Jonathan Swift: Quotations (1)

File 1

[ top ]

A Tale of A Tub (1710), “Digression on Madness”: ‘[…] Let us next examine the great Introducers of new Schemes in Philosophy, and search till we can find, from what Faculty of the Soul the Disposition arises in mortal Man, of taking it into his Head, to advance new Systems with such an eager Zeal, in things agreed on all hands impossible to be known: from what Seeds this Disposition springs, and to what Quality of human Nature these Grand Innovators have been indebted for their Number of Disciples. Because it is plain, that several of the chief among them, both Antient and Modern, were usually mistaken by their Followers, to have been Persons Crazed, or out of their Wits, having generally proceeded in the common Course of their Words and Actions, by a Method very different from the Dictates of unrefined Reason: agreeing for the most Part in their several Models, with their present undoubted successors in the Academy of Modern Bedlam (whose Merits and Principles I shall farther examine in due Place). Of this Kind were Epicurus, Diogenes, Apollonius, Lucretius, Paracelsus, Des Cartes, and others; who, if they were now in the World, tied fast, and separate from their Followers, would in this our undistinguishing Age, incur manifest Danger of Phlebotomy, and Whips, and Chains, and dark Chambers, and Straw.’ (Tale of a Tub, in Gulliver’s Travels and Selected Writings in Prose and Verse, Nonesuch Edn. 1944; 2nd edn. 1944, pp.330-31.)

A Tale of A Tub (1710; “Digression on Madness”) - cont.: ‘Having therefore so narrowly past thro’ this intricate Difficulty, the Reader will, I am sure, agree with me in the Conclusion; that if the Moderns mean by Madness, only a disturbance or Transposition of the Brain, by Force of certain Vapours issying up from the lower Faculties; Then [333] has this Madness been the Parent of all those mighty Revolutions, that have happened in Empire, in Philosophy, and in Religion. For, the Brain, in its natural Position and State of Serenity, disposeth its Owner to pass his Life in the common Forms, without any Thought of subduing Multitudes to his own Power, his Reasons or his Visions; and the more he shapeshis Understanding by the Pattern of Human Learning, the less he is inclined to form Parties after his own particular Notions; because that instructs him in his private Infirmities, as well as in the stubborn Ignorance of the People. But when a man’s Fancy gets astride of his Reason, when Imagination is at Cuffs with the Senses, and common Understanding as well as common Sense, is Kickt [hurled] out of doors; the first Proselyte he makes is himself, and when that is once compass’d, the Difficulty is not so great in bringing over others, a strong Delusion always operating from without, as vigorously as from within. For, Cant and Vision are to the Ear and the Eye, the same that Tickling is to the Touch. Those Entertainments and Pleasures we must value in Life, are such as Dupe and play the Wag with the Senses. For, if we take an Examination of what is generally understood by Happiness, as it has Respect, either to the Understanding or the Senses, we shall find that all Properties and Adjuncts will herded under this short Definition: That is, it is a perpetual Possesssion of being well Deceived. And first, with Relation to the Mind or Understanding; ‘tis manifest, what mighty Advantages Fiction has over Truth; and the Reason is just at our Elbow; because Imagination can build nobler Scenes, and produce more wonderful Revolutions than Fortune or Nature will be at Expence to furnish. Nor is Mankind so much to blame in his Choice, thus determining him, if we consider that the Debate merely lies between Things past, and Things conceived; and so the Question is only this; Whether Things that have Place in the Imagination, may not as properly be said to Exist, as those that are seated in the Memory; which may be justly held in the Affirmative, and very much to the Advantage of the former, since This is acknowledged to be the Womb [334] of Things, and the other allowed to be no more than the Grave. Again, if we take this Definition of Happiness, and examine it with Reference to the Senses; it will be acknowledged wonderfully adapt. How fading and insipid do all Objects accost us that are not convey’d in the Vehicle of Delusion? How shrunk is every Thing, as it appears in the Glass of Nature? So, that if it were not for the Assistance of Artificial Mediums, false Lights, refracted Angles, Varnish, and Tinsel; there would be a mighty Level in the Felicity and Enjoyments of Mortal Men. If this were seriously considered by the World, as I have a certain Reason to suspect it hardly will; Men would no longer reckon among their high Points of Wisdom, the Art of exposing weak Sides, and publishing Infirmities; an Employment in my Opinion, neither better nor worse than that of Unmasking, which I think, has never been allowed fair Usage, either in the World or the Play-House.’ [Cont.]

