collected editions of Swift’s works, which Faulkner was then preparing.  The first of the London reprints bears no indication of any particular edition; the second has the words “second edition” on the title-page.  In his note to this reprint of the “Narrative,” and in his “Life of Swift,” Scott refers to a Dublin periodical called “The Correspondent” (in which the “Narrative” was first published) as being printed in 1731.  The only edition of this periodical, of which I have either seen or heard, is the copy in the British Museum, and that copy distinctly states:  “Printed by James Hoey in Skinner-Row, 1733.”  If, therefore, this be the first edition of “The Correspondent,” the “Narrative” must be ascribed to the year 1733, and the second edition of “The Plea” to the end of the same, or the beginning of the following year.  I conclude, therefore, first, that the first edition of “The Plea” is that dated “Dublin, 1733;” second, that the undated London reprint with the “Ode” is of the same year; and, lastly, that the undated second London reprint with the “Narrative,” is probably of the year, 1734.  Examining Scott’s text of this tract, one is forced to the conclusion that he could not have seen the Dublin edition of 1733; whereas, its almost exact similarity to the London reprint suggests that he used that.  For purposes of the present text all three editions have been collated with one another, and with those given by Faulkner, Hawkesworth and Scott.

[T.S.]

THE Presbyterians PLEA OF MERIT; In Order to take off the TEST, Impartially Examined.

  [Illustration]

  DUBLIN:

  Printed and fold by GEORGE FAULKNER, in
  Essex-Street, opposite to the Bridge, 1733.

We have been told in the common newspapers, that all attempts are to be made this session by the Presbyterians, and their abettors, for taking off the Test, as a kind of preparatory step, to make it go down smoother in England.  For, if once their light would so shine, the Papists, delighted with the blaze, would all come in, and dance about it.  This I take to be a prudent method; like that of a discreet physician, who first gives a new medicine to a dog, before he prescribes it to a human creature.[1]

[Footnote 1:  See note prefixed to the “Letter on the Sacramental Test.” [T.S.]]

The Presbyterians have, ever since the Revolution directed their learned casuists to employ their pens on this subject; by shewing the merits and pretensions upon which they claim this justice; as founded upon the services they did toward the restoration of King Charles the Second; and at the Revolution under the Prince of Orange.  Which pleas I take to be the most singular, in their kind, that ever were offered in the face of the sun, against the most glaring light of truth, and against a continuation of public facts, known to all Europe for twenty years together.  I shall, therefore, impartially examine the merits and conduct of the Presbyterians, upon those two great events; and the pretensions to favour, which they challenge upon them.