that my doing so, shall be taken well, for I confess it has a peculiar insolence in it against His Majesty’s person which (as blasphemous words against God) are scarce fit to be repeated.”

In the last of the series (of date June 13, 1718), Defoe is able to assure his employers that “he believes the time is come when the journal, instead of affronting and offending the Government, may many ways be made serviceable to the Government; and he has Mr. M. so absolutely resigned to proper measures for it, that he is persuaded he may answer for it.”

Following up the clue afforded by these letters, Mr. Lee has traced the history of Mist’ Journal under Defoe’s surveillance.  Mist did not prove so absolutely resigned to proper measures as his supervisor had begun to hope.  On the contrary, he had frequent fits of refractory obstinacy, and gave a good deal of trouble both to Defoe and to the Government.  Between them, however, they had the poor man completely in their power.  When he yielded to the importunity of his Jacobite correspondents, or kicked against the taunts of the Whig organs about his wings being clipped—­they, no more than he, knew how—­his secret controllers had two ways of bringing him to reason.  Sometimes the Government prosecuted him, wisely choosing occasions for their displeasure on which they were likely to have popular feeling on their side.  At other times Defoe threatened to withdraw and have nothing more to do with the Journal.  Once or twice he carried this threat into execution.  His absence soon told on the circulation, and Mist entreated him to return, making promises of good behaviour for the future.  Further, Defoe commended himself to the gratitude of his unconscious dupe by sympathizing with him in his troubles, undertaking the conduct of the paper while he lay in prison, and editing two volumes of a selection of Miscellany Letters from its columns.  At last, however, after eight years of this partnership, during which Mist had no suspicion of Defoe’s connexion with the Government, the secret somehow seems to have leaked out.  Such at least is Mr. Lee’s highly probable explanation of a murderous attack made by Mist upon his partner.

Defoe, of course, stoutly denied Mist’s accusations, and published a touching account of the circumstances, describing his assailant as a lamentable instance of ingratitude.  Here was a man whom he had saved from the gallows, and befriended at his own risk in the utmost distress, turning round upon him, “basely using, insulting, and provoking him, and at last drawing his sword upon his benefactor.”  Defoe disarmed him, gave him his life, and sent for a surgeon to dress his wounds.  But even this was not enough.  Mist would give him nothing but abuse of the worst and grossest nature.  It almost shook Defoe’s faith in human nature.  Was there ever such ingratitude known before?  The most curious thing is that Mr. Lee, who has brought all these facts to light,