"Oct. 28. You are a pleasant fellow; but don't fancy you have escaped me. You will think it odd, but I will assure you that on the first reading of the pamphlet, I was as demonstratively certain of the author, as if I had stood behind him, and seen his trenchant quill move desperately along contrary to all the rules of good penmanship. I knew the hand that defended cloven-tongues, had no cloven-foot, though he supposed he walked invisible." WARBURTON p. 353.

"Nov. 8. I will not tell you how much you have obliged me in this correction of Leland. You never wrote anything in your life, in which your critical acumen and elegant manner more shone. About a fortnight or three weeks ago, our friend Col. Harvey called on us for a few days in his way to Ireland, whither he is going to take possession of a regiment of horse, which the King has given him instead of his dragoons. I put the pamphlet into his hands, only telling him that I was not in the secret of its writing; but that, whoever was the author, he would see it was one of the finest pens in England. I desired him to get it reprinted in Dublin, which he said he would do with the greatest satisfaction and pleasure. This I think but a proper return for Leland's favour in London." WARBURTON p. 353.

"March, 1765. You have had a curiosity, which I never shall have, of reading Leland's Second Thoughts. I believe what you say; they are as nonsensical, as his First." WARBURTON p. 359.

The reader will observe that Hurd has suppressed all which he had written to Warburton about Leland, except the following notice:

"July 18, 1768. After all, if I am defective in this

quality (of modesty,) you must, in part, ascribe it to yourself, who have contributed so much to make me vainer than I ought to be: witness what you say of your portico-reading in the close of this Letter, which I am now answering. But you suffer, I doubt, for your complaisance; for was not the rheumatic pain you complain of, the fruit of regaling over my Anti-Leland in fresco ?" P. 418.

The reader, who is conversant with the compositions of Dr. Leland, in which he triumphed over Warburtonian sophistry and Hurdian acumen, and who is acquainted with the Preface and the Dedication of Dr. Parr in the Tracts by Warburton and a Warburtonian, cannot fail to be highly amused with the language of Warburton in the above-quoted extracts from his correspondence with Hurd.

*

* It should seem from Hurd's correspondence with Warburton, that the real reason, which induced Hurd to suppress the Tracts by Warburton, (which were republished by Dr. Parr,) was the abuse, which Warburton's enemies had during his life, about the years 1756 and 1757, poured out on these earliest productions of his pen as very inferior compositions,—as much below the standard of the Divine Legation, as far beneath those pretensions to great intellectual superiority, claimed for him by his friends. Hurd did not wish, by republishing these tracts in his collection of Warburton's Works, to revive this abuse, and to provoke the surviving enemies of Warburton to offer indignities to his remains. He felt a soreness on this subject, and determined to be wary. It is evident from Hurd's account, that Warburton himself was much annoyed at the comparison, which these enemies were accustomed to make between these early and his later compositions; these enemies had discovered this mode of annoying him, and their perseve

VII. LOWTH.

"April 5, 1753. Your account of Lowth's book is very curious. I will cast an eye on some of the chapters, when I have leisure; and may possibly return some of his favours." WARBURTON p. 132.

"Jan. 18, 1757.

The contents of the enclosed paper is for a Note at p. 484, of the second Volume of the

rance in annoying him was proportioned to the real anxiety, which they had ascertained to be felt by him. It should seem too that Edmund Curl, the bookseller, had republished the book, either because he had been instigated by these enemies, or because great enquiry had been made for the book :

"Dec. 30, 1756. For the first years of my residence in the University, when I was labouring through the usual courses of logic, mathematics, and philosophy, I heard little of your name and writings and the little I did hear, was not likely to encourage a young man, that was under direction, to enquire further after either. In the mean time I grew up into the use of a little common sense; my commerce with the people of the place was enlarged. Still the clamours increased against you, and the appearance of your second Volume opened many mouths. I was then Bachelor of Arts; and, having no immediate business on my hands, I was led, by a spirit of perverseness, to see what there was in these decried volumes, that had given such offence. To say the truth, there had been so much apparent bigotry and insolence in the invectives I had heard, though echoed, as was said, from men of note amongst us, that I wished, perhaps out of pure spite, to find them illfounded. And I doubt I was half-determined in your favour, before I knew anything of the merits of the case. The effect of all this was, that I took the Divine Legation down with me into the country, where I was going to spend the summer of,

Divine Legation, where I enter upon the book of Job. I occasionally take notice of some of my answerers as I go along, in the Notes, chiefly Grey and Peters. As for Worthington, Lowth, Garnet, Chappelow etc., I am entirely silent on their chapters." WARBURTON p. 234.

"Nov. 14, 1765. All you say about Lowth's pamphlet, breathes the purest spirit of friendship. His wit,

I think, 1741, with my friends. I there read the three Volumes at my leisure, and with the impression I shall never forget. I returned to College the winter following, not so properly your convert, as all over spleen and prejudice against your defamers. From that time, I think, I am to date my friendship with you. There was something in your mind, still more than in the matter of your book, that struck me. In a word, I grew a constant reader of you. 1 enquired after your other works. I got the Alliance into my hands, and met with the Essay on Portents and Prodigies, which last I liked the better, and still like it, because I understood it was most abused by those, who owed you no good will. Things were in this train, when the Comment on Pope appeared. That Comment, and the connexion I chanced then to have with Sir Edward Lyttleton, made me a poor critic and in that condition you found me. : I became, on the sudden, your acquaintance; and am now happy in being your friend. You have here a slight sketch of my history; at least, of the only part of it, which will ever deserve notice." HURD p. 214.

Jan, 9, 1757. But I have more to say to your quondamauthorship. You have a right to undervalue your first attempts in literature as much as you please. The so much greater things you have done since, are your warrant for so doing. But I should not be very patient of this language from any other. The truth is, and I am not afraid to say it roundly to any man, not one of all the wretches, that have written or rail against

and his reasoning, God knows, and I also, (as a certain critic said once in a matter of the like great importance,) are much below the qualities, that deserve those names. But the strangest thing of all, is this man's boldness in publishing my Letters without my leave or knowledge. I remember several long Letters passed between us; and I remember you saw the Letters. But I have so totally

you, and who affect to find great consolation in this first escape of your pen, was ever able in the acme of his parts and judgment to produce anything half so good. Mr. Balguy and I read it together some years ago, and we agreed there was the same ingenuity of sentiment, and vigour of expression, as in your other works; in a word, that it was a fine effort of genius, not yet formed indeed and matured, but even in this juvenility portending plainly enough what you were one day to be capable of. I have read it again very lately, and I think of it just the same; so that I almost blame your anxiety about Curl's edition. It was not worth, perhaps, your owning in form; but your reputation was not concerned to suppress it. One sees in it your early warmth in the cause of virtue and public liberty, and your original way of striking out new hints on common subjects. There are many fine observations up and down; amongst which, that in the Dedication, on the characters of the three great Romans, which you have since adopted in the Notes on Pope, is admirable. In running it over this last time, I find I have stolen a hint from you, which I was not aware of. It is what I say of the Apes of Plato and Aristotle, in p. 79, of the Commentary on the Epistle to Augustus, taken from what you say in p. 9, on that subject. I should not have said so much on this matter, (for I am as much above the thought of flattering you, as you are above the want of it,) but that I think your shyness in acknowledging this little prolusion of your genius, gives a handle to your low, malignant cavillers, which you need