The consequence of this wrong step in his majesty was very unhappy; for it put that prince under a necessity of introducing those people called Whigs into power and employments, in order to pacify them. For, although it be held a part of the King's prerogative to refuse passing a bill, yet the learned in the law think otherwise, from that expression used at the coronation, wherein the prince obligeth himself to consent to all laws, quas vulgus elegerit.

Mr. Swift having lived with Sir William Temple some time, and resolving to settle himself in some way of living, was inclined to take orders. But first commenced M. A. in Oxford as a student of Hart Hall on 5th July, 1692. However, although his fortune was very small, he had a scruple of entering into the church merely for support, and Sir William, then being Master of the Rolls in Ireland, offered him an employ of about £120 a-year in that office; whereupon Mr. Swift told him, that since he had now an opportunity of living without being driven into the church for a maintenance, he was resolved to go to Ireland, and take holy orders. In the year 1694 he was admitted into deacon's and priest's orders by Dr. William Moreton, bishop of Kildare, who ordained him priest at Christ Church the 13th January that year. He was recommended to the Lord Capel, then Lord Deputy, who gave him a prebend in the north worth about £100 a-year, called the Prebend of Kilroot in the Cathedral of Connor, of which growing weary in a few months he returned to England, resigned his living in favour of a friend who was reckoned a man of sense and piety, and was besides encumbered with a large family. After which he continued in Sir William Temple's house till the death of that great man, who beside a legacy left him the care, and trust, and advantage of publishing his posthumous writings.

Upon this event Mr. Swift removed to London, and applied by petition to King William upon the claim of a promise his majesty had made to Sir William Temple, that he would give Mr. Swift a prebend of Canterbury or Westminster. Col. Henry Sidney, lately created Earl of Romney, who professed much friendship for him, and was now in some credit at court, on account of his early services to the King in Holland before the Revolution, for which he was made Master-General of the Ordnance, Constable of Dover Castle, Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports, and one of the Lords of the Council, promised to second Mr. Swift's petition; but said not a word to the king. And Mr. Swift, having totally relied on this lord's honour, and having neglected to use any other instrument of reminding his majesty of the promise made to Sir William Temple, after long attendance in vain, thought it better to comply with an invitation, given him by the Earl of Berkeley, to attend him to Ireland, as his chaplain and private secretary; his lordship having been appointed one of the Lords Justices of that kingdom, with the Duke of Bolton and the Earl of Galway, on the 29th June, 1699. He attended nis lordship, who landed near Waterford; and Mr. Swift acted as secre

tary the whole journey to Dublin. But another person had so far insinuated himself into the earl's favour, by telling him that the post of secretary was not proper for a clergyman, nor would be of any advantage to one who aimed only at church preferments, that his lordship after a poor apology gave that office to the other.

In some months the Deanery of Derry fell vacant; and it was the Earl of Berkeley's turn to dispose of it. Yet things were so ordered that the Secretary having received a bribe, the Deanery was disposed of to another, and Mr. Swift was put off with some other church livings not worth above a third part of that rich Deanery; and at this present time, not a sixth namely, the Rectory of Agher, and the Vicarage of Laracor and Rathbeggan in the Diocese of Meath; for which his letters patent bear date the 24th of February following. The excuse pretended was his being too young, although he were then thirty years old.

:

The next year, in 1700, his grace Narcissus Lord Archbishop of Dublin was pleased to confer upon Mr. Swift the Prebend of Dunlaven in the Cathedral of St. Patrick's, by an instrument of institution and collation dated the 28th of September. And on the 22nd of October after, he took his seat in the Chapter.

From this time he continued in Ireland; and on the 16th of February, 1701, he took his degree of Doctor of Divinity in the University of Dublin. After which he went to England about the beginning of April, and spent near a year there.

