newbei'y had actually issued his edition in 

 July 1769, that Woodfall first proposed to follow 

 the example. Junius immediately gave his con- 

 sent, and offered assistance. But nothing resulted 

 for neai'ly two years. This was dreadful to an 

 earnest zealous man — who complained that he 

 was not supported as he ought to be ; who wanted 

 a hundred arms and pens to aid the cause, and 

 found even his own hands tied by his printer. 

 Therefore it may have been that other agencies 

 were set to work. 



Wheble further assures the reader that the 

 second edition " has been revised and corrected by 

 one of the first men, in point of political and 

 literary knowledge, in the kingdom." I am not so 

 inexperienced in literary history as to be quite awed 

 even in the presence of booksellers' "first men;" yet 

 there is something so emphatic and specific in this 

 announcement of a matter of so little consequence 

 — seeing that the work was but a literal reprint from 

 a newspaper — that I cannot but believe Wheble felt 

 what he said, and that it is significant. Wheble 

 knew as well as we do that " first men" do not 

 usually offer themselves as printers' readers ; and 

 what other office was there for any one to fill on 

 this occasion? But if any of the " first men," or of 

 Wheble's " first men," said to him, " Your edition 

 was full of grammatical and other blunders ; I will 

 cast an eye over the second" — there was enough 

 said and done to ensure that reasonable accuracy 

 which those interested might naturally desire, and 

 tojustify Wheble's preliminary flourish. Junius, we 

 know, was somewhat sensitive in these typographi- 

 cal matters. When the first edition was published 

 by Newbery, he wrote to Woodfall (P. L., No. 4.), 

 " I wish he had done it correctly. . . . Give him 

 a hint that, having thought proper to republish 

 these letters, he might at least have corrected the 

 errata, as we did constantly : " and then follows a 

 list of errors in Newbery's edition for publication 

 in the Public Advertiser. " If this man," he says, 



"will keep me alive, let me live without being 

 offensive." So, in respect to " the author's edition," 

 he tells Woodfall — " on page 25 , It sh'' be the in- 

 stead 0? your. This is a woeful mistake : pray take 

 care for the future." (P. Z., No. 44.) Again (P. i.. 

 No. 45.), " I must see proof sheets of the Ded" and 

 Pref. ; and these, if at all, I must see before the end 

 of next week." From his next letter (No. 46.) I 

 infer that the printer had Informed him it was 

 impossible to comply with his request ; for he in 

 reply roars about accuracy as if the fiite of the 

 ministry or nation depended on It: — "I have no 

 view but to serve you, and consequently have only 

 to desire that the Ded" and Pref. may be correct. 

 Look to it. If you take it upon youi'self, I will 

 never forgive your suffering it to be spoiled. I 

 weigh every word ; and every alteration, In my 

 eyes at le.ast, is a blemish." Woodfall did not 

 venture, after this, to take It upon himself, but 

 submitted the proofs to Wilkes ; and Junius wrote 

 (P. Z., No. 57.) — " When you see Mr. W., pray 

 return him my thanks for the trouble he has taken. 

 / ivish he had taken more." 



Wheble's " first man," whoever he was, was cer- 

 tainly very familiar with Junius's Letters, and had 

 a strong and startling memory, or must have com- 

 pared Wheble's first edition with the Public Adver- 

 tiser, — a sort of drudging labour in which " first 

 men" do not usually delight. I speak of the letters 

 contained in the first edition. There Is nothing, 

 for example, in the passage before quoted which 

 would have suggested an omission to any one but 

 the author. Junius also, we know, was familiar 

 with Wheble's editions. In private letter to 

 Woodfall (No. 39.), when preparing for the edition 

 of 1772, he suggests that "the type" should be 

 " one size larger than Wheble's." Again (No. 41.), 

 when some specimens were sent to him, he ob- 

 serves, " I think the paper is not so good as 

 Wheble's ;" and with respect to the specimen of a 

 title-page, " All these are miserable : I think a 

 plate w'' look handsome." And a plate, that is, a 

 copperplate title-page, he had : and so had Wheble 

 for his second edition — the edition read by " first 

 man" — and for every subsequent edition. 



Could Junius have been the " patriotic and 

 literary" of Wheble's first edition, or "the politi- 

 cal and literary" of the second ? Of course, if he 

 were, he was not known as Junius ; and to have 

 carried emendations beyond obvious literals and 

 restorations would have betrayed him. 



It strikes me also as strange that Junius should 

 use one of Wheble's editions as copy for his own 

 edition of 1772, in preference to the originals In 

 the Public Advertiser. According to general ex- 

 perience, ■ a reprint contains most of, or all the 

 errors of the original, with some of its own super- 

 added. Other circumstances are perplexing. 

 Amongst the merits of the edition read by one of 

 the " first men," Wheble tells us that " the dates" 



