tie Lancey, in his Xotes on Jones's History of Xeic-York during the Htcolulionary Wnr, (i., 722,) has partly "let the cat out of the bag," by saying they "were sons of Emanuel Scrope Howe, second Viscount " Howe, by Mary Sophia, an illegitimate daughter of George I., by his *' mistress, the Hanoverian Baroness Kihnausegge, and, consequently, "in point of fiict, first cousins once removed of George III." But our friend appears to have gone a little astray, since George III. was the grciit-grandson of George I. ; and the children of a daughter of the latter could hardly have been "first cousins once removed" of the former. Besides, if our memorj- serves us correctly, the mother of the Howes, whomsoever she may have been, was a paramour of Frederic Lewis, son of George II., and father of George III., even after her convenient marriage with Viscount Howe ; and the very distinctive features and the l>eculiar physical ailments of the two brothers, which they shared with the King, very clearly indicated whose offspring they were, although they were born in wedlock and were, therefore, nominally, Howes. They were, in fact, half-brothers of the King.

3 The extent of the authority of the brothers. Admiral and General Howe, as Commissioners for the restoration of Peace, in America, lias been so variously slated, that the careful reader will do well to refer to their Commission, which may be found in a most singular connection with a mass of p<ipers concerning the Exiiedition commanded by Geneial Burgoyne, which appear lo have l>een laid before the House of Commons, early in 1778. (.Minon's Parliamentary Register, London : 1778, viii., 308-312.)