He appeared at the Dean's visitation on the 11th of January, 1702; at a chapter held the 15th of April; and at the visitation on the 10th of January, 1703. He attended a chapter on the 9th of August, and the visitation of 8th of January, 1704. He was at two chapters held the 2nd of February and the 2nd of March following, and at the visitation the 7th of January, 1705. Also in April, August, and January, 1706; and in April, June, July, and August, 1707. Set sail for England 28th of November, 1707; landed at Darpool; next day rode to Parkgate; and so went to Leicester first.

He was excused at the visitation in 1707 and 1708; and on the 9th of January 1709 expected at the visitation, but did not come. He spent 1708 in England, and set sail from Darpool for Ireland 29th of June, 1709, and landed at Ringsend next day, and went straight to Laracor. Was often giddy and had fits this year.

He attended a chapter held the 15th February, 1709; also at a chapter 29th July and 11 August, 1710. Excused at the visitation 8th of January, 1710. He was not in Ireland after this till his instalment as Dean on the 13th of June, 1713. On the 27th of August he nominated Dr. Edward Synge to act in his absence as sub-dean; and came no more to Ireland until after the Queen's death. He set out to Ireland from Letcombe in Berkshire August the 16th, 1714; landed in Dublin the 24th of the same month; and held a chapter on the 15th of September, 1714.

APPENDIX II.

NOTE ON THE TALE OF A TUB

THE Tale of a Tub was first issued in April or May, 1704. During that year three editions appeared (besides those that were pirated, or published in Ireland, where no English copyright was secured by law). In 1705, a fourth edition was issued by John Nutt, who had been the authorized publisher from the first. The demand then fell off, or was met by unauthorized editions: and the next, or fifth, authorized edition was that issued, also by Nutt, in 1710, with the Author's Apology prefixed. After this the copyright seems to have passed into the hands of Benjamin Motte and Tooke. In 1711, I find an unauthorized version, without the Apology: but the sixth and seventh editions appear only in 1724 and 1727. In 1747, there appeared an eleventh edition, published by Bathurst.

The differences between the editions are very slight, except for a few notes, taken from the adverse critiques of Wotton and others, introduced in the fourth and later editions.

A fact so well ascertained as Swift's authorship of the Tale, would not be worth discussion, were it not for the half paradoxical doubt cast on it by Johnson. That doubt clearly arose from Johnson's wish to disparage Swift, by denying the authenticity of his greatest work. But setting aside the overwhelming intrinsic evidence, it may be well to state shortly the proof positive. First, Swift's letter to Tooke (June 29, 1710) is only intelligible as written by the author of the Tale. Secondly, in a list of those of his pieces that are suitable for a miscellany, written in his own hand, the Apology occurs; and if he wrote the Apology, he necessarily wrote the Tale. Thirdly, in the Journal to Stella, he clearly refers to it as you know what" which might help him with his new Tory friends. Fourthly, he treasured amongst his papers a letter from a Quaker in Philadelphia, in which the writer thanked him-truly the strangest thanks that any of his sect ever gave-as the author of the Tale. So generally accepted did the authorship at length become, that Pulteney in a letter to Swift himself (June 3, 1740) actually names the book in some Latin verses, as one of the manifestations of his genius.

66

Seu levis a vacuo fabula sumpta cado.

Lastly, in the period of almost speechless apathy which preceded his death, Swift was heard by Mrs. Whiteway to mutter, as he turned over the leaves of the book, "Good God, what a genius I had when I wrote that book!"

APPENDIX III.

THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE HISTORY OF THE FOUR LAST YEARS OF THE QUEEN

As is the case with several particulars in Swift's life, doubts, proceeding from what was at first a mere suspicion, have been cast on his authorship of this work and these doubts have grown until they gave rise to a positive denial. I must begin the discussion of the subject, by expressing my indebtedness to Mr. Elwin, for the evidence and arguments bearing on it which he has enabled me to adduce.

