r indulgence
cannot justify me in taking; else I would beg to know on what authority
you attribute to Laurence Earl of Rochester[1] the famous preface to
his father's history, which I have always heard ascribed to Atterbury,
Smallridge, and Aldridge.[2] The knowledge of this would be an
additional favour; it would be a much greater, Sir, if coming this way,
you would ever let me have the honour of seeing a gentleman to whom I am
so much obliged.

[Footnote 1: The Earl of Rochester was the second son of the Earl of
Clarendon. He was Lord Treasurer under James II., but was dismissed
because he refused to change his religion (Macaulay's "History of
England," c. 6).]

[Footnote 2: Atterbury was the celebrated Bishop of Rochester,
Smallridge was Bishop of Bristol, and Aldridge (usually written Aldrich)
was Dean of Christchurch, Oxford, equally well known for his treatise on
Logic and his five reasons for drinking--

Good wine, a friend, or being dry;
Or lest you should be by and by,
Or any other reason why--]

_HIS "ROYAL AND NOBLE AUTHORS"--LORD CLARENDON--SIR R. WALPOLE AND LORD
BOLINGBROKE--THE DUKE OF LEEDS._

TO THE REV. HENRY ZOUCH.

STRAWBERRY HILL, _Oct._ 21, 1758.

Sir,--Every letter I receive from you is a new obligation, bringing me
new information: but, sure, my Catalogue was not worthy of giving you so
much trouble. Lord Fortescue is quite new to me; I have sent him to the
press. Lord Dorset's[1] poem it will be unnecessary to mention
separately, as I have already said that his works are to be found among
those of the minor poets.

[Footnote 1: Lord Dorset, Lord Chamberlain under Charles II., author of
the celebrated ballad "To all you ladies now on land," and patron of
Dryden and other literary men, was honourably mentioned as such by
Macaulay in c. 8 of his "History," and also for his refusal, as
Lord-Lieutenant of Essex, to comply with some of James's illegal
orders.]

I don't wonder, Sir, that you prefer Lord Clarendon to Polybius[1]; nor
can two authors well be more unlike: the _former_ wrote a general
history in a most obscure and almost unintelligible style; the _latter_,
a portion of private history, in the noblest style in the world. Whoever
made the comparison, I will do them the justice to believe that they
understood bad Greek better than their own language in its elevation.
For Dr. Jortin's[2] Erasmus, which I have very nearly finished, it has
given me a good opinion of t