_Junius Rumours_ (Vol. v., pp. 125. 159. 474.).--"N. & Q." contains
abundant speculation about the "Vellum-bound" to which your correspondent
refers (p. 474.). Some persons, I know, consider it doubtful whether the
printer did have a copy bound in vellum as Junius directed, and they
strengthen their doubts by, as they assert, no such copy having ever been
met with. MR. CRAMP, on the contrary, maintains that such copies are so
common that the printer must have taken the Junius copy as a pattern. As
MR. CRAMP, I observe, is become a correspondent of "N. & Q.," I will take
leave to direct his attention to the question asked by V. B. (Vol. iii., p.
262.) Others, again, assuming that the printer did have a copy specially
bound for Junius, think it doubtful whether it ever reached him. Of these
differences and speculations your correspondent is evidently unaware; and
he therefore raises a question as if it were new, which has been under
discussion for thirty years. As a set-off, however, he favours us with an
entirely original anecdote, so original, that neither the anecdote nor the
tea-service were ever heard of by H. S. Woodfall's family. Yet it must be
admitted that his story has all the characteristics of authenticity--names,
dates, places. I know, indeed, but one objection, viz. that Mr. Woodfall
never was "in prison on account of the publication of these redoubtable
letters." He was tried, but _acquitted_, under the somewhat celebrated
verdict of "guilty of printing and publishing _only_."