[ top ]

A Tale of A Tub (1710; “Digression on Madness”) - cont.: ‘In the Proportion that Credulity is a more peaceful Possession of the Mind, than Curiosity, so far preferable is that Wisdom, which converses about the Surface, to that pretended Philosophy which enters into the Depth of Things, and then comes gravely back with Informations and Discoveries, that in the inside they are good for nothing. The two Senses, to which all Objects first address themselves, are the Sight and the Touch; These never examine farther than the Colour, the Shape, the Size, and whatever other Qualities dwell, or are drawn by Art upon the Outward of Bodies; and then comes Reason officiously, with Tools for cutting, and opening, and mangling, and piercing, offering to demonstrate, that they are not of the same consistence quite thro’. Now, I take all this to be the last Degree of perverting Nature; one of whose Eternal, Laws it is, to put her best Furniture forward. And therefore, in order to save the Charges of all such expensive Anatomy for the Time to come; I do here think fit to inform the Reader, that in such Conclusions as these, Reason is certainly in the Right; and that in most Corporeal Beings, which have fallen under my Cognizance, the Outside hath been infinitely preferable to the Inn: Whereof I have been [335] farther convinced by some late Experiments. Last Week I saw a Woman flay’d, and you will hardly believe, how much it altered her Person for the worse. Yesterday I ordered the Carcass of a Beau to be stript in my Presence; when we were all amazed to find so many unsuspected Faults under one Suit of Cloaths. Then I laid open his Brain, his Heart, his Spleen; But I plainly perceived at every Operation, that the farther we proceeded, we found the Defects encrease in Number and Bulk: from all which, I justly formed this Conclusion to my self, that whatever Philosopher or Projector can find out an Art to sodder [solder] and patch up the Flaws and Imperfections of Nature will deserve much better of Mankind, and teach us more useful Science, than that so much in present Esteem, of widening and exposing them (like him who held Anatomy the ultimate end of Physick). And he, whose Fortunes and Dispositions have placed him in a convenient Station to enjoy the Fruits of this noble Art; He that can with Epicurus contend his Ideas with the Films and Images that fly off upon his Senses from the Superficies of Things; Such a Man truly wise, creams off Nature, leaving Sower and drugs for philosophy and Reason to lap up. This is the sublime and refined Point of Felicity, called, the possession of being well-deceived; The Serene and Peaceful State of being a Fool among Knaves.’ (Gulliver’s Travels and Selected Writings in Prose and Verse, Nonesuch Edn. 1934; 2nd Edn. 1944, pp.333-36.)

[ top ]

Proposal for Correcting, Improving and Ascertaining the English Tongue; in a Letter To the Most Honourable Robert Earl of Oxford and Mortimer, Lord High Treasurer of Great Britain (London: Benjamin Tooke 1712):

‘My Lord,
What I had the Honour of mentioning to Your Lordship some time ago in Conversation, was not a new Thought, just then started by Accident or Occasion, but the Result of long Reflection; and I have been confirmed in my Sentiments by [6] the Opinion of some very judicious Persons, with whom I consulted. They all agreed, That noting would be of greater Use towards the Improvement of Knowledge and Politeness, than some effectual Method for Correcting, Enlarging, and Ascertaining our Language; and they think it a Work very possible to be compassed, under the Protection of a Prince, the Countenance and Encouragement of a Ministry, and the Care of Proper Persons chosen for such an Undertaking. I was glad to find Your Lordship’s Answer in so different a Style, from what hath been commonly made use of on the like Occasions, for some Years past, that all such Thoughts must be deferred to a Time of Peace[...’; 7].

If Things go on at this rate, all I can promise Your Lordship is, that about two hundred Years hence, some painful Compiler, who will be at the Trouble of studying Old Language, may inform the World, that in the Reign of QUEEN ANNE, Robert Earl of Oxford, a very wise and excellent Man, was made High Treasurer, and saved his Country, which in those Days was almost ruined by a Foreign War, and a Domestick Faction. Thus much he may be able to pick out, and willingly transfer into his new History, but the rest of Your Character, which I or any other Writer may now value our selves by drawing, and the particular Account of the great Things done under Your Ministry, for which You are already so [42] celebrated in most Parts of Europe, will probably be dropt, on account of the antiquated Style and Manner they are delivered in.

