on the Continent during the greater part of the time?

The reviewer, indeed, tells us that "just as Junius concluded his great work, Thomas Lyttelton returned to his father's house, and Chatham was one of the first to congratulate Lord Lyttelton on the event." This was in February 1772; and in the Chatham Correspondence, vol. iv. p. 195., is Lord Lyttelton's letter of thanks in reply. The reviewer would evidently have it inferred, that Thomas Lyttelton had returned home like a prodigal son, after a temporary estrangement, and from a comparatively short distance; but surely, had the volume of Poems been referred to, it might or rather must have occurred to a candid inquirer, that in February 1772 Thomas Lyttelton returned from his travels on the Continent, after an absence of nearly three years! But, perhaps, the authenticity of the Poems may at once be boldly denied? Is this the case? Chalmers certainly includes them with the Letters, as having been "disowned" by Lord L.'s executors; but says, "as to the Poems, they added, 'great part whereof are undoubtedly spurious.'" It is certain, therefore, that some of the Poems are genuine; and it is a pity that the exceptions were not specified, as the discussion might then have been confined within narrower limits. The editor of the Poems, in his address "To the Reader," writes thus in vindication of them:

"There is scarcely a line in the collection which does not bear testimony of its origin; the places and dates are also strong corroborations to such of his friends as he corresponded with on his last journey across the Alps. His style was elegant, and his ideas so animated, that spurious productions would be immediately detected."

This is the testimony of one who "had the honour of his friendship, which terminated only with his death," and is not to be lightly rejected.^[3] My own conviction is in favour of the authenticity of the whole; but, at all events, I shall be able to offer undoubted evidence as to the genuineness of part of the volume, and additional proof that the author was abroad at the precise time when, if he were Junius, he must have resided in this country. By Thomas Lord Lyttelton's will (dated Oct. 30, 1777), he appointed as his executors his brother-in-law Arthur Viscount Valentia, his uncle William Henry Lord Westcote, and Wilson Aylesbury Roberts of Bewdley. To the latter he left all his "letters, verses, speeches, and writings," with directions that, if published, it should be for his sole emolument. The important Query therefore at once arises, what became of these manuscripts, and were they destroyed or preserved?

The above Mr. Roberts was an intimate personal friend; and from his local influence as bailiff and deputy-recorder of Bewdley, had no doubt contributed towards Thomas Lyttelton's return for that borough in 1768. His son continued to keep up a close connexion with the Valentia family at Arley Hall^[4]; and this fact, coupled with the close proximity of Bewdley, Arley, and Hagley, and the circumstance of the co-executorship of Lord Valentia and Mr. Roberts, would make us naturally look to the library at Arley as a not unlikely place of deposit for Thomas Lyttelton's papers. This is not mere conjecture, and brings me immediately to the point at issue: for, at the sale of the Valentia Library at Arley Castle, in December last, a manuscript volume made its appearance in a lot with others thus designated:

"Original Diary of Travels [of Lord Valentia] 4 vols.; Five Memorandum Books of Journeys and Travels; also Two Old Folio Volumes of Original Poetic Pieces."

One of the folio volumes thus catalogued subsequently came into my hands, and is evidently one of the manuscripts left by Thomas Lord Lyttelton's will to the care of Mr. Roberts, since it consists wholly of pieces in verse and prose of his composition, written either in his own hand, as rough draughts, or copied (apparently by a female scribe) and afterwards corrected by himself. Among the poetry in this MS. I find the greater part of the long poem printed in the edition of 1780, p. 1., entitled "The State of England in the year 2199," which is without date in the MS., but in the edition bears date March 21, 1771; as likewise the "Invitation to Miss Warb[u]rt[o]n," edit. p. 35., which appears in the MS. without any name; and the "Extempore Rhapsody, March 21, 1771," edit. p. 37., also undated in the MS., but which supplies the name of "Yates," expressed in the edition by asterisks; and also six lines at the end, which were omitted in the edition on account of their indecency. There are several variations in the manuscript, which prove that some other copy was followed by the printer; and many typographical errors in the edition may hence be corrected. Besides these poems, the following pieces constitute the chief contents of this manuscript volume:

Draughts of four letters written by Thomas Lyttelton from Lyons, the first of which is dated September 10, 1769.

Heads of a series of Dialogues, in imitation of "Dialogues of the Dead," by his father George, first Lord Lyttelton.

Poetical Fragments, imitated from Lucretius.

Two letters addressed by Thomas Lyttelton to his father; and a third to "Dear George," probably his cousin George Edward Ayscough.

Some Latin lines, not remarkable for their delicacy.

Political letter, written from Milan, by Thomas Lyttelton; in which indignant notice is taken of the commital of Brass Crossby, Lord Mayor, which took place in March, 1771.

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