That many persons wrote single papers or letters in the SPECTATOR, whose names are now irrecoverable, may be easily supposed. Mr. COLE, in his MSS. in the British Museum, mentions a Mr. WESTERN, father of THOMAS WESTERN of Rivenhall, in Essex, (which last died in 1766,) as the author of a few numbers; and I learn from a recent letter in the Gentleman's Magazine, that the Rev. JOHN LLOYD, M. A. who published a poem entitled "GoD," about the year 1724, calls himself, in the title-page, "Author of several of the Spectators."

The paper in which the above compliment is paid to Mr. INCE, is the concluding one of the seventh volume of the original second edition, to which STEELE signs his name, and in which he introduces the names of the principal writers. The SPECTATOR was then laid down about a year and a half, in which interval the GUARDIAN, and its sequel the ENGLISHMAN, were published. The time when the SPECTATOR was revived, Dr. JOHNSON thought "unfavourable to literature," as "the succession of a new family to the throne filled the nation with anxiety, discord, and confusion." The attempt, however, was made, (for which a whimsical reason is assigned in No. 632) and not unsuccessfully with respect to merit, but the sale was not so extensive as that of the preceding papers. They now came out only three times a week, and STEELE, it is thought, had no concern it it. ADDISON wrote above a fourth part, and conducted the whole with EUSTACE BUDGELL, whose share, if he had any, has not been ascertained. There are none of the papers lettered at the close, as in the preceding volumes, and ADDISON's contributions are marked in this edition upon the authority of Mr. TICKELL, who collected them in his works.

In Dr. JOHNSON's opinion, this volume is more valuable than any of those which went before it. There is certainly more variety of style and manner in it, and perhaps of subject; but in general the papers are less lively, and have been less popular. Why the SPECTATOR was revived after the GUARDIAN had closed, and why it ends abruptly with a paper from a stranger, are questions which cannot now be resolved. There is some reason to think this eighth volume was a bookseller's project, who perhaps employed BUDGELL as editor, and engaged ADDISON as a writer.

Of the great success of the SPECTATOR, both in papers and in volumes, we have unequivocal evidence from STEELE'S declaration, in No. 555, that an edition of the reprinted volumes, of above "nine thousand each book," were then sold off, such was the laudable avidity in those days for moral instruction and elegant amusement. The tax on each half-sheet brought into the stampoffice, one week with another, above 20l. per week, notwithstanding it at first reduced the sale to less than half the number that was usually printed before the tax was imposed. This stampduty took place, Aug. 1, 1712, and every single half-sheet paid a half-penny to the queen. "Have you seen," says Swift, "the stamp? Methinks the stamping is worth a half-penny. The OBSERVATOR is fallen; the MEDLEYS are jumbled together with the Flying Post; the EXAMINER is deadly sick; the SPECTATOR keeps up and doubles its price." This increased the price of each paper to two-pence, the price, as we shall see afterwards, of periodical papers*, consisting of three half sheets elegantly printed on fine paper,

* Rambler, Adventurer, &c.

while the TATLERS, SPECTATORS, and GUARDIANS, consisted of a single half-sheet, printed on the vilest paper of which any specimens have descended to posterity.

But the exact amount of the daily sale has been, with some, the subject of much controversy. Dr. JOHNSON, estimating by the 207. paid to the revenue weekly, gives 1680 for the daily number. One of the annotators thinks that this calculation is not made with the Doctor's usual accuracy; that it is probable we ought to read above "297. instead of above 201." in STEELE'S concluding number; or, that admitting the other sum, it ought to be considered that the greatest number of the SPECTATORS were actually published before the duty, on which the calculation rests, took place. It is added on the express testimony of Dr. FLEETWOOD, in a letter to the then Bishop of SALISBURY, that the daily sale amounted to fourteen thousand.

Whatever the precise number, was, it is cer tain that it far exceeded that of any preceding or contemporary work of the kind, and, it is almost needless to add, of any which has followed. The sale however, was probably not steady; some papers, we are assured, were bought up with more eagerness than others, and to this, and to the frequent reading and careless handling of the original publications, it is no doubt owing that a perfect copy can so rarely be met with, notwithstanding the vast number sold.

It was reprinted in octavo like the TATLER, at the price of one guinea per volume, and other editions at inferior prices were soon multiplied.

In opposition to this we have ADDISON's declaration, that three thousand were sold daily about the commencement of the work. See No. 10.

It was also translated into French, but with the omission of some papers, and parts of papers, which it is unnecessary to specify to any one acquainted with the work and the state of France at that period.

As there was a spurious TATLER, there was likewise an attempt to impose on the public by a spurious continuation of the SPECTATOR, begun Monday, Jan. 3, 1715, and concluded Monday, Aug. 3. It was published on Mondays and Fridays, and consists of fifty-nine numbers, afterwards republished in 12mo. as "The SPECTATOR, volume ninth and last." My copy adds, "The fifth edition. Printed for W. Mears, at the Lamb, without Temple Bar, 1726."* It is far inferior to the spurious TATLER, and indeed to any imitation whatever, of the works of STEELE and ADDISON.

An humble wish to gratify the public induced some person to publish, in 1712 and 1713, a little volume, entitled, "The mottos of the TATLERS and SPECTATORS translated into English." This extends to the end of the seventh volume of the SPECTATOR. The translations are in general very poorly executed.t ADDISON's acquaintance with the Roman classics, for it is not clear that he was eminent as a Greek scholar, enabled him to select very apposite lines for his various subjects. Dr. WARTON remarks in his "Essay on

One of the principal writers of this volume is said to have been Dr. GEORGE SEWELL, of whom some account has been given in the preface to the Tatler.

The Rev. THOMAS BROUGHTON, one of the original writers of the Biographia Britannica, is said to have translated the mottos of the SPECTATOR, GUARDIAN, and FREEHOLDER, as we now find them. Those of the TATLER were corrected and altered for the edition, with notes print ed in 1786, cr. 8vo. 6 vols.

the Genius of POPE," that in applying to the poetical remains of Sappho the two lines of Phadrus, contained in the motto of No. 223, ADDISox has hit upon one of the most elegant and happy applications that perhaps ever was made from any classic author. It may be necessary to inform some readers, that the authors of these papers, as well as their successors, occasionally changed a word or two in a classical quotation, that it might become more apposite to their subject. The translations in the latter editions are entirely new, and selected from the best poets, but no translations of any kind were printed with the volumes for many years after their first publication.

Since the first edition of this Preface appeared, I have been favoured with some information respecting the original of Sir ROGER DE COVERLEY'S perverse widow, which ought not to be withheld, although it might have been placed with perhaps more propriety among the annotations. This information was lately communicated, by the Rev. DUKE YONGE of Plympton, to my excellent and learned friend Mr. ARCHDEACON NARES, to whom I am immediately indebted for a copy.

"My attention," says Mr. YONGE, "was first drawn to this subject by a very vague tradition in the family of Sir THOMAS CRAWLEY BOEVEY, Of Flaxley Abbey in Gloucestershire, that Mrs. CATHERINE BOEVEY, widow of WILLIAM BOEVEY, Esquire, and who died January 21, 1726, was the original from whence the picture was drawn. She was left a widow at the early age of 22, and by her portrait (now at Flaxley Abbey, and drawn at a more advanced period of her life), appears to have been a woman of a handsome dignified fi