Part 10 (1/2)

Hill left behind hie of literary rarities, which it occupied a clear week to sell by auction A them was Garrick's cup, forarden at New Place, Stratford-upon-Avon; this produced forty guineas A small vase and pedestal, carved from the same mulberry-tree, and presented to Garrick, was sold with a coloured drawing of it, for ten guineas And a block of wood, cut from the celebratedplanted by Pope, at his villa at Twickenhauinea

TYCHO BRAHE'S NOSE

Sir David Brewster relates that in the year 1566, an accident occurred to Tycho Brahe, at Wittenberg, which had nearly deprived him of his life On the 10th of December, Tycho had a quarrel with a noble countryius, and they parted ill friends On the 27th of the sa renewed their quarrel, they agreed to settle their differences by the sword They accordingly ht in total darkness In this blind combat, Manderupius cut off the whole of the front of Tycho's nose, and it was fortunate for astronoans were defended by so faithful an outpost The quarrel, which is said to have originated in a difference of opinion respecting their mathematical attainments, ter upon his face a nose of gold and silver, which is said to have forinal Thus, Tycho was, indeed, a ”Martyr of Science”

FOOTE'S WOODEN LEG

George Coler, notes:--”There is no Shakspeare or Roscius upon record who, like Foote, supported a theatre for a series of years by his own acting, in his oritings; and for ten years of the ti! This prop to his person I once saw standing by his bedside, ready dressed in a handsoold buckle, awaiting the owner's getting up: it had a kind of tragic, coenuity of punning upon a Foote in bed, and a leg out of it The proxy for a li a rehable His undressed supporter was the common wooden stick, which was not a little injurious to a well-kept pleasure-ground I re him after a shower of rain, upon a nicely rolled terrace, in which he stumped a deep round hole at every other step he took, till it appeared as if the gardener had been there with his dibble, preparing, against all horticultural practice, to plant a long row of cabbages in a gravel walk”

RIVAL REMEMBRANCE

_Mr Gifford to Mr Hazlitt_

”What we read from your pen, we remember no more”

_Mr Hazlitt to Mr Gifford_

”What we read from your pen, we remember before”

WHO WROTE ”JUNIUS'S LETTERS”?

This question has not yet been satisfactorily answered In 1812, Dr

Mason Good, in an essay he wrote on the question, passed in review all the persons who had then been suspected of writing these celebrated letters They are, Charles Lloyd and John Roberts, originally treasury clerks; Samuel Dyer, a learned man, and a friend of Burke and Johnson; Williale-speech Hamilton;”

Mr Burke; Dr Butler, late Bishop of Hereford; the Rev Philip Rosenhagen; Major-General Lee, ent over to the Americans, and took an active part in their contest with the , Lord Ashburton; Henry Flood; and Lord George Sackville

Since this date, in 1813, John Roche published an Inquiry, in which he persuaded himself that Burke was the author In the same year there appeared three other publications on Junius: these were, the Attempt of the Rev J B Blakeway, to trace them to John Horne Tooke; next were the ”Facts” of Thomas Girdlestone, MD, to prove that General Lee was the author; and, thirdly, a work put forth by Mrs Olivia Wil confident terms:--”Life of the Author of _Junius's Letters_,--the Rev J Wile, Oxford;”

and, like most bold attempts, this work attracted some notice and discussion

In 1815, the Letters were attributed to Richard Glover, the poet of _Leonidas_; and this i the authorshi+p of the Letters to the Duke of Portland, in 1816 In the sauments and Facts,” to show that John Louis de Lolland, was the writer of these anonymous epistles In 1816, too, appeared Mr

John Taylor's ”Junius Identified,” advocating the claims of Sir Philip Francis so successfully that the question was generally considered to be settled Mr Taylor's opinion was supported by Edward Dubois, Esq, formerly the confidential friend and private secretary of Sir Philip, who, in common with Lady Francis, constantly entertained the conviction that his deceased patron was identical with Junius

In 1817, George Chalh Macaulay Boyd to the authorshi+p of Junius In 1825, Mr George Coventry e Sackville was Junius; and triters in America adopted this theory

Thus was the whole question re-opened; and, in 1828, Mr E H Barker, of Thetford, refuted the claie Sackville and Sir Philip Francis, and advocated those of Charles Lloyd, private secretary to the Hon George Grenville[4]

In 1841, Mr N W Simons, of the British Museum, refuted the supposition that Sir Philip Francis was directly or indirectly concerned in the writing; and, in the same year, appeared M Jaques's review of the controversy, in which he arrived at the conclusion that Lord George Sackville composed the Letters, and that Sir Philip Francis was his a the theory of Mr Taylor with that of Mr Coventry