containing this sentence: " Since I had the honour of receiving your Lordship's favour of the 9th of February last, I have taken occasion, so far as a tedious indisposition would allow me, to look over, with particular care, my father's papers and records of correspondence, and I find it mentioned in a very circumstantial manner, that you had complied with Mr. Tweddell's directions, in transmitting the papers and other effects of his late son."" From these words, Lord E. draws the inference that the property must have been transmitted, and that the Tweddell-family knew that it was so. Here we differ with his Lordship. The word "compliance," used by the elder Mr. Tweddell, does not convey to us the meaning which Lord Elgin attaches to it. The act of transmission is not of necessity contemporaneous with a verbal or a written com pliance with a request of such a nature, and we see no reason for supposing that the "compliance" here mentioned was of any other description than a verbal or an epistolary communication. The property in question may be at the bottom of the ocean, may have been lost in re-shipment of cargoes, or in any other way, but we do not believe that any of Mr. Tweddell's connections ever received it, or had authentic advices of its embarkation. Of those parts of Lord Elgin's pamphlet, which argue the improbability of his committing so base an action, and the little advantage that it could have given him, we shall make no other remark than that, his character, as far as we know, having always stood unimpeached as a man of honour, in this light such an action is very improbable indeed; and doubtless any person, who wishes to form a decision on this subject, will take this as no weak evidence in his Lordship's favour. - In the Earl's second pamphlet, or " Postscript to his Letter," several pages are employed in proving that the extent and value of the property saved, and ever in the Ambassador's custody, were much less than the Tweddell-family imagined: but this is a portion of the argument which we have already dismissed, as not relevant to the main object of discussion. Mr. Carlyle, the Professor at Cambridge, parted with Lord Elgin (as did Dr. Hunt) with feelings of hostility; and Mr. Losh describes the former as having said to him, "he thought his Lordship would not take the property in question, because he did not see how he could convert it into money:" which Lord Elgin quotes to prove that it was the opinion of an open enemy " that he would not take the property in question." We think that his Lordship had better have omitted such a reference: it proves nothing any way, and only shews, what few would wish to publish, that much freedom of language has been used respecting him. Dr. Hunt, on the contrary,

trary, in his pamphlet *, concurs with the most material of Lord Elgin's statements; and he expresses his conviction, from sundry circumstances occurring to his memory, that the property was transmitted. The greater part of his narrative is occupied with an explanation of the intimation given by Mr. R. Tweddell, about copies having been taken from his brother's works: a point on which we scarcely touched, and which we shall also pass over here, only adding that Dr. Hunt's account of the business seems by no means unsatisfactory.

Here we beg permission to withdraw from this much-agitated question, having placed the heads of the case, impartially we trust, before our readers: : - at least we can conscientiously declare that on neither side have we purposely omitted the points which we deemed most relevant to the cause of the respective parties.

From all that we have said, it will not surprize the reader to be told, that The Remains of John Tweddell' contain very little to repay the expectation raised by such a title. His letters were never intended by him for the public eye, though, as a series of private correspondence, they evince that elegance of mind, and that purity of heart, for which their author was remarkable: nor, though written while he was abroad, must they be considered as the journal of a traveller under the form of letters; this being so far from the writer's view of them, that we know his journals were kept with wonderful accuracy, while his letters are allowed to flow in an easy desultory stream, natural to the effusions of private intercourse. - Of the only remaining portion of the work, the "Prolusiones Juveniles," our opinions, or rather our eulogies, are already on record+; with our fond anticipations that the then juvenile author would live "to mellow the eloquent fervour of youthful feeling by the more dignified energy of maturity." Nothing, therefore, is left for us but to add a few words on Mr. Robert Tweddell's merits as editor of the pages before us. His biographical memoir, then, the only portion of the volume which has the recommendation of brevity, is confused and unsatisfactory: - it is left to the reader's own judgment to assign what portions of his brother's education he pleases to Mr. Raine, and what to Dr. Parr; - no date is given of his removal to the University, the time of which can be ascertained

* " Narrative of what is known respecting the literary Remains of the late John Tweddell, by Philip Hunt, LL.D." &c. &c. London, Rodwell and Martin. 8vo. pp.47.

† See M. R. New Series, Vol. xii, p. 327, &c.

only. only by a rude guess, from the date of his election to his fel lowship; - a view of his character is abruptly introduced in the narration of the life, which might with effect have been reserved for the close of it; - and fragments of letters interrupt the continuity of the whole. With regard to the correspondence, selection and annotation were the only points in which the Editor could exercise his judgment, and we cannot compliment him on his success in either of these branches of his duty. What he may have omitted, we know not: but he undoubtedly has published much which had better have been suppressed. We allude especially to some letters purely domestic, and a few passages in others, written probably under the influence of accidental petulance of temper, from which the very best of us are not at all times free, and calculated by their publication to wound the feelings of the individuals who may apply them, for which purpose an easy clue is afforded by their author. - As to the notes, many are superfluous, and some absolutely ludicrous, from the importance with which an unnecessary explanation of common things is obtruded on the reader. They shew, however, an industry in the collection of what the Editor deemed necessary illustration, although this necessity is a point on which we are at variance with him. The voluminous appendix betrays a want of compression and arrangement which renders it perplexing to any reader, and nearly fatal to a reviewer. Why the writer should have thrown the statement of his case against Lord Elgin into a prolix and heavy epistolary form, we are at a loss to conceive: but this is a trifling inconvenience, compared to the mode in which he has printed his Appendix to his Appendix, for we actually find such a division, although not gazetted by that title on the top of the pages. In this portion of the volume, we are referred backwards to the corresponding passages, instead of having a forward catchletter, while those passages are under our eye; so that in fact the main work is quoted from the Appendix, instead of the Appendix from the main work. - Of the intemperate language, into which the editor has been betrayed by his disappointments in the attempt to recover his brother's property, we have little doubt that he has himself repented; and we merely observe that it forms a rather strong contrast with the remarkably obsequious tone, (to say the least of it,) with which he addressed Lord Elgin in his correspondence previously to his publication of the volume.

