Johnston — S/ippo^cd Aulogmj)!! Letter of BUhop Berl'eley. 275 



on a Duke of Ormonde. The first was the period 1703-1707. But at 

 that time, Berkeley was still in Trinity College; in 1703 he was an 

 undergraduate; and in 1707 he gained his Fellowship, while not until 

 1709 was he ordained. This period must therefore he excluded. Then 

 iigain, from 1710 to 1713, a Duke of Ormonde represented the Crown 

 in the Kingdom of Ii'eland. But dui'ing this period Berkeley could not 

 write of himself as in hoth the Academy and the Carlow letters, that 

 he had heen brought out of England by his protector, for he was con- 

 tinuously resident in Dublin from 1700 to 1713. Moreover, to sustain 

 the view of Stock and Praser, that 1721 was the date of Berkeley's 

 chaplaincy, the letters should have mentioned as the Lord Lieutenant, 

 not the Duke of Ormonde, but the Duke of Grafton. 



The other main argument of Dr. Lorenz is this. Both these 

 letters are directed to Robert Nelson in London. The Carlow letter- 

 addresses him as " Deare Brother." Both letters refer to Kelson's 

 wife. "Who was Eobert Nelson that Berkeley should call him brother ? 

 Dr. Lorenz's investigation in this direction has been most conclusive.. 

 The Lord Berkeley who died in 1698 had two sons and several daughters. 

 One daughter was married in 1682 to Robert Nelson, "the pious 

 Robert Nelson," the author of "The Life of Bishop Bull," and of 

 "Festivals and Feasts," who died in 1715. The elder of Lord 

 Berkeley's sons duly succeeded, in 1698, to the father's title. The 

 younger son entered the Church, became a Prebendary of "Westminster 

 in 1687, died in 1694, and his name was — George Berkeley! By 

 assuming that this George Berkeley wrote the Carlow and Academy 

 letters all difficulties disappear. "Deare brother" is but a contraction 

 of " dear brother-in-law." Nelson's wife is specially mentioned ; she 

 was the sister of this George Berkeley. The Duke of Ormonde is now 

 the nobleman of that name who was Lord Lieutenant from 1677 to 

 1685. It may also be mentioned that Professor Fraser, in consequence 

 of his 1721 theory, is forced to describe Robert Nelson as a son, piu-ely 

 hypothetical, of the "pious Robert Nelson." 



So far Dr. Lorenz. In confirmation of his conclusion that these 

 letters were not the composition of George Berkeley the philosopher, 

 the following additional points may be advanced : — 



The George Berkeley of the Academy letter speaks of himself 

 as a " country pastor." Now in 1721, the date to which these letters 

 must be assigned if written by the Idealist, Berkeley might possibly 

 have described himself as a man of letters, he might have written him- 

 self down as a College don, but it would be absolutely impossible for 

 him to assume for himself the character of a " country pastor." Nay 



