Footnote 1
Mitchell was in Pall Mall, probably at Millar’s house, on 7 March. He had returned to Berlin by the end of May. See A. Bisset, Memoirs and Papers of Sir Andrew Mitchell, K. B. (London: Chapman and Hall, 1850) vol. 2, 359–62.
×Footnote 2
sith, i.e., since.
×Footnote 3
The season at Tunbridge Wells, a fashionable spa 45 miles southwest of London, ran from June to August. See P. Hembry, The English Spa: A Social History, 1560–1815 (London: Athlone P, 1990) 231.
×Footnote 4
William Strahan (1715–85), eminent and influential printer, was Millar’s business partner and longtime friend. He had been apprenticed in Edinburgh under the bookseller and publisher James McEuen’s printer, John Mosman, from 1729–36; McEuen had been Millar’s master. In 1736 Strahan relocated to London as a printer for Millar’s longtime collaborator, the bookseller William Bowyer. Strahan had been in contact with Benjamin Franklin from as early as 1740, when his friend and employee David Hall emigrated to Philadelphia and joined one of Franklin’s printing companies. Strahan was an executor of Millar’s will, and had named his son Andrew Strahan (1750–1831) after Millar.
×Footnote 5
William Pitt, brilliant orator and Whig politician, had a long and distinguished career as a leading government and opposition member of the House of Commons and later in the House of Lords. He had resigned in 1761 but had been asked to assemble a new governing ministry, or “cabinet-council”, on 7 July.
×Footnote 6
no bar, i.e., notwithstanding.
×Footnote 7
The official announcement that Pitt would be created Earl of Chatham, and thus hold an eventual seat in the House of Lords, was made on 4 August; it was swiftly denounced as the creation of “Lord Cheattem”. See M. Peters, The Elder Pitt (London: Longman, 1998) 172–3.
×Footnote 8
Millar may be making a distinction between Pitt’s ideological service to his “country”, and his political duties to serve the monarch, bearing in mind Pitt’s condemnation of John Wilkes’s North Briton during the 1763–64 parliamentary session, as an “illiberal, unmanly, and detestable” attack on Scotland and the Scots. In March, Pitt had “praised my Lord Bute and said though he did not wish to see him minister yet it was shameful to proscribe his relations and his friends.” See Peters, The Elder Pitt, 148, 158. Pitt had argued energetically for a repeal of the Stamp Act during this period, despite the king’s support for it; he “strongly asserted the right of the Americans not to have internal taxes laid on them by Parliament . . . and that Britain could not subsist without America.” See J. Black, Pitt the Elder (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1992) 257.
×Footnote 9
Richard Grenville-Temple (1711–79), former Lord of the Admiralty (1756–57), visited Pitt’s house on 16 June, asking to choose his own Treasury Board and to find places for his associates on the council. The two men argued throughout the day, ending in Pitt’s decision to terminate their political connections—and a brief pamphlet war ensued. Temple was strongly associated with Wilkes and his anti-Scottish attacks. See B. Williams, The Life of William Pitt, Earl of Chatham (London: Longmans, Green, 1913) vol. 2, 209.
×Footnote 10
John Perceval, Earl of Egmont (1711–72), First Lord of the Admiralty (1763–66), resigned from Pitt’s ministry on 12 August, for reasons normally associated with his antipathy to Pitt rather than for policy differences.
×Footnote 11
Despite Bute’s decision to end British subsidies to Prussia in 1761, Mitchell tried unsuccessfully to persuade Frederick the Great of Britain’s ongoing support, consistent with Pitt’s policy since the first Treaty of Westminster (1756). Millar’s reference to Frederick’s heroism may have been ironic; Mitchell had recognized the symbolic importance of token support when he urged the Earl of Holdernesse, then Secretary of State, to send English horses: “trifles, your lordship knows, sometimes operate on the greatest of minds.” See Bisset, Memoirs and Papers of Sir Andrew Mitchell vol. 1, 403; D. Fraser, Frederick the Great, King of Prussia (London: Allen Lane, 2000) 461.
