“Sir,
“Having given insertion to the two articles of P. P. and J. M. and thus afforded the writers, or rather the Writer, an opportunity of assailing the Peerage in its literal errors, I am induced to hope you will give insertion to my reply; which, as it is composed with more temper, cannot be less creditable to the columns of a Journal building its hopes for reputation on candour and consequent impartiality. I have said writer, because, if similarity of style can ever lead to identity, it is very evident in the present instance; and I may reasonably conclude that the next attack will be on the Peerage of England! thus perfecting the Tria Juncta in uno.
“To attempt perfection in a work crowded by so
many difficulties, impediments continually obtruding, changes continually
defeating, would be idle; so would my defence, did I seek more than in
support of my claim to diligence, and unwearied and
| MAGINN: THE PEERAGE. | 329 |
“But it is not by diligence alone that the Peerage can arrive at accuracy; it must be assisted by occasional corrections from noble and other correspondents. Sir William Dugdale, Garter King of Arms, the learned author of the admirable History of Warwickshire, the History of St. Paul’s, and other works of the first order of merit—works, the splendid monument of his learning and talents;—he felt the almost insuperable difficulties of a Peerage; and, hopeless of accuracy, confessed his deficiency. Where a Dugdale failed, I could hardly hope for complete success. My efforts were an approach to accuracy; and, I may confidently and without vanity assert, that I have done more than any of my predecessors. Your correspondent P. P. says, ‘I do not think I overstep the modesty of calculation, when I assert, that it contains at least as many errors as there are articles.’ I shall not stop to enquire into the quantum of your correspondent’s modesty, of his accuracy in calculation, or whether there is more of malignity in his assertion than of candour in investigation. I can only reply that most of the errors he has so vauntingly detected might have been easily remedied by the introduction of a figure—mere errors of the compositor, or the dropping of a letter at press. These, Sir, are errors which candour would have supplied. In another part of the article of your correspondent, he charges me with scandalous negligence. Let me ask of your correspondent Sir, whether I may not, with more propriety, and without the loss of temper, charge him with scandalous meanness, in an assertion so wanton and unprovoked. With regard to the playfulness of his satire, I would fain remind him, that he becomes very serious when he would be amusing, and very amusing when he would be serious. To conclude, Sir, as I have never aimed at perfection, never hoping to accomplish it, let me request your correspondent’s attention to the following quotation from the Baronetage; and let me press upon his attention, that, as I have always invited and solicited corrections of the press, his corrections would have been attended to with more pleasure if they had been pointed out with a more liberal feeling:—
| 330 | APPENDIX. |
“‘Of his labours and industry in the pursuit, he would wish to say little. He has been abundantly recompensed for the time occupied in his very numerous personal applications, by the politeness and attention with which those applications have been honoured, and by the extensive aids which he has derived from them. The only regret which he feels in offering this result of his endeavours to the public, arises from a dread of too frequent error in treating on subjects, with regard to which perfect correctness is absolutely unattainable.’
“I am, Sir, yours, &c,
