It is true that "amongst the letters attributed to Junius, and, in the opinion of Dr. Good, most certainly his production, is one signed Atticus," {323} which your correspondent proceeds to quote, adding that it is "believed to be the first which appeared signed Atticus." This is really a little "too bad." It is known, and ought to have been known to your correspondent before he intermeddled, that Good, though he wrote so confidently in public, had "most certainly" very great doubts in private; that others who have examined the question have no doubt at all; and have, indeed, adduced such strong proofs against Good's conjectures, that the gentleman now engaged in producing a new edition of Good's work speaks, in the first volume, the only one yet published, of Good's "unhesitating affiliation" of these letters, and announces his intention of offering hereafter "strong proof" that the letters signed Poplicola, _Atticus_, and others, "_were not written by Junius_." That there may be persons who _believe_ that the letter quoted was the first which appeared signed Atticus, I cannot deny; but all who are reasonably informed on the subject _know_ that it is not so;--know, as stated not long since in the _Athenaeum_, that letters signed Atticus appeared in the _Public Advertizer_ from 1766 to 1773--possibly before and after--and that within that period there were at least thirty-seven letters published, from which Good was pleased to select four. W. * * * * * WHITE HART INN, SCOLE.