1802.] 
from 2 Cor. v. 19. that affociation ap- 
pears to have confifted only of Paul, Sil- 
vanus, and Timotheus. Having once 
ufed the firft perfon plural to fignify the 
whole delegated triumvirate, he could not 
ufe it with propriety, when, through any 
accidental feparation, the narration does 
not concern all the three united. Accords 
ingly, when the magiftrates of Philippi, 
“contemning or commiferating the youth 
of Timotheus, had feparated the members 
of the affociation, by arrefting, punifhing,y 
and imprifoning only Paul and Silas; he 
again ufes the third perfon when {peaking 
of himfelf, and continues, for the fame 
reafon, to do fo in the two next chapters ; 
after which, the hiftory concerning Paul 
alone, the auther had no occafion to {peak 
of himfelf at all till Ch. xx. where, hav- 
ing exprefsly told us, that Timothy left 
the original affociation, and joined another 
party of St. Paul’s companions on. their 
return to Afia, he again adopts the firft 
perfon plural, which could then be under- 
{tood to mean only Pauland himfelf; and 
as he became, from that time, for a con- 
ftancy, fingly affociated tothe Apoftle, he 
continues to {peak in the fame perfon to 
the end of the hiftory. In this manner, 
Sir, it appears to me to bea firmly efta- 
blithed fa&t, that Silas, whofe hiftory he 
himfelf hath given us, hath declared him- 
felf to be the author of both the books 
faid to have been written by St. Luke. 
Since Luke and Silas are in thetr meaning 
fynonimous, if they really mean the fame 
perfon, the change of the Jaft name for the 
firf{ may, from the circumftances of the 
times atter the Hiftory of the Acts was 
written, be ealily and naturally accounted 
for. But if they denote different perfons, 
notwithftanding the implicit deference fo 
long and generally paid to the ipfi dixerunt 
of the Fathers, to borrow a phrafe from 
Hamlet, I would take the author’s word 
againit theirs for a thoufand pounds. 
Lympfion, Epw. EVANSON,. 
Sept. 15 1802. 
a 
To the Editor of the Moythly Magazine. 
SIR, 
Correfpondent in your Magazine of 
laft month, under the fignature of 
P. S. has expreffed a with to Know fome- 
thing about my work, which you were 
cod enough to give notice of in your 
Magazine tor September, 
Of the work which your Correfpondent 
notices in the Magazine for July, 1800, 
Tam wholly ignorant, nor have I heard of 
Mr. Dibdin’s Work on the Claffics. 
379 
its publication. Mize is not an Abridg- 
ment of Harwood, nor can it be confidered 
as at all built upon the planof it: T have 
called it, ** in Part, a Tabulated Arrange- 
ment from Dr. Harwood’s View,’? &c. 
but, I apprehend, very few of its readers 
will conceive it analogous to Dr. Har- 
wood’s work. * Probably ycur Correfpon- 
dent has noticed the infertion of my work 
in your Magazine for Oober, as al- 
ready publifbed. 
Permit me, Sir, through the medium of 
your refpectable Magazine, to correct an 
error which has taken place relating to 
the London publifhers of the work :—By 
two or three London papers, it has ap- 
peared, as if Davyer only was the pub- 
lifher ; whereas, in faét, my principal pub- 
lithers(and who have a larger intereft in the 
work) are Egerton, Faulder, Payne, Rabine 
fous, 8c. &c. Tt is but due to thefe gen- 
tlemen, that this faét fhould be made pub- 
lic; and I know not how I could have 
embraced a more feafonable opportunity of 
doing it, than by trefpaffing on your kindnefs 
in caufing this letter to be inferted in your 
Magazine. 
Gloucefter, 
OG. 5, 1802. 
T. F. Dippin. 
eR bi 
To the Editor of the Monthly Magazime. 
SIR, 
OVEMBER 1, 1801, p.285. Cu- 
riofus is informed, that the author 
of Peter Wilkins was Robert Paltock, of 
Clement’s Inn; alfo, that the prefent was 
not the author’s original title, that being 
Peter Pantile, or fomething like it, which 
the bookfellers objected to, and it was re~ 
named into the prefent title. I cannot 
help wondering, that it is not re-publifh- 
ed, although merely a work of fancy 3 
yet I think, the plates alone would re- 
commend it, being all engraved by Boi- 
tard, better known in Spence’s Poly 
Metis. 
Feb. 22, 1802. LiBERNATUS.~ 
a 
othe Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SiR, 
AVING frequently derived much 
information refpecéting what is go- 
ing forward in the {cientific and literary 
world, from your publication, I generaily 
turn over itsepages with attention: it was 
therefore natural, that I fhould be much 
ftruck with the curious account of Dr. 
Gall’s Craniofcopical Lefures, which was 
given in your Magazine for October. I 
fuppofe we may rely upon the information 
aftorded 
