n s. i. MAR. 19, i9io.] NOTES AND QUERIES.
235
born in 1720, and died in 1807. Being only
two years old at Watson's death, he could
have known nothing personally about the
' History of Printing,' which was published
in 1713 ; but his father, John Paton, a book-
seller in Edinburgh and an antiquary of
some note, was contemporary with Watson.
It cannot surely be taking too much for
granted to assume that George Paton derived
his knowledge of the Spottiswood authorship
from his father, who, in all likelihood, was
only reporting the current opinion of Edin-
burgh litterateurs at the time the book was
published.
It is no doubt somewhat difficult to explain the silence of the editor of the ' Spottiswoode Miscellany,'- 1844-5, 2 vols. The editor was a "mighty bookman," un- fortunate only in not being a Scotsman, James Maidment, a learned lawyer and distinguished antiquary, a bare list of whose publications forms a small volume .by itself. Maidment certainly, as MR. COUPEB points out, speaks (somewhat guardedly, no doubt) as if Watson were the author. Perhaps he did not know any better in 1845, or, knowing, did not feel himself at liberty to make the matter public, especially in a publication that had little to do with Watson. If, as one might suppose, he happened on a dis- charged account while rummaging in the Spottiswood charter chest, or wherever he obtained the materials for the ' Miscellany,' it may have seemed to Maidment no part of his duty as an editor to publish without permission what was after all a mere private business transaction ; showing that Spottis- wood for certain pecuniary considerations had written Watson's Preface and translated the ' History of Printing ' from the French.
Besides, if silent about Spottiswood's authorship, he was also silent about Paton's " myth," if such it was. And yet the only memorials of George Paton that now survive letters written to him by Ritson, Bishop Percy, and other eminent men, in two small volumes, 1829-30 were edited by James Maidment. In addition to these he edited, if he did not write, the best and most read- able account of Paton that has come under my notice the sketch in the popular edition of ' Kay's Edinburgh Portraits.' To the best of my knowledge he has nothing but praise to bestow on George Paton. In none of Maidment' s writings that I have seen is there ^ anything to suggest a belief that Paton's literary judgments were untrust- worthy.
This, then, I venture to submit, is the true explanation : Watson hired Spottis-
wood to write his Preface and translate the
' History of Printing,' and paid him for his
services. -Spottiswood in the circumstances
could not, and did not desire to make any
claim to authorship, and the work accordingly
has come down to us in Watson's name.
It would not be difficult to find scores of
similar instances in the history of literature.
Permit me to say a word on a side-issue
raised by MB. COUPEB. The entry in Bonn's
edition of Lowndes is susceptible of easy
explanation. We have only to put a full
stop after " 5s., n and make the words
' ' Large Paper n apply to the following
entries, and the meaning is plain. Bohn
was correct in speaking of large-paper copies.
He mentions two one at the Roxburghe
Sale sold for II. 10s., and the other at
the Dibdin Sale for 11. 15s. Perhaps the
following note by Dibdin will be deemed
conclusive :
"The 'History of the Art of Printing' by Wat- son, Edit. 1713, 8vo, is at best but a meagre per- formance. It happens to be rare, and, therefore, bibliomaniacs hunt after it. My copy of it, upon Larye Paper, cost me 11. 8s. It was formerly Paton's, of Edinburgh, a knowing antiquary in Scottish printing." ' Bibliomania,' new edition, 1876, p. 52, foot-note.
It may be added that ordinary copies now sell for nearly 51. WALTEB SCOTT.
Stirling.
MONUMENTS TO AMEBICAN INDIANS : CBISPUS ATTUCKS (10 S. xii. 87, 230, 358 ; 11 S. i. 37). At the second reference I said that " a temporary absence from Boston prevents my writing with absolute certainty.' ' Memory is a treacherous thing, and it is better to be cautious, though at the risk of being thought ignorant, than positive and then proved to be wrong. My own previous reply furnishes a good illustration, for I there stated that ' ' Attucks took no part in the fray, and was a mere casual bystander who happened to be killed." Of the five killed, two were shot as they rushed out of houses to respond (as they supposed) to a call of fire ; but my memory was at fault in saying that Attucks was one of these. John Adams, who defended the soldiers at their trial for murder, said :
" This was the behaviour of Attucks ; to whose mad behaviour, in all probability, the dreadful carnage of that night is chiefly to be ascribed. And it is in this manner, this town has been often treated ; a Carr from Ireland, and an Attucks from Framingham, happening to be here, shall sally out upon their thoughtless enterprizes, at the head of such a rabble of Negroes, &c., as they can collect together, and then there are not wanting persons to ascribe all their doings to the good people of the town." ' Trial,' p. 176.