How then shall any Man who hath a Genius for History, equal to the best of the Ancients, be able to undertake such a Work with Spirit and Chearfulness, when he considers, that he will be read with Pleasure but a very few Years, and in an Age or two shall hardly be understood without an Interpreter? This is like employing an excellent Statuary to work upon mouldring Stone. Those who apply their Studies to preserve the Memory of others, will always have some Concern for their own. And I believe it is for this Reason, that so few Writers among us, of any Distinction, have turned their Thoughts to such a discouraging Employment: For the best English [43] Historian must lie under this Mortification, that when his style grows antiquated, he will only be considered as a tedious Relator of Facts; and perhaps consulted in his turn, among other neglected Authors, to furnish Materials for some future Collector.’ [Virginia Text Centre; for longer version see RICORSO Library, “Irish Classic Texts”, infra.]

Cf. -

‘My LORD; I do here in the name of the Learnèd and Polite Persons of the Nation, complain to your LORDSHIP, as First Minister, that our Language is extremely imperfect; that its daily Improvements are by no means in proportion to its daily Corruptions; that the Pretenders to polish and refine it, have chiefly multiplied Abuses and Absurdities; and, that in many Instances, it offends against every Part of Grammar.’ (Quoted in David Crystal, The Stories of English, London: Allen Lane 2004; Penguin 2005, p.365 - calling it ‘a complaint [which] could hardly have been phrased more formally or more powerfully.’)

Further: ‘Not only the several Towns and Countries [sic] of England, have a different way of Pronouncing, but even here in London, they clip their Words after one Manner about the Court, another in the City, and a third in the Suburbs.’ (Quoted in Crystal, op. cit., 2004, p.368 [presum. the same text as quoted supra.)

[Note: Crystal remarks that Swift seems to have been an early-day Professor Higgins, and writes further: ‘We might interpret this as a sign of linguistic vitality. But what one person sees as an enriching diversity another person sees as a divisive fragmentation. To the observers of the time, such as Swift and Chesterfield, this was further evidence that the language was headed for disaster.’ (Idem.)

[ top ]

Proposal for The Universal Use of Irish Manufacture (1720): ‘[…] utterly rejecting and renouncing everything wearable that comes from England ... burn every Thing that came from England, except their People and their Coals.’ (Works, Vol. 10, p.17.) Note: This remark was offered by Swift in the form of ‘a pleasant observation of some Body’s’ which had been quoted to him by the deceased archbishop of Tuam [viz., John Vesey, d.1716]’, but was rephrased between 1720 and 1725 editions of the pamphlet following the successful prosecution of the printer by Judge Whitshed, who asserted that ‘the author’s design was to bring in the Pretender’. (See Herbert Davis, ed., Works, 1965-75, Vol. 10, p.17) [There is no ODNB article on Whitshed, but another of the name was commander.-in-chief in Cork during 1807-10.]

Further (referring to Greek myth of Pallas and Arachne): ‘I confess, I always pitied poor Arachne, and could never heartily love the goddess on account of so cruel and unjust a sentence; which, however, is fully executed upon us by England, with further additions of rigour and severity, for the greatest part of our bowels and vitals are extracted, without allowing us the liberty of spinning and weaving them.’ (Quoted in Cambridge History of English and American Literature - available at Bartley.com online.)

[ top ]

[ top ]

Drapier’s Letters [No. III] - Of Kendall Wood: ‘He must surely be a Man of some wonderful Merit [...] Hath he discovered the Longitude or the Universal Medicine? No, but he hath found out the Philosopher’s Stone after a new Manner, by Debasing of Copper, and resolving to force it upon us for Gold [...] (Some Observations Upon the Report to the Committee; quoted in Sebastian Luthers, MA Diss. [CA Essay] 2002.)

