piercing die referred to, and the unusually difficult and laborious nature of the work, consequent on the extreme depth of the engraving, it had been fully impressed on his memory, and he was enabled at once to recognise the impression given on the fly-leaf of this letter as a faithful (though somewhat less artistically finished) copy of the piercing die executed by his firm for me in 1833.⁴

In order to secure permanently this important evidence, Mr. Porter made, at my request, a statutory declaration to that effect, his identity being witnessed by a gentleman of position who had known him intimately for the last thirty-five years. A verbatim copy of this declaration is appended hereto.

The advertisement referred to induced many persons to whom I was known to tender such information as they might happen to possess in reference to Mr. Porter; one of these letters was from a Mr. Richard Cull, a gentleman with whom I became personally and intimately acquainted soon after my first arrival in London, about the year 1831. Being a man of taste and superior education, he took great interest in my invention for cheaply reproducing works of art in bas-relief, and during our intimacy of that period he proposed to join me as partner in the commercial carrying-out of my invention, but this proposition was never carried into effect.

Many years had elapsed since I had seen Mr. Cull, during which time he had risen to the highest eminence as a philologist and a prominent member of the Society of Antiquarians. Most fortunately, he had happened to see my advertisement for Mr. Porter in The Times, and having been acquainted in early life with Mr. Porter and his family, he at once wrote to me on the subject; he had also seen my letter in The Times on the "Reward of Invention," and it is to that circumstance, no doubt, that I owe the closing remarks of his letter, of which the following is a verbatim copy, omitting only some irrelevant family matters relative to Mr. Porter:--

12, Tavistock Street, Bedford Square, November 9th, 1878.

DEAR MR. BESSEMER,

It is some time since we met, but seeing your advertisement for Mr. Porter, the die-sinker, I determined to write to inform you what I can on the subject. He was a very good artist, but he failed in business and took a situation in the City; I knew him very well, and his family, including his father, mother, and sister. . . . . I think he must now be dead, as I have not met him for fourteen or fifteen years, and he never said where he lived after leaving Percival Street.

I remember SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS with you concerning Sir C. Presley and your invention, AT THE TIME OF YOUR INTERVIEWS WITH HIM. I Well remember the unfavourable opinions I formed of that official.

I am, Yours very truly, (Signed) R. CULL.

This letter from a gentleman I had for so many years lost sight of was a most unexpected and spontaneous confirmation of the fact that I was at the time mentioned in constant communication with Sir Charles Presley on the subject of my newly-invented stamps, and also that our conversations at the time had impressed Mr. Cull with "an unfavourable opinion of that official." I have no doubt but that in our frequent and friendly intercourse I had complained loudly of the constant evasions with which my claims were met at the Stamp Office, which must have given rise to this unfavourable impression in the mind of my friend, and which, it appears, was strongly enough imprinted to survive for so many years, although the precise reasons for it are no longer distinctly remembered. At my suggestion, Mr. Cull unhesitatingly made a statutory declaration on the 15th of November embodying these facts, a verbatim copy of which is appended.

In my letter on the "Reward of Invention," I stated that I was twenty years of age when my experiments for the prevention of forgery were commenced. Now, I was born on the 19th, January, 1813, hence I had arrived at twenty years of age in January, 1833. I have also stated that after some months of study