We know for a certainty, from the published correspondence of Swift, that the work, written long before, was revised and sent to Dr. William King, the Principal of St. Mary's Hall, Oxford, for publication in 1737. The bearer of the MS. was Lord Orrery. Swift was deeply interested in the work but much to his vexation, it was strongly objected to by those who represented the very Ministry whose defence it undertook. Remonstrances came to him from Erasmus Lewis, the old official: from Lord Bolingbroke and from Lord Oxford as representing his father, the special patron of Swift.

This prevented its appearance at the time; but, in 1758, what claimed to be this work was published by Dr. Lucas, into whose hands a transcript had fallen, and who, while professing it worth publication from its interest and ability, was careful to disclaim any sympathy with the opinions it professed; and who, in particular, strives to exaggerate the dangerous interpretation which might be placed on certain casual words. in it.*

The author's preface prefixed to some of the editions, tells us that the treatise was written at Windsor, and that he had resolved to publish it in 1713, but was kept back owing to the alterations desired by Lord Oxford, and Lord Bolingbroke, to which the author refused to submit. This supposes 1712, or early in 1713, as the date of its being written, the narrative beginning in January 1712. Now we know from the Journal, which was not published in 1758, that Swift was at Windsor in September 1712. The supposed forger thus hit upon the truth and he is further corroborated by the account given in Swift's letter to Lord Oxford of June 14, 1737-which was also unpublished in 1758.

This so-called forgery was published in 1758, and received universally as genuine. It attracted much notice.

Dr. King, to whom it had been

against Swift, he would have invented something a little more conclusive of guilt than this careless phrase.

entrusted, lived till 1763: he was a man of letters, yet he published no denial he was a man widely known, yet he said nothing against it, or we should certainly have had his doubts repeated. Lord Orrery had carried over the MS. had read the work; and was a man much inclined to literary talk. Yet he also lived till 1762, and never allowed any denial to escape him. Deane Swift, who was at St. Mary's Hall, and intimate with King, tells us that his cousin handed the MS. about in Ireland. Yet no one amongst all these readers of the MS. ever convicted or accused the publication of being a forgery.

This evidence is in itself surely strong enough and the internal evidence of the piece tells the same way. It is not indeed equal to the great efforts of Swift: no genius is ever equal to himself throughout all his work. But it has conclusive and inimitable marks of Swift's manner in every page and it has no real marks of forgery. Its resemblances to his style are natural: not of the pronounced and forced type which would certainly have appeared had the forger been at work.

But Mr. Elwin has enabled me to adduce another and almost conclusive piece of evidence. It is the following abstract of the history by the historical collector, Dr. Birch, which is amongst his manuscripts in the British Museum.

"June 30, 1742."

"From y manuscript of Dr. Swift's History of the last Parliament of Queen Anne: written at Windsor in 1713.

It begins with the characters of Lord Sommers, Lord Godolphin, Lord Sunderland, Lord Wharton, Lord Cowper, Duke and Duchess of Marlborough, Earl of Nottingham, and Duke of Somerset, and Prince Eugene.

Lord Sommers-a man of strong passions, though a great master of them, he frequently discovered great rage in his countenance, at the same time that his words and the tone of his voice were full of softness-extremely civil in his whole behaviour, even in private conversation, though it appeared there like formality; of excellent parts, well cultivated by polite learning, but had no great relish for conversation, spending his leisure hours in thinking and reading, except when he relaxed himself with an illiterate chaplain, an humble friend, or a favourite domestic.

Lord Godolphin, said to be designed for a trade before he was a page at court; faithful to his master King James II. to a degree beyond many persons, who had much greater obligations; corresponded with his queen, and made little presents to her, with the leave of K. William, though he concealed it from her lest she should be offended, and wrote to her in a style of double entendre, between Love and Respect. Had a turn for gallantry, and would write songs to his mistress with a pencil on a card. Had a passion for the Duchess of Marlborough. Negligent of the public accounts, but not corrupt.

Lord Sunderland received his religion, that is, his indifference for any