[ top ]

[ top ]

Drapier’s Letters [No. IV]: ‘I thought I had sufficiently shewn to all who could want Instruction, by what Methods they might safely proceed, whenever this Coyn should be offered to them: And I believe there hath not been for many Ages an Example of any Kingdom so firmly united in a Point of great Importance, as this of Ours is at present, against that detestable Fraud. But however, it so happens that some weak People begin to be allarmed anew, by Rumours industriously spread. Wood prescribes to the News-Mongers in London what they are to write. In one of their Papers published here by some obscure Printer (and probably with no good Design) we are told, that the Papists in Ireland have entered into an Association against his Coyn, although it be notoriously known, that they never once offered to stir in the Matter; so that the Two Houses of Parliament, the Privy Council, the great Number of Corporations, the Lord Mayor and Aldermen of Dublin, the Grand-juries, and Principal Gentlemen of several Counties are stigmatized in a Lump under the Name of Papists.’ Further: ‘Now, here you may see that the Vile Accusation of Wood and his Accomplices, charging us with Disputing the King’s Prerogative by refusing his Brass, can have no Place, because compelling the Subject to take any Coin which is not Sterling is no Part of the King’s Prerogative, and I am very confident if it were so, we should be the last of his People to dispute it, as well from that, inviolable Loyalty we have always paid to his Majesty, as from the Treatment we might in such a Case justly expect from some who seem to think, we have neither Common Sense nor Common Senses. But God be thanked, the Best of them are only our Fellow Subjects, and not our Masters. One great Merit I am sure we have, which those of English Birth can have no Pretence to, That our Ancestors reduced this Kingdom to the Obedience of ENGLAND, for which we have been rewarded with a worse Climate, the Priviledge of being governed by Laws to which we do not consent, a Ruined Trade, a House of Peers without Jurisdiction, almost an Incapacity for all Employments; and the Dread of Wood’s Half-pence. / But we are so far from disputing the King’s Prerogative in Coyning, that we own he has Power to give a Patent to any Man for setting his Royal Image and Superscription upon whatever Materials he pleases, and Liberty to the Patentee to offier them in any Country from England to Japan, only attended with one small Limitation, That no body alive is obliged to take them.’ (Gulliver’s Travels and Selected Prose, London: Nonesuch Edn. 1944, “Irish Tracts”, p.484ff.)]

Drapier’s Letters [No. IV - ‘a digression’]: ‘But because great Numbers of you are altogether Ignorant in the Affairs of your Country, I will tell you some Reasons why there are so few Employments to be disposed of in this Kingdom. All considerable Offices for Life here are possessed by those to whom the Reversions were granted, and these have been generally Followers of the Chief Governours, or Persons who had Interest in the Court of England. So the Lord Berkely of Stratton holds that great Office of Master of the Rolls, the Lord Palmerstown is First Remembrancer worth near £2000. per Ann. One Dodington Secretary to the Earl of Pembroke, begged the Reversion of Clerk of the Pells worth £2500 a Year, which he now enjoys by the Death of the Lord Newtown. Mr. Southwell is Secretary of State, and the Earl of Burlington Lord High Treasurer of Ireland by Inheritance. These are only a few among many others which I have been told of, but cannot remember. Nay the Reversion of several Employments during Pleasure are granted the same Way. This among many others is a Circumstance whereby the Kingdom of Ireland is distinguished from all other Nations upon Earth, and makes it so Difficult an Affair to get into a Civil Employ, that Mr. Addison was forced to purchase an old obscure Place, called Keeper of the Records of Berminghams Tower of Ten Pounds a Year, and to get a Sallery of £400 annexed to it, though all the Records there are not worth Half a Crown, either for Curiosity or Use. And we lately saw a Favourite Secretary descend to be Master of the Revels, which by his Credit and Extortion he hath made Pretty Considerable. I say nothing of the Under-Treasurership worth about £8000 a Year, nor the Commissioners of the Revenue, Four of whom generally live in England: For I think none of these are granted in Reversion. But the Jest is, that I have known upon Occasion some of these absent Officers as Keen against the Interest of Ireland as if they had never been indebted to Her for a Single Groat. / I confess, I have been sometimes tempted to wish that this Project of Wood might succeed, because I reflected with some Pleasure what a Jolly Crew it would bring over among us of Lords and ’Squires, and Pensioners of Both Sexes, and Officers Civil and Military, where we should live together as merry and sociable as Beggars, only with this one Abatement, that we should neither have Meat to feed, nor Manufactures to Cloath us, unless we could be content to Prance about in Coats of Mail, or Eat Brass as Ostritches do Iron.’ (Ibid., Nonesuch Edn., pp.489-90.)