×Footnote 12
Prince Ferdinand (1721–92), Frederick the Great’s brother-in-law, enjoyed great popularity in Britain. In June 1766, Frederick sided with an insubordinate colonel in one of Ferdinand’s regiments, leading directly to Ferdinand’s resignation and to deepening concerns in Britain over the costly alliance with Prussia. On the “irresistible admiration at the heroism of his Prussian majesty” in Britain, see A Short View of the Political Life and Transactions of a Late Right Commoner (London: W. Griffin, 1766) 19; Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie (Leipzig: Dunder & Humblot, 1877) vol. 6, 688.
×Footnote 13
By 1766, Frederick was governing Prussia through measures that included a new taxation system: “the strictness and evening extortion [was] meted out to the public while irregularities committed by officials went undiscovered and unpublished.” It also forced industrial resettlement, which created widespread resentment and deepened poverty. See W. Hubatsch, Frederick the Great of Prussia: Absolutism and Administration (London: Thames and Hudson, 1975) 143–4.
×Footnote 14
George III was in residence at Richmond Lodge (toward the south end of Kew Gardens) between 23–29 August, and had likely arrived at the start of the month. See The Correspondence of King George the Third, ed. J. Fortescue (London: Macmillan, 1927) vol. 1, 387, 390.
×Footnote 15
John Stuart, Earl of Bute (1713–92), George III’s childhood tutor, and Prime Minister from 1761–63. He had kept a house (later called Cambridge Cottage) at Kew Green since 1755. By the summer of 1766, Bute was reproaching the king for excluding him from Pitt’s ministry, hence Millar’s curiosity over whether Bute and the king remained on good terms. See K. W. Schweizer, Frederick the Great, William Pitt and Lord Bute: The Anglo-Prussian Alliance, 1756–63 (Oxford: Oxford UP, 1991).
×Footnote 16
In 1762, George III had purchased Buckingham House, St James’s, which was soon known as the Queen’s House.
×Footnote 17
St James’s Palace, Westminster, the royal family’s principal residence.
×Footnote 18
Arthur Forbes of Craigievar, fourth baronet (1709–73), MP for Aberdeenshire (1732–44), had two older and six younger children, from two marriages. He was Mitchell’s friend and cousin, and had offered his parliamentary seat to Mitchell in 1747. As Mitchell’s closest surviving kinsman, Forbes would be the sole inheritor of his estate in 1771.
×Footnote 19
heared for, i.e., to be informed of.
×Footnote 20
John Pringle (1707–82), military physician, MD (1730), Physician-General (1744), Fellow of the Royal Society (1745), and Physician to the Queen (1761). He was made a baronet in 1766.
×Footnote 21
George Lewis Scott (1708–80), royal tutor, mathematician, Millar’s associate on the Society for the Encouragement of Learning, and his friend since the 1730s. From 1749, Scott was a tutor to the future George III, then aged 11. In 1751, he married Sarah Robinson (1720–95), whose anonymous first novel A History of Cornelia (1750) Millar had published. Despite the couple’s bitter and blatant estrangement from 1752, Millar continued to publish her works, including the two-volume novels A Journey through Every Stage of Life (1754) and The History of George Ellison (1766), as well as her historical compilation The History of Gustavus Ericson (1761). It may have been through George Scott’s acquaintance with the budding polemicist Thomas Paine (1737–1809) that the latter was introduced to Benjamin Franklin during his visit to London in 1772. See A. D. McKillop, ed., James Thomson: Letters and Documents (Lincoln: U of Kansas P, 1958) 140, 202.
×Footnote 22
Franklin and Pringle left London on 14 June 1766 to travel to the spa at Pyrmont (now Bad Pyrmont), Lower Saxony. The earliest evidence of Franklin’s relationship with Millar dates to 3 May 1753, when Franklin decided not to send a proof of a manuscript to Edward Cave because he did not want to disappoint Millar. See The Papers of Benjamin Franklin, ed. L. W. Labarse (New Haven: Yale UP, 1969) vol. 13, 314; vol. 4, 475.
×Footnote 23
The final volume of Hume’s History of England appeared in 1762; new editions, including revisions, were published consequently. Hume did not compose further volumes, despite urging from Millar and others. Mossner has concluded “that Hume was impatient to continue the History is certainly not true, although the previous autumn [1768] he had received His Majesty’s permission to inspect the papers in the various government archives.” See E. C. Mossner, The Life of David Hume (Oxford: Oxford UP, 1980) 555.
