Draughts of four letters _written by Thomas Lyttelton from Lyons, the first of which is dated September_ 10, 1769.
Heads of a series of Dialogues, in imitation of "Dialogues of the Dead," by his father George, first Lord Lyttelton.
Poetical Fragments, imitated from Lucretius.
{ 33} Two letters addressed by Thomas Lyttelton to his father; and a third to "Dear George," probably his cousin George Edward Ayscough.
Some Latin lines, not remarkable for their delicacy.
Political letter, _written from Milan_, by Thomas Lyttelton; in which indignant notice is taken of the commital of Brass Crossby, Lord Mayor, _which took place in March, 1771_.
Fragment of a poem on Superstition, and various other unfinished poetical scraps.
A page of writing in a fictitious or short-hand character, of which I can make nothing.
Remarks, in prose, on the polypus, priestcraft, &c.
Portion of a remarkable political letter, containing some bitter remarks by Thomas Lyttelton on the "first minister." He ends thus: "The play now draws to a conclusion. I am guilty of a breach of trust in telling him so, but I shall [not] suffer by my indiscretion, for it is an absolute impossibility any man should divine who is the author of the letter signed ARUSPEX."
It would appear from the water-mark in the paper of which this MS. is composed, that it was procured in Italy; and there can be little or no doubt it was used by Thomas Lyttelton as a draught-book, during his travels there in 1769-1771; during which period, nearly the whole of the contents seem to have been written. The evidence afforded therefore by this volume, comes peculiarly in support of the dates and other circumstances put forth in the printed volume of _Poems_; and leads us inevitably to the conclusion, _that it was utterly impossible for Thomas Lyttelton to have had any share in the Letters of Junius_. He has enough to answer for on the score of his early profligacy and scepticism, without being dragged from the grave to be arraigned for the crime of deceit. His heart need not, according to the reviewer, be "stripped bare" by the scalpel of any literary anatomist; but he may be left to that quiet and oblivion which a sepulchre in general bestows. Before I conclude these remarks (which I fear are too diffuse), I will venture to add a few words in regard to the signature of Thomas Lord Lyttelton. In the _Chatham Correspondence_, a letter from him to Earl Temple is printed, vol. iv. p. 348., the signature to which is printed LYTTLETON, and the editors point out in a note the "alteration adopted" in the spelling of the name; but it is altogether an error, for the fac-simile of this signature in vol. iv. p. 29., as well as his will in the Prerogative Court, prove that he wrote his name _Lyttelton_, in the same manner as his father and uncle. As to the resemblance pointed out by the author of the _Review_ between the handwriting of Thomas Lyttelton and that of Junius, it exists only in imagination, since there is really no similitude whatever between them.