terest.

FOOTNOTES:

[350] Morehead's _Life of the Rev. R. Morehead_, p. 43.

[351] Add. MSS., 32, 566.

[352] See above, pp. 189, 190, 205.

[353] Clayden's _Early Life of Samuel Rogers_, p. 96.

[354] Clayden's _Early Life of Samuel Rogers_, p. 90.

[355] Dyce's _Recollections of the Table-talk of Samuel Rogers_, p.
45.

[356] Add. MSS., 32, 566.

[357] Bentham's _Works_, iii. 21.

[358] Bentham MSS., British Museum.

CHAPTER XXXI

REVISION OF THE "THEORY"

A revision of the _Theory of Moral Sentiments_ was a task Smith had
long had in contemplation. The book had been thirty years before the
world and had passed through five editions, but it had never undergone
any revision or alteration whatever. This was the task of the last
year of the author's life. He made considerable changes, especially by
way of addition, and though he wrote the additions, as Stewart informs
us, while he was suffering under severe illness, he has never written
anything better in point of literary style. Before the new edition
appeared there was a preliminary difference between author and
publisher regarding the propriety of issuing the additions as the
additions to the _Wealth of Nations_ had been issued, in a separate
form, for the use of those who already possessed copies of the
previous editions of the book. Cadell favoured that course,
notwithstanding that it would obviously interfere with the sale of the
new book, because he was unwilling to incur the charge of being
illiberal in his dealings with the public. But Smith refused to assent
to it, for reasons quite apart from the sale, but connected, whatever
they were, with "the nature of the work." He communicated his decision
through Dugald Stewart, who was in London in May 1789 on his way to
Paris, and Stewart reports the result of his interview with Cadell in
the following letter, bearing the post stamp of 6th May 1789:--

DEAR SIR--I was so extremely hurried during the very short
stay I made in London that I had not a moment's time to
write you till now. The day after my arrival I called on
Cadell, and luckily found Strachan (_sic_) with him. They
both assured me in the most positive terms that they had
published no Edition of the _Theory_ since the _Fifth_,
which was printed in 1781, and that if a _6th_ has been
mentioned in any of the newspapers, it must have been owing
to a typographical mistake. For your fart