Notes and Queries, Number 193, July 9, 1853: A Medium of Inter-communication for Literary Men, Artists, Antiquaries, Genealogists, etc. — John Shaqi
Notes and Queries, Number 193, July 9, 1853: A Medium of Inter-communication for Literary Men, Artists, Antiquaries, Genealogists, etc.Various
History
Notes and Queries, Number 193, July 9, 1853: A Medium of Inter-communication for Literary Men, Artists, Antiquaries, Genealogists, etc.
Various
Questions and answers -- Periodicals
Fragment of a poem on Superstition, and various other unfinished
poetical scraps.
Private memoranda of expenses.
A page of writing in a fictitious or short-hand character, of which I
can make nothing.
Remarks, in prose, on the polypus, priestcraft, &c.
Poem in French, of an amatory character.
Portion of a remarkable political letter, containing some bitter
remarks by Thomas Lyttelton on the "first minister." He ends thus: "The
play now draws to a conclusion. I am guilty of a breach of trust in
telling him so, but I shall [not] suffer by my indiscretion, for it is
an absolute impossibility any man should divine who is the author of
the letter signed ARUSPEX."
It would appear from the water-mark in the paper of which this MS. is
composed, that it was procured in Italy; and there can be little or no
doubt it was used by Thomas Lyttelton as a draught-book, during his travels
there in 1769-1771; during which period, nearly the whole of the contents
seem to have been written. The evidence afforded therefore by this volume,
comes peculiarly in support of the dates and other circumstances put forth
in the printed volume of _Poems_; and leads us inevitably to the
conclusion, _that it was utterly impossible for Thomas Lyttelton to have
had any share in the Letters of Junius_. He has enough to answer for on the
score of his early profligacy and scepticism, without being dragged from
the grave to be arraigned for the crime of deceit. His heart need not,
according to the reviewer, be "stripped bare" by the scalpel of any
literary anatomist; but he may be left to that quiet and oblivion which a
sepulchre in general bestows. Before I conclude these remarks (which I fear
are too diffuse), I will venture to add a few words in regard to the
signature of Thomas Lord Lyttelton. In the _Chatham Correspondence_, a
letter from him to Earl Temple is printed, vol. iv. p. 348., the signature
to which is printed LYTTLETON, and the editors point out in a note the
"alteration adopted" in the spelling of the name; but it is altogether an
error, for the fac-simile of this signature in vol. iv. p. 29., as well as
his will in the Prerogative Court, prove that he wrote his name
_Lyttelton_, in the same manner as his father and uncle. As to the
resemblance pointed out by the author of the _Review_ between the
handwriting of Thomas Lyttelton and that of Junius, it exists only in
imagination, since there is really no similitude whatever between them.
Some Queries are now annexed, in reference to what has been above
discussed:
1. In what publication or in what form did the executors of Thomas Lord
Lyttelton disown the _Letters_ and _Poems_?
2. Is it known who was the editor of the _Poems_ published in 1780?
3. Can the present representative of the family of Roberts give any farther
information respecting Thomas Lord Lyttelton's manuscripts?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account