no copy of
the original French edition of 1677-9 described by Marchand, in any English
public library; but if there is a copy in the French national library, any
of your bibliographical correspondents at Paris could easily ascertain
whether (as is probably the case) the Amsterdam edition is a mere reprint
from the original Paris edition.

The French version of this work is not only much enlarged, but it differs
in the names and incidents, and is fuller in the account of the
institutions and customs of the imaginary state. The English edition of
1738 (1 vol. 8vo.) is a literal translation from the French version, though
it does not purport to be a translation. It may be doubted whether the
translator was aware of the existence of the English publication of 1675-9.
The German translation was published in 1680; the Dutch translation in
1682: both these appear to have been taken from the French.

Morhof (_Polyhistor._, vol. i. p. 74.), who inserts this work among the
_libri damnati_, and dwells upon its deistical character, refers to the
French version; and though he knew that the book had originally appeared in
English, he probably was not aware of the difference between the two
versions. A note added by his first editor, Moller, states that Morhof
often told his friends that he believed Isaac Vossius to have been the
author of the work. Isaac Vossius was in England from 1670 until his death,
which took place at Windsor, February 21, 1689. His residence in England,
combined with the known laxity of his religious opinions, doubtless
suggested to Morhof the conjecture that he wrote this freethinking Utopia.
There is, however, no external evidence to support this conjecture, or to
show that it had any better foundation than the conjecture that Bishop
Berkeley wrote _Gaudentio di Lucca_. The University of Leyden purchased the
library of Isaac Vossius for 36,000 florins. If it is still preserved at
Leyden, a search among his books might ascertain whether there is among
them any copy of the English or French editions of this work, and whether
they contain any written remark by their former possessor. Moreover, it is
to be observed that the system of natural religion is for the first time
developed in the French edition; and this was the part which chiefly gave
the book its celebrity: whereas, the supposition of Morhof implies that the
English and French versions are identical.

Heumann, in his _Schediasma de Libris Anonymis et