2. "Not that imparted knowledge doth Diminish learning's store; But books I find, if often lent, Return to me no more. 3. "Read slowly, pause frequently, Think seriously, return duly, With the corners of the leaves not turned down." [+.] _The Substitution of the Letter "I" for "J" in the Names of "John, James, Jane," &c._--Will you permit me to ask the reason of the absurd, and sometimes inconvenient, custom of substituting _I_ for _J_ in MS. spelling of the names John, James, Jane, &c.? If it be correct in MS., why is it not equally correct in print? Let us, then, just see how the names would read in print with such spelling: _Iohn_, _Iames_, _Iane_, &c.! Besides, if it be correct to put _I_ for _J_ in John, it must, of course, be equally correct to put _J_ for _I_ in _Isaac_, and to turn it into _Jsaac_. Indeed, if you happen in a subscription list, or a letter, or anything else intended for the press, to write in the MS. the letter _I_ (which _rightly_ stands as the initial in _that_ case), as the initial of some person named _Isaac_, it is ten to one but the compositor substitutes _J_ in its place in print. I have found Sir _I._ Newton in my MS. thus metamorphosed into Sir _J._ Newton in print. I see in "The Clergy List" more than one name which ought to be _I_, turned into a _J_. Now, Sir, it is folly to pretend that _I_ and _J_ are synonymous letters, or that they express the same meaning, unless we are prepared to allow _Isaac_ to be spelt with a _J_ or _I_, according to the writer's pleasure or caprice. May I, then, be permitted to ask whether it is not high time for every one to _write_ _I_ when he _means_ _I_, and to _write_ _J_ when he _means_ _J_? If compositors would always _print_ MSS. _as they are written in this particular_, the palpable absurdity of putting _I_ for _J_ would, I am sure, soon be evident to all, and soon shame people out of the fashion. What if _U_ and _V_ were treated with as little ceremony as _I_ and _J_? So it once was. Thus T. Rogers, in his work on the Thirty-nine Articles, A.D. 1586, will furnish an example. In it we read: "Such is the estate principally of infants elected _v_nto life, and sal_u_ation, and increasing in yeers." But this old-fashioned mode of spelling has long become obsolete: may the substitution of _I_ for _J_ soon become the same. C. D. _Daniel de Foe._--A son of Daniel shines in Pope's _Dunciad_. Does the following notice refer to a son of that son? It is extracted from an old Wiltshire paper: "On the 2 Jan. 1771, two young men, John Clark and John Joseph De Foe, said to be a grandson to the celebrated author of the _True Born Englishman, &c._, were executed at Tyburn for robbing Mr. F----, the banker, of a watch and a trifling sum of money on the highway."