1828.] 
From the masses of acquisition, thus ga- 
thered in the course of a long life, the good 
man published first—we know not how 
many volumes of what he called Literary 
Anecdotes; and then the immediate pre- 
cursors of the present, which, with his usual 
felicity, he termed “ Tustrations of the 
Literary History of the Eighteenth Cen- 
tury,”’ intended to be in character, as well 
as in order, the “ sequel’’ of the Anecdotes 
—bushels of chaff, with but here and there 
a grain of corn. The particular volume be- 
fore us contains, if possible, still fewer 
“ grains’ of a marketable quality—scarcely, 
indeed, any thing of general or permanent 
interest ; and yet an idle hour may not un- 
agreeably be spent in turning over the pages 
even by those who never heard of the nume- 
rous persons here celebrated for every virtue 
under heaven; and no doubt with deep 
interest by their surviving friends. Most 
people like to see their dead acquaintance 
brought into notice; it gives distinction to 
themselyes.—“ I knew him.” 
The more remarkable part of the original 
materials are some letters of Dean Swift’s— 
not the Dean’s, but a relative of his—to 
Nicholls, when Nicholls was projecting an 
edition of the Dean’s works, containing— 
the Letters we mean—particulars, especially 
of his birth—invaluable to his biographers, 
and we cannot imagine why they weve not 
communicated to. Sir Walter Scett, who 
certainly fished in Mr. Theephilus Swift’s 
reservoir. There are half-a-dozen letters 
also of Priestley’s, chiefly concerning his 
“ Theological Repository,” of no intrinsic 
value ; some of George Steevens, Sir Henry 
Croft, Daines Barrington; and others from 
persons who were never, we imagine, heard 
of in their own days, and it would puzzle 
any body to find out why they should be 
_ in ours. 
Of the biographical parts, there are lives 
of Malone, by a son of Jemmy Boswell’s— 
of Windham, by Malone—the sum and 
Substance of which have already figured in 
the Gentleman’s Magazine—of Parsons, 
Bishop of Peterborough—of Pearson, mas- 
ter of Sidney—of Barrington, Bishop of 
Durham—and Milner, the Catholic bishop 
_ —the latter, by-the-way, much the most 
attractive of the volume. Among others of 
still less significance are those of Jefferson, 
chdeacon of Colchester — Christopher 
Hunter, tutor of Sidney—Dr. Ford, of Mel- 
ton—Hugh Moises, of Newcastle, Lord El- 
don’s tutor—&c. ; the whole exhibited in a 
strain—written, indeed, by the 
friends of the parties—where all is told en 
beau, and whatever does not tell well is sup- 
pressed. Archdeacon Jefferson’s preferment 
was all conferred wnsolicited—to enhance 
his merits—which may, for any thing we 
know, have been very considerable; but 
then we do know that he was tutor to some 
of the Duke of Beaufort’s children, and got 
what he did get, mainly or wholly, through 
the interest of the family. 
M.M. New Series.—Vou. VI. No. 33. 
Domestic and Fereign. 
305 
A long story is told of one Mr. Gulstone, 
a gentleman of somewhat eccentric habits, 
who contrived to get through a magnificent 
property without himself knowing how, and 
who died aruined man at forty-one—no- 
body’s enemy but his own. Nevertheless, it 
seems, he brought legitimate and illegiti- 
mate children into the world—neglected the 
education of some, and left all without a 
provision. He was, however, a collector of 
old books and papers,-and had “ completed 
a biographical dictionary of all the foreign- 
ers who had ever been in England, forming 
a supplement to Granger.’’ At his death, 
the voluminous MS. sold for little; and, it 
is believed, bought by Mr. Jeffery, the 
bookseller, of Pall Mall. 
We distinguished Swift’s Letters, and 
will give an extract :— 
It is true that a negative upon all occasions is 
hard to be proved, and sometimes almost beyond 
the power of reason to prove, so far as to convince 
gainsayers, if an alibi donot intervene. But hap- 
pily for the reputation of Swift’s mother, it was 
quite, nay absolutely impossible, she could have 
had any connexion or intrigue with Sir William 
Temple; for Sir William was constantly resident 
at Brussels, as appears from his correspondence 
with the ministers of state in England, from Sep; 
tember 1665, until the January after Dr. Swift 
was born. And Swift's mother immediately after 
her marriage went over to Ireland, where his sister 
was born about a year, I suppose, or thereabouts, 
before her brother; and her husband haying died 
a very young man, about the time of the spring 
assizes, in the year 1667, she was invited to my 
grandfather, Counsellor Swift's house, in Dublin. 
And, as I have been told, and helieve it to be true, 
she was then so young with child, that properly 
speaking, she was not aware of it, and the Doctor 
was born at my grandfather’s house, the 30th of 
November following. How soon afterthe doctor’s 
birth his mother returned to Leicester, where I 
think she was born, I cannot exactly say, but at 
Leicester she spent the remainder of her days, and 
lived to be anold woman. Neither was Swift’s 
mother ever out of the English dominions, ex- 
cepting in Ireland, during her whole life. What 
I have said to you respecting the doctor’s mother, 
I declare to you upon my honour, or what is in- 
Jinitely more sacred, I will declare to you upon 
my oath, if you please, that I believe it to he 
true. And if true, is not that negative proved by 
an alibi toa demonstration ? Or, is it possible to 
resist the force of it? All I shall further say is, 
that, if you were acquainted with the name and 
spirit of the Swrrrs, you would soon acknow- 
ledge, that if a woman of infamous conduct, after 
marriage with any of the family, should have the 
impudence to attempt a visit to one of her hus- 
band’s relations, instead of mecting with favour 
or pity, she would have had the dvor shut in her 
face ; or, if she happened first to get into the hall, 
she would as suddenly be turned out of the house 
with reproach and contempt. And give me leave 
to assure you, thatit is a remark in the Swift 
family, and so delivered down by tradition, that 
no woman of the name was ever known to be 
guilty of misconduct; nor, what is more extra- 
ordinary, was any woman that eyer married into 
the family guilty of the like. r 
2R 
