Remitter.'i ho story of the founding of the “Edinburgh Kwii'w, and tho publication of Wavcrley” when the ascendancy of Byron had canned Scott to cchm- the writing of poetry, ih briefly sketched by Mr. Cantwell. In the mater I used there it nothing new excepting on.i letter of ►mall important. Mr. Carswell hu made the moat of this bv printing one hnlf of it in the text and the whole of it in an appendix. But on the question of the secrecy of the authorship oi “Wnverley,” Mr. Curawell doca re-1 mind us that “in Edinburgh there could never have been any serious doubt nlmut the authorship. for the July J1SI41 numher of the ‘Scot* Magazine' contained a long review, which practically gave it away. The ‘Scot* Magazine' had recently Wen acquired by Constable for the purpose of pushing Ins ware*. . . The review ends with these word*: ‘Report nsmgns it to the most mi rnired poet of the ago. a subject on which we have sought in vain for any informa ti*»o. The internal evidence doc* not cor to inly contradict the assertion; and we see no reason that even such a writer could have to disown a performance like the present.’ Mr. Carswell quotes a letter from Scott to hi* friend Morritt, covering the despatch to Morritt of a copy of “ Waver ley, in which tho writer nays: “I had written a greater part of the first volume and sketched other passage* when I mislaid the manuscript, nnd only found it hv the merest, accident as I was rummaging the drawers of an old cabinet: nnd I took the fancy of finishing it. which I did so fast that ths Inst two volumes were written in three weeks.• ■ • • .. . i r i ...__ it