before the hurry of winter, to peruse it, and to write me your remarks on it. I fancy you will publish about the middle of November. I must desire you to take the trouble of distributing a few copies to my friends in London, and of sending me a few copies here. The whole will be fifteen copies.
"Notwithstanding Mr. Mallet's impertinence in not answering my letter, (for it deserves no better a name,) if you can engage him from yourself to mark on the perusal such slips of language as he thinks I have fallen into in this volume, it will be a great obligation to me: I mean that I shall lie under an obligation to you; for I would not willingly owe any to him. I am, dear sir, your most humble servant."[3:1]
"Edinburgh, 4th December, 1756.
"Dear Sir,—I have two of yours before me, and should have answered them sooner, had not Mr. Dalrymple told me that he would come to a resolution, in a few days, about the method of printing his volume. As soon as he does so, I shall write you.
"I am certainly very well satisfied with your sale, which I hope continues. Lord Lyttelton's objection is not well grounded; I have not contradicted that story betwixt Shaftesbury and Clifford: I have only omitted it. It stands only on Burnet's authority, who is very careless and inaccurate. I believe I could convince both you and him that it was without foundation. I am very glad that Mr. Mallet has marked those expressions which appeared Scotticisms. You could not do me a greater pleasure than to procure me a list of them. I beg of you to employ all your interest with him to that purpose. I am very anxious to see them soon, that I may examine them at leisure, and
correct them in all my writings. A very little time would suffice for him to take down the page and the line and the expression. If counting the line were too troublesome, he would oblige me by only marking the page and the expression; I would easily find it.
"I had a conversation, yesterday, with Messrs. Kincaid and Donaldson, when I made them a proposal, which, I hope, will be for both your advantage. They told me that you had only about four hundred complete sets of my philosophical writings. I am extremely desirous to have these four volumes, with that which you will publish this winter, brought into a quarto volume. They said that the small size was rather more proper for their sale; and, therefore, they would gladly take, at present, two hundred sets of the four volumes, to be paid for by so many of their shares in the quarto edition as would be an equivalent; that is, if the quarto volume were sold at the same price with the four volumes, then set for set: if at more, then such allowance to be made as, upon calculation, would appear to be an equivalent. If the History meet with success, it will certainly quicken the sale of the philosophical writings; and the taking two hundred sets from you, leaves you so small a number on hand, as gives you a certain prospect of coming soon to a new edition. Though some odd copies of particular volumes remain on hand, there is no great matter, as they may be disposed of with a small discount. If you agree to this proposal, they empowered me to desire you to put the two hundred copies on board a ship with the first occasion, and to write them a letter, by which they may be sure that there is no mistake in the conditions. The bringing these scattered pieces into one volume will, of itself, quicken the sale; and every new edition has naturally that effect.
"I again recommend to you, very earnestly, the procuring me that favour from Mr. Mallet. It is not possible that he can refuse you. I wish I had desired you to ask the same favour of Mr. Reid, to whom please to make my compliments. I am, dear sir, your most obedient servant."[5:1]
The second volume of the History, bringing down the narrative to the Revolution, was published in 1756. "This performance," says Hume in his "own life," alluding to the previous volume, "happened to give less displeasure to the Whigs, and was better received. It not only rose itself, but helped to buoy up its unfortunate brother."
The manner in which he had characterized the different religious bodies, whose conduct he had to describe, gave offence to many readers, and was afterwards matter of regret to himself. The toleration which forbids us to punish our neighbour on account of his creed, he had fully learned. That still higher toleration, which forbids us to treat our neighbour's religious creed with disrespect, he had not yet acquired. He always speaks of the extreme Independents and Presbyterians as enthusiasts. With this term, not in itself opprobrious, because, though it implies excess, it does not imply the excess of a bad quality, he, on some occasions, associates the word fanaticism, and other expressions having a like sarcastic, or at least slighting tendency. To the Roman Catholic religion he was still less respectful, generally speaking of it as "the Catholic superstition."[5:2]