[31] In the _Letters and Memorials of Archbishop Trench_, vol. ii., p. 57, there is a letter bearing upon this point from Mr. Frank Millson, dated 1868, which deserves serious consideration from Vaughan’s forthcoming editors. “I think,” he writes the Dean, “that your supposition that the 1655 edition is the same book as the one of 1650, with a new title-page and additions, can hardly be correct, though I know that Lyte, the editor of Pickering’s reprint, thinks as you do. The preface to the 1655 edition is dated September 30, 1654, and contains this passage” (not given in the _Memorials_) “which seems to me to refer to the fact of a new edition. A comparison of my two copies shows that the 1650 edition consists of half a sheet, title and dedication, and 110 pages. The second edition has title, preface, dedication, motto, the 110 pages of the first edition, with 84 pages of new matter, and a table of first lines. A noticeable thing in the arrangement is that the sheets do not begin with new printer’s marks, as they might be expected to do if the second part were simply new matter added to the first volume, but begin with A, the last sheet of the former volume having ended with G. I am sorry to trouble you with these trifling details; but as Vaughan has long been a favorite author of mine, they have an interest for me, and if they help to show that he was not neglected by readers of his own time, I shall be glad.” [32] Anthologies and cyclopædias nowadays, especially since Dr. John Brown and Principal Shairp drew attention to the Silurist in their pages, are more than likely to admit him. It was not so always. Winstanley, sharp as was his eye, let Vaughan escape him in his _Lives of the Poets_, published in 1687. He is not in the _Theatrum Poetarum_, nor in Johnson’s _Lives_. He is in neither of Southey’s collections. Mr. Palgrave allows him, in _The Golden Treasury_, but a song and a half; Ellis’s sheaf of excellent _Specimens_ of 1811 furnishes eighteen lines of a wedding blessing on the _Best and Most Accomplished Couple_ apologizing for “their too much quaintness and conceit”; and in Willmott’s _Sacred Poets_ Vaughan occupies four pages, as against Crashaw’s thirty-five, Herbert’s thirty-seven, and Wither’s one hundred and thirty-two. But Vaughan fares well in Dr. George Macdonald’s _England’s Antiphon_, and in Archbishop Trench’s _Household Book_. Ward’s _English Poets_, in the second volume, has a conventional selection from him, as has, at greater length, Fields’ and Whipple’s _Family Library of British Poetry_. There is a goodly list entered under Vaughan’s name in Gilfillan’s _Less-Known British Poets_, all chosen from his devotional work. Thirty-seven religious lyrics again adorn the splendid _Treasury of Sacred Song_. Vaughan’s secular numbers yet await their proper bays, although a limited edition of most of them, containing a bibliography, was printed in 1893 by J. R. Tutin of Hull. Mr.