of proving him a liar, as you may refer to your book to detect him.

This is what I would do: I would specify in the same magazine, in which he has attacked you, your real words, and those he has imputed to you, and then appeal to the equity of the reader. You may guess that the shaft comes from somebody whom you have censured, and thence you may draw a fair conclusion that you had been in the right to laugh at one, who was reduced to put his own words into your mouth, before he could find fault with them: and having so done, whatever indignation he excited in the reader must recoil on himself, as the offensive passages will come out to have been his own, not yours. You might even begin with loudly condemning the words, or thoughts, imputed to you, as if you retracted them—and then, as if you turned to your book, and found you had said no such thing there as what you was ready to retract, the ridicule would be doubled on your adversary. Something of this kind is the most I would stoop to: but I would take the utmost care not to betray a grain of more anger than is implied in contempt and ridicule. Fools can only revenge themselves by provoking, for then they bring you to a level with themselves. The good sense of your work will support it, and there is scarce a reason for defending it, but by keeping up a controversy, to make it more noticed for the age is so idle and indifferent, that few objects strike, unless parties are formed for and against them. I remember many years ago advising some acquaintance of mine who were engaged in the direction of the opera, to raise a competition between two of their singers, and have papers writ

ten pro and con-for then numbers would go to clap and hiss the rivals respectively, who would not go to be pleased with the music.

Dr. Lort was chaplain to the late archbishop, sir, but I believe is not so to the present, nor do I know whether at all connected with him. I do not even know where Dr. Lort is, having seen him but once the whole summer. I am acquainted with another person, who I believe has some interest with the present archbishop; but I conclude that leave must be asked to consult the particular books, as probably indiscriminate access could not be granted.

I have not a single correspondent left at Paris. The abbé Barthelemi, with whom I was very intimate, behaved most unhandsomely to me after madame du Deffand's death; when I had acted by him in a manner that called for a very different return. He could have been the most proper person to apply to; but I cannot ask a favour of one to whom I had done one, and who has been very ungrateful. I might have an opportunity, perhaps, ere long, of making the inquiry you desire, though the person to whom I must apply is rather too great to employ; but if I can bring it about, I will; for I should have great pleasure to assist your pursuits, though, from my long acquaintance with the world, I am very diffident of making promises that are to be executed by others, however sincerely I am myself,

Sir, your obedient, humble servant,

HOR. WALPole.

IX.

Strawberry-hill, Sept. 30, 1785.

As soon, sir, as I can see the lady my friend, who is much acquainted with the archbishop, I will try if she will ask his leave for you to see the books you mention in his library, of which I will give her the list. I did ask Mr. Cambridge where Dr. Lort is he told me, with the bishop of Chester, and on an intended tour to the Lakes. I do not possess, nor ever looked into, one of the books you specify; nor Mabillon's Acta Sanctorum, nor O'Flaherty's Ogygia. My reading has been very idle, and trifling, and desultory; not that, perhaps, it has not been employed on authors as respectable as those you want to consult, nor that I had not rather read the Deeds of Sinners than Acta Sanctorum. I have no reverence but for sensible books, and consequently not for a great number; and had rather have read fewer than I have than more. The rest may be useful on certain points, as they happen now to be to you, who, I am sure, would not read them for general use and pleasure, and are a very different kind of author. I shall like, I dare say, any thing you do write; but I am not overjoyed at your wading into the history of dark ages, unless you use it as a canvass, to be embroidered with your own opinions, and episodes, and comparisons with more recent times. That is a most entertaining kind of writing. In general, I have seldom wasted time on the origin of nations, unless for an opportunity of smiling at

the gravity of the author, or at the absurdity of the manners of those ages; for absurdity and bravery compose almost all the anecdotes we have of them; except the accounts of what they never did, nor thought of doing.

I have a real affection for Bishop Hoadley. He stands with me in lieu of what are called The Fathers; and I am much obliged to you for offering to lend me a book of his *; but as my faith in him and his doctrines has long been settled, I shall not return to such grave studies, when I have so little time left, and desire only to pass it tranquilly, and without thinking of what I can neither propagate nor correct. When youth made me sanguine, I hoped mankind might be set right. Now that I am very old, I sit down with this lazy maxim, that unless one could cure men of being fools, it is to no purpose to cure them of any folly, as it is only making room for some other. Self-interest is thought to govern every man ; yet is it possible to be less governed by self-interest than men are in the aggregate? Do not thousands sacrifice even their lives for single men ? Is not it an established rule in France that every person should love every king they have in his turn? What government is formed for general happiness? Where is not it thought heresy by the majority to insinuate that the felicity of one man ought not to be preferred to that of millions? Had not I better at sixty-eight leave men to these preposterous notions, than return to bishop Hoadley, and sigh?

* A collection of his small tracts and single sheets, presented by himself to speaker Onslow.

Not but I have a heart-felt satisfaction when I hear that a mind as liberal as his, and who has dared to utter sacred truths, meets with approbation and purchasers of his work. You must not, however, flatter yourself, sir, that all your purchasers are admirers. Some will buy your book, because they have heard of opinions in it that offend them, and because they want to find matter in it for abusing you. Let them; the more it is discussed, the more strongly will your fame be established. I commend you for scorning any artifice to puff your book; but you must allow me to hope it will be attacked.

I have another satisfaction in the sale of your book; it will occasion a second edition. What if, as you do not approve of confuting misquoters, you simply printed a list of their false quotations, referring to the identic sentences, at the end of your second edition. That will be preserving their infamy, which else would perish where it was born : and perhaps would deter others from similar forgeries. If any rational opponent staggers you on any opinion of yours, I would retract it; and that would be a second triumph. I am, perhaps, too impertinent and forward with advice: it is, at least, a proof of zeal; and you are under no obligation to follow my counsel. It is the weakness of old age, to be apt to give advice; but I will fairly arm you against myself, by confessing, that when I was young I was not apt to take any.

Yours most sincerely,

HOR. WALPOLE.