such villainy, Sir Edward’s servant arriving told Hamilton his master was waiting at the Gray’s Inn coffee-house. They first proceeded to the house of the editor, in whose papers the most flagrant and pointed paragraphs had been inserted. Hamilton, on their way, expressed his surprize that so malignant a calumny should appear in a journal of considerable ability, and that did not require scandal to supply the want of valuable materials; besides, the editor, whom he knew very well, was a man of fair and respectable reputation. Sir Edward observed, that in the vast multiplicity of matter it must be difficult for the editor of a daily newspaper to guard against the insertion of very objectionable passages. Being introduced to the gentleman in question, Sir Edward opened the business as relating to himself; Mr. Hamilton stated its other objects, branches, and connections, and very strongly represented its gross falsehood and malignant tendency. Their purpose in troubling the editor, he said, was to require the name of the author. As the language and manner of both was temperate and polite, the editor conducted himself accordingly: he declared, upon his honour, that the paragraphs of both that and the preceding day had been inserted without his knowledge; that he had been out of town the two last days, and was only arrived that morning. He had seen his paper of the day before at Salt Hill, on his way to town, and was extremely sorry to observe a paragraph alluding to so respectable a member of the senate as Sir Edward Hamden. The paragraph in his paper of to-day was equally unknown to him; in itself it was insignificant, but connected with the advertisement, other paragraphs both in his and other papers, he acknowledged it appeared to be all one chain of defamation. He, himself, protested he did not know whence it proceeded; but as his paper had been one vehicle of the calumny, he would be extremely happy to trace it to its source; and added, that they themselves should dictate, as far as respected his paper, any strictures upon the slander, which they should judge expedient. Convinced that this editor was not intentionally to blame, they accepted of his apology, and Hamilton asked whether he could not see the hand writing in which the calumny had been conveyed. The editor not immediately answering this proposition, our hero observed that he was convinced no writer known to or approved by the editor could have sent such defamatory libels; but an anonymous calumniator was an assassin that attacked in the dark, and ought to be made public. The editor said he had not seen the hand-writing, but that there was a general rule to withhold from persons complaining of a libel, the means of establishing the proof. Hamilton immediately answered to this,--“Mr. Editor, I must take the liberty of observing that you misconceive my meaning; we do not want the hand-writing as the means of establishing the libel. The libel, sir, is printed and published by