Coming to town in a few days - some confidential things to discuss. Allies now in Paris, and the pictures, statues and mss. are safe.

Trinity news. Adversaria being reprinted in Leipzig - will PE review it? He is the only person with a sufficiently wide knowledge, and superior to Blomfield and Gaisford. Part of PE's commonplace book on Athenaeus would thus be made known.

Still no IT.

Returns PE's notes on Eq. (to be returned by PE for the press - therefore with observations by JHM?). Good to see PE engaged with the Germans. Blomfield archdeacon of Colchester. Sends remembrances and thanks to Gaisford - sorry to hear about his wife.

Publication of 2nd ed. of Hipp. Contribution requested for Museum Criticum.

Begs PE for visit to Cambridge the following weekend (Commencement). Sorry that PE has suggested some excuses for Barker (who claims that Blomfield and PE had praised him - M knows one of these claims to be false, and hopes the other is too). Two years ago Barker had tried (via an undergraduate) to have Cic De Amicitia included as one of the college lecture subjects...so he could increase the sales of one of his books. Thanks PE for 2 articles for the 2nd number of the Mus Crit. 'Professor' more normally prefixed to the name of the holder in Cambridge than in Oxford.

From London - Blomfield about to arrive in town - the three to dine together. Suggests Ibbotsons Hotel (off Oxford Street - but it is not central.

Double letter (brought by a friend). Notes/conjectures on the Alcestis - wants PE's views (and especially wants to properly attribute the ideas of others). Has read PE's notes on HF in the most recent Class.Journ. - some rude remarks on Gilbert Wakefield.

In London - PE to send anything for the Mus.Crit. to Ibbotson's Hotel.

Something else has been sent under separate cover (rejected by the Post Office as too much for one cover). A) In PE's note on a word, he ought to differ, not from JHM, but from Porson, whose opinion JHM had defended. B) Begs PE to delete any reference to the Class.Journ. - not so much Barker, as the behaviour of the editor towards Blomfield and JHM.