Since the above article was written, an additional publication on the subject of dispute between Lord Elgin and the

Editor of Tweddell's Remains has come to our hands*. The title of it we have given at length in our note; and it is necessary to observe, in limine, that this title by no means fairly represents the contents of the work, since the 'Addenda to the Remains' supply no one additional remains of John Tweddell whatever. We have also very strong objections to the mode and form in which this production has appeared. It seems to have been the author's intention to make the present work a necessary appendage to his larger volume; and, with this view, he has not only printed it in quarto to correspond with the former, but has added an index to the whole work at the end of this auctarium. - It is far from our wish to circumscribe Mr. Robert Tweddell's undoubted right to publish any defence of his own conduct when attacked, or any arraignment of that of others on points in which he is individually concerned: but we really do not see why all present and future purchasers of "Tweddell's Remains" are to be in possession of only an incomplete work, unless they purchase also this fasciculus of criminations and re-criminations; which will necessarily have lost all their interest, when the persons principally concerned in them have disappeared from the stage of worldly controversies.

Yet, however we may object to the method to which Mr. R. Tweddell has resorted on the present occasion, we by no means wish that he had rested altogether silent when attacked either by unfair mis-representation or by unjust imputation. A man cannot always escape from a pamphlet-war by an obstinacy of silence which may be mis-interpreted and distorted by prejudice or design. - The object of the present publication will be most easily ascertained from the author's own summary.

'The following heads comprize the chief points which, in contradiction to the misrepresentations of the parties alluded to, I hope to explain and establish satisfactorily: viz.

The quotation from a letter of mine which has been so ingeniously perverted, and ostentatiously paraded by his Lordship: " that he had transmitted to England the papers, &c. &c." is in no shape or sense attributable to my father, but is actually the declaration of the noble Lord himself. - The charge of disingenuousness in withholding his Lordship's letters, of suppressing, falsifying, mis-stating others, &c. is disproved by fact, and by Lord Elgin's own correspondence, now annexed.- Professor Carlyle never had a particle of Mr. Tweddell's property entrusted to him - never assisted at the opening, examining, drying, or packing of it. 1. Mr.J. S. Smythe did not " decline the custody of the effects on a point of mere official etiquette;" but the reason why he did so was, because Lord E. took immediate possession by affixing his own seal to the packages: this gentleman was not " negligent of Mr. Tweddell's affairs:" is not in any degree the cause of the loss of his effects-is not chargeable with authorship of the "Remains:" but Mr. S. was an eye-witness, and his testimony is competent and credible. - Mr. Nisbet, who was entrusted by Lord E. with a portion of Mr. T.'s costume-drawings, brought them to England, and placed them amongst his Lordship's effects; because he had no instructions to forward them to the Tweddell-family. - As to the Athenian-property, no plunder thereof took place at Athens by the Greek servant or by others-no access to the MSS. was had by Fauvel or by any travellers-no loss of any thing was sustained at the scene of shipwreck, so far at least as appears in evidence. - As to the Thornton-property, it was not damaged by fire or otherwise when delivered to Lord Elgin-this delivery was "in consequence of his Excellency's orders;" and the testimony of Mr. Thornton is that of an honest and unprejudiced man. - The effects of Mr. J. Tweddell in Lord Elgin's hands were really and substantially the whole of his effects; they are exceedingly depreciated both in quantity and quality by his Lordship in contradiction to authentic records. - This property, as has been already shewn, and as his Lordship since has allowed, was not shipped in the "Lord Duncan;" and a more recent theory, which consigns it to the New Adventure, is disproved by existing documents and circumstantial facts. - Dr. Hunt's complaints of my conduct, and other declarations contained in his " Narrative," are futile and unfounded; and the conjoint though differing testimony of himself and Mr. Hamilton prove the transcription of some at least of the MSS.Definitively, therefore, I re-assert the substance of my former statements; namely, that Lord Elgin did authoritatively and irregularly attach the whole of my brother's property-that he suffered a portion of it to be injured for want of timely examination, and afterwards exposed it to the eyes of strangers and the fingers of copyists-that having constituted himself a trustee, he then was negligent of the obligation-that his Lordship never answered any of my father's representations on the subject; notwithstanding repeated enquiries by him or others at his request, during the years 1800, 1801, and part of 1802-and in a word, that Lord E. has never to this day rendered any account which can be deemed satisfactory.'

To many of the points included in this summary we have already adverted. Of the others introduced, the statement relative to Mr. Nisbet is one of the most important; since; although that gentleman left Greece in company with Professor Carlyle, they did not set out on their return together,