mporium near the mouth of the Indus. Peacock
seems to give undue weight to the fact, that the Tibetans have a copious
nomenclature for high numbers: their arithmetic, doubtless, came with
their alphabet, and the Buddhist legends from India.

F.Q.

_Junnius and Sir Philip Francis._--A few years ago, an aged intelligent
person named Garner was living at Belgrave, near Leicester. I have heard
him say that, when he was a farm bailiff to Lord Thanet, at Sevenoaks,
in Kent, Sir Philip Francis was a frequent visitor there, and had a
private room set apart for literary occupation. On one occasion, when he
(Mr. Garner) was riding over the farm with Sir Philip Francis, the
former alluded to one of the replies to Junius, by a clergyman who had
been the subject of the "Great Unknown's" anonymous attacks, adding,
"They say, Sir Philip, you are Junius." Sir Philip did not deny that he
was the man, but simply smiled at the remark. This, and other
circumstances coupled with the fact of Sir Philip's frequent visits to
the house of so noted a politician as Lord Thanet, rendered Mr. Garner a
firm believer in the identity of Sir Philip and Junius to the end of his
days.

JAYTEE.

_Jews under the Commonwealth_ (Vol. i., pp. 401. 474.; vol ii., p.
25.).--There is a confirmation of the story of the Jews being in treaty
for St. Paul's and the Oxford Library in a passage in Carte's _Letters_,
i. 276, April 2, 1649:--

"They are about demolishing and selling cathedral churches. I
hear Norwich is designed already, and that the Jews proffer
600,000l. for Paul's and Oxford Library, and may have them for
200,000l. more."

CH.

"_Is anything but," &c._--As your work seems adapted, amongst other
subjects, to check the introduction into our language of undesirable
words, phrases, and forms of speech, I would call the attention of your
readers to the modern phrases, "is anything but," and the like, which
have lately crept into use, and will be found, in many (otherwise)
well-written books.

I read the phrase "is anything but," for the first time, in Napier's
_Peninsular War_; where it struck me as being so much beneath the
dignity of historical composition, and at the same time asserting an
impossibility, that I meditated calling the author's attention to it.
The not unfrequent use of the same phrase by other writers, since that
time, has by no means reconciled me to its use.

In the _Edinburgh Review_ for January last