Drapier’s Letters [No. IV; on Ireland’s ‘dependent’ status]: ‘[A]nother Slander spread by Wood and his Emissaries is, that by opposing him we discover an Inclination to shake off our Dependance upon the Crown of England. Pray observe how Important a Person is this same William Wood, and how the Publick Weal of Two Kingdoms is involved in his Private Interest. First, all those who refuse to take his Coyn are Papists; for he tells us that none but Papists are associated against him; Secondly, They dispute the King’s Prerogative; Thirdly, They are Ripe for Rebellion, and Fourthly, They are going to shake off their Dependance upon the Crown of England; That is to say, they are going to chuse another King. For there can be no other Meaning in this Expression, however some may pretend to strain it. / And this gives me an Opportunity of Explaining, to those who are Ignorant, another Point, which hath often Swelled in my Breast. Those who come over hither to us from England, and some Weak People among our selves, whenever in Discourse we make mention of Liberty and Property, shake their Heads, and tell us, that Ireland is a Depending Kingdom, as if they would seem, by this Phrase, to intend that the People of Ireland is in some State of Slavery or Dependance different from those of England: Whereas a Depending Kingdom is a Modern Term of Art, unknown, as I have heard, to all antient Civilians, and Writers upon Government; and Ireland is on the contrary called in some Statutes an Imperial Crown, as held only from God; which is as High a Style as any Kingdom is capable of receiving. Therefore by this Expression, a Depending Kingdom, there is no more understood than that by a Statute made here in the 33nd Year of Henry 8th. The King and his Successors are to be Kings Imperial of this Realm as United and Knit to the Imperial Crown of England. I have looked over all the English and Irish Statutes without finding any Law that makes Ireland depend upon England, any more than England does upon Ireland. We have indeed obliged our selves to have the same King with them, and consequently they are obliged to have the same King with us. For the Law was made by our own Parliament, and our Ancestors then were not such Fools (whatever they were in the Preceding Reign) to bring themselves under I know not what Dependance, which is now talked of without any Ground of Law, Reason or Common Sense.’ (Ibid., Nonesuch Edn., p.493.)

Drapier’s Letters [No. IV; on English ignorance of Ireland]: ‘There was a few Days ago a Pamphlet sent me of near 50 Pages Written in Favour of Mr. Wood and his Coynage, Printed in London, it is not worth answering, because probably it will never be published here: But it gave me an Occasion to reflect upon an Unhappiness we lye under, that the People of England are utterly Ignorant of our Case, which however is no wonder, since it is a Point they do not in the least concern themselves about, farther than perhaps as a Subject of Discourse in a Coffee-House when they have nothing else to talk of. For I have Reason to believe that no Minister ever gave himself the Trouble of Reading any Papers Written in our Defence, because I suppose their Opinions are already determined, and are formed wholly upon the Reports of Wood and his Accomplices; else it would be impossible that any Man could have the Impudence to write such a Pamphlet as I have mentioned. / Our Neighbours whose Understandings are just upon a Level with Ours (which perhaps are none of the Brightest) have a strong Contempt for most Nations, but especially for Ireland: They look upon Us as a Sort of Savage-Irish, whom our Ancestors conquered several hundred Years ago, and if I should describe the Britains to you as they were in Caesar’s Time, when they Painted their Bodies, or cloathed themselves with the Skins of Beasts, I would act full as reasonably as they do: However they are so far to be excused in Relation to the present Subject, that, hearing only one Side of the Cause, and having neither Opportunity nor Curiosity to examine the Other, they believe a Lye merely for their Ease, and conclude, because Mr. Wood pretends to have Power, he hath also Reason on his Side.’ (Ibid., Nonesuch Edn., 1944, pp.465-96.)

Drapier’s Letters [No. IV; sundry sentences]: ‘A People long used to Hardships, lose by Degrees the very Notions of Liberty; they look upon themselves as Creatures at Mercy; and that all Impositions laid on them by a stronger Hand are, in the Phrase of the Report, legal and obligatory.’ ([Letter 4]; quoted in Sebastian Luthers, Essay, MA Dipl., 2002.)

‘ I declare, next under God, I depend only on the King my Sovereign, and on the Laws of my own Country; and I am so far from depending upon the People of England, that if they should ever Rebel against my Sovereign (which God forbid) I would be ready at the first Command from his Majesty to take Arms against them, as some of my Country-men did against Theirs at Preston. And if such a Rebellion should prove so successful as to fix the Pretender on the Throne of England, I would venture to transgress that Statute so far as to lose every Drop of my Blood to hinder him from being King of Ireland.’ (Do., Nonesuch Edn., p.494; see also Works, ed. Davis, 1965, Vol. 10, p.62).