×Footnote 24
his Temper: Hume was famously temperate, despite his notoriety as an irreligious skeptic. The international scandal which arose over the public quarrel between Hume and Rousseau was ongoing; Hume’s final letter to Rousseau was dated 22 July, and Hume continued to receive letters on the matter from France into the autumn. See J. Y. T. Greig, The Letters of David Hume (Oxford: Oxford UP, 1932) vol. 2, 66, 382–448; R. Klibansky and E. C. Mossner, New Letters of David Hume (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1954) 132–52. For a summary of the affair, see Mossner, Life of David Hume 507–32; D. Edmonds and J. Eidinow, Rousseau’s Dog: Two Great Thinkers At War In The Age of Enlightenment (London: Faber, 2007). See also note 27.
×Footnote 25
William Murray, Earl of Mansfield (1705–93), politician and Lord Chief Justice.
×Footnote 26
Philip Dormer Stanhope, Earl of Chesterfield (1694–1773), retired Secretary of State yet still active in the House of Lords.
×Footnote 27
Hume’s account of this famous row was published in October in French and the next month in English. See A Concise and Genuine Account of the Dispute between Mr Hume and Mr Rousseau, with the Letters that Passed between Them during Their Controversy (London: T. Becket and P. A. de Hondt, 1766). To confirm its accuracy, Hume sought to deposit the original letters in the British Library; they are currently in the National Library of Scotland.
×Footnote 28
his stomack, i.e., affected his spleen or caused emotional upset.
×Footnote 29
Patrick Murdoch (d. 1774), clergyman and scientific writer, their longtime friend.
×Footnote 30
Dr Robert Smith (bap.1689–1768), mathematician and Newton’s longtime disciple, was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1719 under Newton’s presidency. By 1766 failing health had inhibited Smith’s academic abilities, but not his interests. Murdoch’s edition of Newton’s works was never published, possibly due to his own deteriorating health.
×Footnote 31
Although John Gray (d.1769) had been rector of Marischal College, Aberdeen, since 1762 (a largely ceremonial position), he lived near London on Richmond Hill, three miles from Millar’s home at Kew Green. He had probably known Millar since 1726, during the latter’s earliest days in London. He was credited by Millar’s friends Patrick Murdoch and Robert Symmer (d.1763) with clarifying Newton’s philosophy for the poet James Thomson, who published A Poem Sacred to the Memory of Sir Isaac Newton in 1727. Gray was a capable scholar who collaborated with Andrew Reid (see note 32) on a four-part abridgment of the Royal Society’s Philosophical Transactions from 1720–32 (London: W. Innys and R. Manby, 1733). Gray also worked with William Guthrie (1708–70) on a 12–vol. General History of the World, from the Creation to the Present Time (London: J. Newbery et al., 1764–67).
×Footnote 32
Andrew Reid (d. ca. 1767), editor and translator of historical and mathematical works, including The Elements of the Theory and Practice of Chymistry (London: A. Millar, 1758), which reached a fifth edition in 1787.
×Footnote 33
William Robertson, MD (1708–91), surgeon to the royal household at Richmond. Millar had known Robertson from his earliest days in London, at which time Robertson was the poet James Thomson’s neighbour. See McKillop, James Thomson 139–40; The Bee 6 (1791) 281–7; E. B. Chancellor, The History and Antiquities of Richmond (Richmond: Hiscoke & Son, 1894) 250.
×Footnote 34
John Carmichael, Earl of Hyndford (1701–67) solicited and received numerous investitures, including a royal grant to add the Silesian eagle to his coat of arms, despite his ineptitude as Envoy Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to Prussia (1741–44) during the War of Austrian Succession. See R. Lodge, Great Britain and Prussia in the Eighteenth Century (Oxford: Oxford UP, 1923) 67–9.
×Footnote 35
The fashionable season at Bath took place from September to December; unlike other English spas, Bath featured hot springs and an unrivalled range of indoor entertainments. See Hembry, The English Spa 137; T. Fawcett, ed., Voices of Eighteenth-Century Bath (Bath: Ruton P, 1995) 49–56.
