I should here apologize to the reader for having omitted the portrait of an incompetent and splenetic Reviewer in the first edition of this work; but, as it is never too late to amend, and I cannot violate my own sense of the injustice of giving information in a new edition withheld in the first, by noticing so common a character, I shall here proceed to shew him in his true colours, as part of the grand aggregate I have attempted to describe; merely observing, as a further excuse, in the words of the Critical Review on these Anecdotes: I am "more pleased with faithful delineations of general nature, than with the account of any anomalous productions." Unfortunately for the majority of authors, and most fortunately for the Reviewer, it too often happens that second editions of works are not called for; through this circumstance _Reviews_ of _Reviewers_ are rarely to be met with, and pamphlets refuting their strictures seldom answer any purpose, owing to their confined sale. Happily for myself, an opportunity offers which must have full effect, as the reader of these pages will judge for himself on their merits, and between the assertions of certain Reviewers, and what I have to offer in opposition to them. These self-important _unknown_ persons will find me combating on the side of injured authors, not only on my own account, but on that of other individuals severely and unjustly condemned. I certainly despise them with Dr. Blair; that I do not fear them in my literary pursuits, and have no cause for so doing, my own words, and the approbation of the publick, sufficiently demonstrate. I shall be highly gratified if the following investigation leads one man to judge for himself hereafter, when he finds Reviews of a similar description connected with others of liberality and moderation. We may venture to attribute the introduction of Modern Reviews to Edward Cave eventually; for, although the Gentleman's Magazine never assumed that exclusive character, it certainly suggested the hint of issuing _monthly_ anonymous strictures on new publications[x:A]. All have since professed to commence their career with good humour, talents, liberality, candour, justice, mercy, and, in short, with the exercise of every virtue. Had they _all_ strictly adhered to their professions, Literature would indeed have flourished under the moderate corrections of Criticism, which is necessary to raise a perfect stock for the great demand of England; but, instead of those tempered reproofs, we are often surprised by floods or torrents of censure, which beat to the earth, and completely destroy, every thing within their scope. It is the authors of those torrents that I combat: the impartial and candid Reviewer I honour and admire, in proportion to the dangers and difficulties of his office.