‘[D]angerous authors [such as Thos. Molyneux] who talk of Liberty as a Blessing, to which the whole Race of Mankind hath an Original Title; whereof nothing but unlawful Force can divest them (Vol. 10, p.86; prob. ironical).

‘As to Ireland, they know little more than they do of Mexico; further than that it is a Country subject to the King of England, full of Boggs, inhabited by wild Irish Papists; who are kept in Awe by mercenary Troops sent from thence, and their general opinion is, that it were better for England if this whole Island were sunk in the Sea, For, they have a Tradition, that every Forty Years there must be a Rebellion in Ireland.’ (Drapier’s Letters, Davis ed., OUP 1965, p.128.

[For complete text of the Fourth Drapier’s Letter, see RICORSO > Library > Irish Classics Library, as attached.]

[ top ]

“Lowering the Coins” (1732), in Historical and Political Tracts (London: George Bell & Sons 1905), 5pp.: ‘Gentlemen, I beg you will consider, and very well weigh in your hearts what I am going to say, and what I have often said before. There are several Bodies of Men, among whom the Power of this Kingdom is divided. 1st, The Lord-Lieutenant, Lords-Justices and Council, next to these, my Lords the Bishops; there is likewise my Lord Chancellor, and my Lords the Judges of the Land, with other eminent Persons in the Law, who have Employments and great Salaries annexed. To these must be added the Commissioners of the Revenue, with all their under Officers: And lastly, their Honours of the Army, of all Degrees. / Now, Gentlemen, I beg you again to consider, that none of these Persons above-named, can ever suffer the loss of one Farthing by all the Miseries under which the Kingdom groans at present. For, first, until the Kingdom be intirely Ruined the Lord Lieutenant and Lords-Justices must have their Salaries. My Lords the Bishops, whose Lands are set a fourth part value, will be sure of their Rents and their Fines. My Lords the Judges, and Those of other Employments in the Courts, must likewise have their Salaries. The Gentlemen of the Revenue will pay Themselves; and as to the Officers of the Army, the Consequences of not paying Them, is obvious enough; Nay, so far will those Persons I have already mentioned to be from suffering, that, on the contrary, their Revenues being now way lessen’d by the fall of Money, and the prices of all Commodities considerably sunk thereby, they must be great Gainers. Therefore, Gentlemen, I do entreat you, that, as long as you live, you will look upon all Persons who are for lowering the Gold, or any other Coin, as no Friends to this poor Kingdom, but such who find their private account in what will be most detrimental to Ireland. And, as the Absentees are the strongest views, our greatest Enemies, first, by consuming above one half of the Rents of this Nation Abroad. And secondly, by turning the Weight, by their Absence, so much on the Popish side, by weakning the Protestant Interest. Can there be a greater folly than to pave a Bridge of Gold at your Expence, to support them in their Luxury and Vanity abroad, while hundreds of thousands are starving at home, for want of Employment.’ [End; sourced from Virginia Text Centre; also available as text file at McMaster Univ., California - online.]

[ top ]

Simon Wagstaff [Jonathan Swift], A Complete Collection of Genteel and Ingenious Conversation, According to the Most Polite Mode and Method Now Used at Court, and in the Best Companies of England(1738)

[ top ]

“The Story of the Injured Lady” (1746): ‘Being ruined by the inconstancy and unkindness of a lover, I hope, a true and plain relation of my misfortunes may be of use and warning to credulous maids, never to put too much trust in deceitful men.’ (Works, VII, pp. 97-103; quoted in Timothy McLoughlin, ‘An Irish Reaction to English Domination: Swift’ The Story of an Injured Lady’, in Cycnos, Vol. 6 [Violence(s) au siècle de la Raison] (Janvier 1990) [uploaded 30 mai 2008]. , McLoughlin notes: ‘The full title of the first edition (1746) was “The Story of the Injured Lady, being a true Picture of Scottish Perfidy, Irish Poverty and English Partiality” (A Bibliography of the Writings of Jonathan Swift, 2nd edn., eds. H. Teerink & Arthur H. Scouten (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press 1963, p.150.) [McLoughlin's article is available online; accessed 01.09.2017.]