This Mr. Robinson was James Boutineau's son-in-law, the officer of the customs, who inflicted that fatal blow, upon James Otis, which is said to have affected his brain, and compelled him to retire from public life. The issue of that affair is not generally known. Mr. Sabine, in his "American Loyalists," p. 169, says--"the jury assessed £2000 sterling, damages. Boutineau appeared, as attorney, for Robinson, and, in his name, signed a submission, asking the pardon of Otis, who, thereupon, executed a free release for the £2000." The same statement may be found in Allen, and elsewhere. Mr. Benjamin Faneuil, junior, continues thus--"Mrs. Faneuil received a letter, a few days since, from Mrs. Erving (at Bristol). She sends her the prices of provisions, which are much the same they were in Boston, before the troubles came on. * * * * Miss Peggy Hutchinson has been at death's door. * * * * All the rest of us Yankees are well, but growl at each other most confoundedly, for want of money." * * * * "We hope to see you in Boston, in the course of another year." * * * * "Mrs. Faneuil is sitting by me, trying to transmography an old gown. No money to buy new." No. CXXVI. To some persons it has appeared a mystery, how Peter Faneuil, having had but a short lease of life, some two and forty years, should have acquired the "_large and plentiful estate_," that Master Lovell speaks of, in his funeral oration. This mystery is readily explained. He had, for several years, before the death of his uncle, Andrew, been engaged in commerce. As Master Lovell justly observes--"No man managed his affairs with greater prudence and industry." His commercial correspondence proves that his relations were extensive and diversified, though it must be admitted, that _rum, fish, sugar and molasses_, are the chorus, or burden, of the song. It will also appear, that the _large and plentiful estate_, was, probably overrated. Though he had a high sense of commercial honor, no man had a sharper eye for the main chance, as it is called, by money getting men. Let me illustrate both these positions, by extracts--not from "_Peter's letters to his kinsfolks_," but from Peter's letters to his correspondents. He repeatedly scolds Signor Miguel Pacheco de Silva, and Monsieur Sigal, severely, for inattention to his drafts. To S. & W. Baker, of London, who, by reason of the informality of a power to transfer stock, were unsupplied with funds, to meet his drafts, yet paid them, for the honor of the drawer; he writes a letter of cordial thanks, Sept. 7, 1737, in which he says--"_I would not for £500 you had not accepted all those drafts; for, if you had not, it would have been a slur to my character, which I value more than all the money upon earth_."