ess to conceal that he had
merely allowed Faulkner to reproduce in Ireland a volume which had been
printed in England--a volume over which the Dean had no control, and
which being printed, he knew would inevitably be published.

The artful wording of the very note in which Pope refers to the printed
book betrays his desire to keep the fact out of sight. His statement
could enlighten no one who was previously ignorant. It was not from
choice that he promulgated, however obscurely, the allegation of Mrs.
Whiteway that the work had its origin in London. But he was forced upon
one of two evils, and he selected the least. Mrs. Whiteway knew that the
letters must either have been printed by Pope, or have found their way
to the press by the corruption of those who had access to his papers.
She acquitted Pope, out of courtesy, perhaps, to his own protestations,
and accepted the second conclusion, that the London booksellers had
procured the manuscripts by bribes, though she could hardly have
entertained the serious belief that the Curlls had been at the expense
of purchasing and printing them, for no other purpose than to ship a
solitary copy to Ireland. She was eager to be cleared from any possible
imputation of abusing the trust which devolved on her through the
imbecility of Swift,[144] and her anxiety to absolve herself and the
Dean, is the secret of her son-in-law insisting upon writing a preface
to prove that the traitors must have been in England and not in Ireland.
He alone would have been responsible for the facts and arguments he
adduced, and they would have appeared in the edition of Faulkner, where
they would not have claimed the sanction of Pope. His ignorance could be
no reason why an independent person should not tell what he knew and
believed, and his unwillingness to be justified was in direct opposition
to his conduct through life. It was for a different cause that he
interfered with the execution of the design. Mr. Swift would have
disclosed the fact that the letters of the poet had been returned to him
through Lord Orrery, in 1737, that he had exclusive possession of the
letters of the Dean, that the ground-work of the collection was at
Twickenham, that it had been printed at London, and had come printed to
Dublin. When he insisted upon fulfilling his intention, Pope, to divert
him from it, must have been driven to propose the insertion of the
exculpatory note. He drew it up in a form which would bear one mea