286 



KOTES AND QUERIES. 



[No. 152. 



Anecdotes ami the King's Letter were separately 

 published, with Bew's name in the title-page. 



I come now, and in conclusion, to " the author's 

 edition," as Junius called it, — the edition of 1772, 

 ])ubli.shed bj H. S. Woodfall. On this I shall not 

 offer a word of comment, except in reference to the 

 piratical editions which preceded. 



I have before noticed that " the author's edition" 

 is of the same size as Wheble's ; has a copperplate 

 title-page the same as Wheble's; the dates are 

 often taken from the end of the letter and prefixed, 

 as in Wheble's ; the date chosen is not consistently 

 either date of letter or date of publication, — so in 

 Wheble's ; the copy used by the author was not 

 the original letters from the Public Advertiser, but 

 one of Wheble's edition ; and I may here add, that 

 both collections begin with the letter of 21st Jan. 

 ] 769. Now, I can understand why Newbery, who 

 published The Folitical Contest, should begin his 

 collection, even without a " hint," with the letter 

 •with which the contest originated ; and why 

 Thompson and Bew, who desired only to produce 

 without trouble or cost a saleable pamphlet, fol- 

 lowed his example, and probably copied his volume. 

 I'^en Almon called his collection " The Corre- 

 spondence between Junius and Sir Wm. Draper, 

 Knight of the Bath,'' and therefore the letter of 

 21st of January was his proper starting-point. 

 But Wheble published not The Political Con- 

 test, but T'he Letters of Junius ; and why did he 

 not begin with the letter of Nov. 1768 ? Why 

 did Junius himself follow their example ? He 

 avowed himself at starting anxious to make a bet- 

 ter figure than Newbery (P. Z., No. 7.); and how 

 better than Newbery and the pirates generally than 

 by opening the series with a letter not to be found 

 in any other collection ? It is true that the letter 

 of November would have jangled inharmoniously 

 with some subsequent letters. The eulogy on 

 Wilkes in November, " There is scarce an instance 

 of party merit so great as his," could not pleasantly 

 have been reconciled with the assertion in April, 

 *' I have frequently censured Mr. Wilkes," — which 

 indeed is not reconcilable with the known facts : 

 and the dullest of men would have been startled 

 to read in the opening pages a virulent attack on 

 Camden, as one who had exceeded " the last limits 

 of human depravity," while in the very same work 

 lie is described as a " character fertile in every 

 great and good qualification." If this juxtaposition 

 suggest why Junius, assuming him to have been 

 the writer, did not republish this letter, does it 

 explain why the " ignorance " of Almon and the 

 *' malice" of Wheble omitted it? But I desire 

 only to draw attention to points which are certainly 

 not without interest, although they have hitherto 

 escaped attention, and shall leave the solution to 

 your readers. L. J. 



INEDITED LETTJEHS OF SOUTHEY AND NARES. 



Cornwall Crescent, Aug. 27. 1852. 

 I have much pleasure in sending you the copies of 

 the following letters, which I trust will not be without 

 interest to a portion of your readers. It is some little 

 gratification to me to know that I have preserved them 

 from djestruction. T. K. A. 



Sir, 



Keswick, 2nd Sept. 1828. 



Your letter of July 31, with the verses which it 

 enclosed, was delivered into my hands yesterday. 

 I lose no time in replying to it, and in offering to 

 you my sincere and friendly, though too probably 

 unpalatable, advice, which is, that you would give 

 up your intention of appearing before the world 

 as a poet. Men of high natural endowments, with 

 all the advantages of education, find it difficult in 

 these days, not merely to attain distinction in that 

 line of art, but even to obtain notice. And it 

 were better you should be told, however unplea- 

 sant it be for me to tell you so, and for you to 

 hear it, that there is no chance of your gaining 

 reputation by poetry, and that the expenses of 

 printing cannot possibly be defrayed by the sale 

 of your intended vcjlume, — than that you should 

 learn this by experience, and pay dearly for the 

 mortification. 1 remain, 



Sir, 

 Your well-wisher, 



IkOBEKT SOUTHET. 



British Museum, Dec. 31, 1802. 

 My dear Sir, 



That you were lately a defaulter towards me is 

 perfectly forgiven and almost forgotten, and I beg 

 you to dismiss it as completely from your con- 

 science as I do from the resentful side of my 

 mind, which 1 hope is a very small place. Dr. 

 Barrow's book is perfectly provided for, and will 

 probably appear next month. The review of 

 Bennett I will carefully consider, and with your 

 hints, for which I thank you heartily, will, I doubt 

 not, easily be prepared for publication. 



I hear with regret that your Dictionary fatigues 

 you, but the man who has pupils to attend to re- 

 quires no other fatigues. Johnson, I believe, 

 proceeded thus : he read the books which he 

 meant to employ as authorities, and scored the 

 passages with a pencil wliich he meant to cite, 

 distinguishing the word to be exemplified. These 

 passages were transcribed by amanuenses, and 

 classed in alphabetical order, after which he had 

 only to define and subdivide in order to complete 

 his work. But unless your materials are prepared 

 in a similar manner, 1 fear you could not Ibllow 

 his examples. Should you find that an amanuensis 

 Avould really be likely to assist you materially, I 



