New-York tribune., 1868-08-27
THE P0EN 4TTRIBUTED To MILTON

lcttcr FROM Prof Henry Morley of University Col
lcse, London, giving an account Of bis discovery OF
what he believed to be a hitherto unknown poem by
John Milton. An account of the way in which the
discovery came TO be made will not he undressing
as showing he pains conscientious scholar VIII take,
10 secure great accuracy as possible IN any work
he is engaged upon. no matter how small appar-
emily unnupor,aut, it may be- Prof Morley had un-
dcrtaken to compile for some publisher a small book
of selections from the writings of the poets who lived
i'm the timcof Charles l. and the Commonwealth On
receiving from ha prntcra proof containing passages
from Milton De thought it might not be useless TO
compare 30 with the original edition Of his EngIlsh
and Latin poems published in lGlj The British Au-
scum contains two copies of this edition-one III Tue
General Library. and the other in what is known aS
the Kings Library. a magnificent collection OIL 'OV"
volumes, made by George Ill. aud presented 10 lhe
Museum m 1873, 10y George ~ Inns last was Ihe
copy to which Mr.. Morley referred ana we VIII give
his accogut Of what he found in IT, IN his own words
"The volume contains first the English, then the
LATIN poems Of that first period Of Millions life each
sfpa,atclv pa0cd The Latin poems end on page 81,
leaving Che reverse Of the leaf blank; and this blank
ifsmd covered with handwriting which, to any one
familiar with the collection Of fac-simios IN the late
Iir Sothcbys Ramblos in Elucidation of Millions
Au.oecapa would, think, convey at first glance the
impression It conveyed to me- that this was the hand
vrungof John Milton. il Itproyed to be Transcription
poem m 81 lines which Milton either for himself or
for some friend had added to this volume. 1t IS en-
Titled simply "An Epitaph," and signed by him j
NJ Ober, 16i-' He was then in his S9th year AS
tho page about the size OF leaf of notepaper the
bapdwritingis small. Thirty-six lines were first
written which filed the left-hand side of the page
then a line was lightly drawn TO the right OF them
and the book beng turned sideways the rest Oh the
poem was packed into three little columns, eight
lines in ea. of the Gst two columns, and the other
two lines at the top of the thrd column followed by
the initials and date Upon the small blank space
left in this corner of the page, the Museum stamp Is
affixed covering part of Milton's signature 10
this letter Mr.. Morley appended the newly-found
poem with its Ms contraotons expanded, and the
smelling molernzed. Since then, it has been several
times reprted m its original FORM but each success
i've time with important changes, the faded hand
writing with the old cOntraCtiOns and peculiarly
formed letters, has been subjected to a more and
more careful scrutiny with magnfyng glasses in the
hands of adopts. But 1t is probable that we have
not yet the poem exactly as it stands for IN me
Times Of July 29th, letter appears from Mr In
gleby, who states positively that the date OF the
poem is not Ober COctoberl but 1Ober lDecember)
and in letter published in The Times of the 2Oth
though bearing the came date as Mr.. Ingebys Mr..
Bond Keeper of the Dept of MSS. in the British
Museum gives a version Of the poem, intended TO be
exact in which he makes important change in
word not hitherto suspected and also prints the date
1Ober as read BY Mr. lngleby. 1t may be added that
Mr. Bond who does not believe that the handwriting
is Millions appends the signature " p. NJ" instead
of f"J NJ" 10 the version which he gives, that being
the way in which he has read it from the first. MI
Bonds conviction that the signature isnOt -, NJ
first announced in note to The Times July 18th,
from Mr. Rye Of the Museum, written with a view
20 check the incOnvenient rush by the public to the
library to Inspect the vOume-haS had great IN
fucnce I'm the formation OF OPINION on the authentc-
ity of the poem Nevertheless 1t does not appear to
he considered rs settling the matter for both Pro-
fessor Morley and Mr.. HepVOrth Dixon while un-
willing to take position OF decided opposition TO
Mr. Bond are Yet strong IN their belief that ne is
mistaken both as 10 signature ana handWIlt-
ing. Beside the changes which haye been
made in the reading OF the poem by MI. Bona
and others since Mr.. Morley first published hls
transcript OF IT, t Is possible that the suspicion OF
another Times correspondent may prove well
founded and that closer examination may prove
that careless Slip in grammar winch has gwen
rather unnecessary trouble TO the critics. seeing that
ares5 and often mn + nplish does not really exist
in the manuscript. IL this correction of appears
for appear time AZ shall come to be finally allowed
there Will then have been eight changes made m the
body OF the poem since MT. Morley first published 1t.
OF these changes one is essential for grammatical
accuracy, and four are necessary to the sense; the
remaining three are perhaps not OF importance. IL
cannot be long we think, especially IL MT. Morley
shall publish he proposes, a fac-simile OF the
poem, before the true reading OF every WOru VIII De
settled beyond question, ana we snal De IN IuIii
possession Of the facts on which TO found decided
opinion from internal evidence whether the poem
was really written by Milton or not
IN seems. however that Prof Morley is not the
first discOvCrer of tsls pOem MIR. David Mason,
we'll known as a writer, and particularly as the au-
thor Of " Life OF Milton in connection with the His
tory Of his Times of which work only one volume
has been Published writes letter to The 1fmts of
July 81 IN which he says that the lines have been
known to him for considerable tlme-ln letter
written later, he says for about ten years and
hat he has a copy OF them which he took on the 2}d
MAY 1868 from the volume where Nj. Morley has
also found them. Over this copy he put nj the time
the following heading: Copy of Ms. lines IN n CO.
Temporary hand mot BiltOns on the y-page at the
end OF copy of Miltons poems edit 1913 IN Brit
Mus. tpress-nark S, p 81" And, little further on
he says, " md a query attached 10 my copy
whether was right IN making out the hrst letter TO
be u"
1t may be thought that the al-mportant point TO
be settled-sO far evidence Of authenticity Is con-
ccrned-is, whether the handwriting is Mlton's, or
not But, this is a question which, as Mr. Morley adj
mits may never be satisfactorily settled Mr. Bond
as We have does not believe that II ls nor does
be believe the signature 10 be j. NJ" Mr.. Mason
agrees with Mr.. Bond as to the handwriting, and "a
strongly inclined TO give up the signature, OF which,
ms we have seen. he had carly doubts. On the other
hand both Blr Morley, of whose opinion Mr.. Masson
speaks with respect, aud Mr.. HepwOTth Dixon,
are decidedly of the belief that the hand
writing and signature are both Miitons'
writing is a good one OfNiltOns time but his opinion
il that it is the writing of copyist and not or the
author whoever the author may be. lie comes 20
this conclusion from the peculiar form of some OF the
contractiOns 1t may also DO stated That the poem
was written in the book before II was put into It's
present binding which is an old Italian one, but
whether made in England or III Italy, ls not yet
known. Indeed, far, no attempt would seem to
have been made to get at the history OF the volume,
which. if il were traced might throw ray OF hght
on this doubtful matter 1t seems 10 US that after
all the chief difficulty lies in the signature. If that
shall prove 70 be j. NJ. then the poem, supposng