×Footnote 36
James Ferguson (1710–76), scientific author. On this series of public lectures, see J. R. Milliburn, Wheelwright of the Heavens: The Life and Work of James Ferguson, FRS (London: Vade-Mecum P, 1988) 172–75.
×Footnote 37
to collect for, i.e., to collect donations for lectures. Ebenezer Johnston (1716–81) was an eminent dissenting minister who gave talks at Bath; his own parish was at Lewes, Sussex. See Gentleman’s Magazine 2 (1787) 1033.
×Footnote 38
succeeded, i.e., succeeded in raising a sufficient number of paid tickets for his lectures.
×Footnote 39
Robert Lowth (1710–87) was consecrated Bishop of St David’s on 17 May 1766, then named Bishop of Oxford in July—but he would not be translated there until 16 October. See Memoirs of the Life and Writings of the Late Right Reverend Robert Lowth (London: W. Brent, 1787) 6; Annual Register . . . for 1766 164.
×Footnote 40
Charles Moss (1711–1802) would be consecrated Bishop of St David’s in October; Millar is revealing knowledge of ecclesiastical appointments that have not been made public. See the Annual Register . . . for 1766 166.
×Footnote 41
Neither the Prince of Wales, George Augustus (1762–1830) nor Prince Frederick (1763–1827), who held the title of Bishop of Osnabrück, was educated by Lowth. See C. C. Orr, “The Late Hanoverian Court and the Christian Enlightenment” in Monarchy and Religion, ed. M. Schaich (Oxford: Oxford UP, 2006) 336–9.
×Footnote 42
very great, i.e., great friends.
×Footnote 43
Hedretox, i.e., heterodox, lacking in religious convictions, the principal cause of Warburton’s opposition to Hume and his many publications (see note 44).
×Footnote 44
William Warburton (1698–1779), who was implacable in his attacks on Hume, had been consecrated Bishop of Gloucester on 20 January 1760. See J. Nichols, Literary Anecdotes of the Eighteenth Century (London: J. Nichols, 1812) vol. 5, 636.
×Footnote 45
See Psalm 133:1: “how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!” On the famous rows between Lowth and Warburton, see B. Hepworth, Robert Lowth (Boston: Twayne, 1978) 36; on the contemporary notion that the rows began in a disagreement between their wives concerning home furnishings, see Nichols, Literary Anecdotes vol. 8, 411.
×Footnote 46
oily freind, i.e., obsequious. Probably Millar’s close friend, Patrick Murdoch (c.1700–1774), who provided the biographical preface to The Poetical Works of James Thomson (London: A. Millar, 1762). See McKillop, James Thomson 118.
×Footnote 47
Possibly a Peter Marchand (d.1766), gentleman, whose executors included Samuel Gray (ca.1694–1766), a botanist and Millar’s neighbour in Pall Mall.
×Footnote 48
Possibly a Daniel Leckie of Kensington, London, whose provision in the 1765 will of the Bath actor John Quin (1693–1766) was considered, by the Annual Register . . . for 1766 80, to be “a very foolish promise”. Quin may have had connections to the poet James Thomson.
×
seem perfectly happy in one another.[14] Ld Bute has not made his appearance on this Green since I returned.[15] nor do I Perceive any Person here of distinction abt the family. I fancy they are only allowed to come to ye Queens house[16] or St James’[17] when Majesty appears there. where we shall leave them and give an acctt of Freinds wc I think more agreeable.
was so uncertain. they could not. but ye Truth is they are so dissipated and engaged that they cannot find time. 
regretted it nor one hour has lain heavy on my hands. I go there once or perhaps may twice a Week to see and be seen. I allwise find employmt enought at Tunbridge I had honest Fergusson for his Lectures[36] and Johnston ye dissenting minr to collect for,[37] and succeeded in both. That I may not be idle at Bath I have engaged Fergusson there abt Xmas and tho’ he said he never succeded there.[38] I have promised to get him no 50 and I am sure I can for Mrs Millar and I will be 2 and will find no great difficulty of finding 48 more.