blisher's address, 13 pages. It is printed for T. Cooper, at the Globe,
in Paternoster Row. The second edition in 1748, 8vo., contains publisher's
address, 12 pages; the work itself 291 pages.

I find no difference between the two editions, except that in the first the
title is _The Memoirs of Sigr. Gaudentio di Lucca_; and in the second, _The
Adventures of Sigr. Gaudentio di Lucca_; and that in the second the notes
are subjoined to each page, while in the first they follow the text in
smaller type, as _Remarks of Sigr. Rhedi_. The second edition is--

"Printed for W. Innys in Paternoster Row, and R. Manby and H.S. Cox on
Ludgate Hill, and sold by M. Cooper in Paternoster Row."

With respect to the author, it must be observed that there is no evidence
whatever to justify its being attributed to Bishop Berkeley. Clara Reeve,
in her _Progress of Romana_, 1786, 8vo., mentions him as having been
supposed to be the author; {328} but her authority seems only to have been
the anonymous writer in the _Gentleman's Magazine_, vol. xlvii. p. 13.,
referred to by your correspondent. The author of an elaborate review of the
work in the _Retrospective Review_, vol. iv., advocates Bishop Berkeley's
claim, but gives no reasons of any validity; and merely grounds his
persuasion upon the book being such as might be expected from that great
writer. He was, however, at least bound to show some conformity in style,
which he does not attempt. On the other hand, we have the positive denial
of Dr. George Berkeley, the bishop's son (Kippis's _Biog. Brit._, vol.
iii., addenda to vol. ii.), which, in the absence of any evidence to the
contrary, seems to be quite sufficient.

In a letter signed C.H., _Gent. Mag._, vol. vii. p. 317., written
immediately on the appearance of the work, the writer observes:--

"I should have been very glad to have seen the author's name prefixed
to it: however, I am of opinion that it its very nearly related to no
less a hand than that which has so often, under borrowed names,
employed itself to amuse and trifle mankind, in their own taste, out of
their folly and vices."

This appears to point at Swift; but it is quite clear that he could not be
the author, for very obvious reasons.

A correspondent of the _Gent. Mag._, who signs his initials W.H. (vol. lv.
part 2. p. 757), states "on very good authority" that the author was--

"Barrington, a Catholic priest, who had chambers in Gr