A PUBLISHER AND HIS FRIENDS MEMOIR AND CORRESPONDENCE OF JOHN MURRAY WITH AN ACCOUNT OF THE ORIGIN AND PROGRESS OF THE HOUSE, 1768-1843 BY THE LATE SAMUEL SMILES, LL. D. CONDENSED AND EDITED BY THOMAS MACKAY _WITH PORTRAITS_ 1911 PREFACE When my Grandfather's Memoirs were published, twenty years ago, they metwith a most favourable and gratifying reception at the hands of thepublic. Interest was aroused by the struggle and success of a man whohad few advantages at the outset save his own shrewd sense and generousnature, and who, moreover, was thrown on his own resources to fight thebattle of life when he was little more than a child. The chief value of these volumes, however, consists in the fact thatthey supply an important, if not an indispensable, chapter in theliterary history of England during the first half of the nineteenthcentury. Byron and Scott, Lockhart, Croker, George Borrow, Hallam, Canning, Gifford, Disraeli, Southey, Milman are but a few of the namesoccurring in these pages, the whole list of which it would be tedious toenumerate. It may be admitted that a pious desire to do justice to the memory ofJohn Murray the Second--"the Anax of Publishers, " as Byron calledhim--led to the inclusion in the original volumes of some material ofminor importance which may now well be dispensed with. I find, however, that the work is still so often quoted and referred tothat I have asked my friend Mr. Thomas Mackay to prepare a new editionfor the press. I am convinced that the way in which he has dischargedhis task will commend itself to the reading public. He has condensed thewhole, has corrected errors, and has rewritten certain passages in amore concise form. I desire to acknowledge my debt to him for what he has done, and toexpress a hope that the public may extend a fresh welcome to "an oldfriend with a new face. " JOHN MURRAY. _December_, 1910. CONTENTS CHAPTER I JOHN MACMURRAY OR MURRAY The first John Murray--An Officer of Marines--Retires from ActiveService--His marriage--Correspondence with William Falconer--Falconer'sdeath--Murray purchases Sandby's business--John Murray's firstpublications--His writings--Mr. Kerr--Thomas Cumming goes to Ireland onbehalf of Murray--Prof. J. Millar--Mr. Whitaker--Defence of Sir R. Gordon--Ross estate--His controversy with Mr. Mason--The Edinburghbooksellers--Creech and Elliot--Dr. Cullen--The second John Murray--Hiseducation--Accident to his eye--Illness and death of the elder JohnMurray CHAPTER II JOHN MURRAY (II. )--BEGINNING OF HIS PUBLISHING CAREER--ISAAC D'ISRAELI, ETC. John Murray the Second--"The Anax of Publishers"--His start inbusiness--Murray and Highley--Dissolution of the partnership--Colman's"John Bull"--Mr. Joseph Hume--Archibald Constable--John Murray aVolunteer--The D'Israeli family--Isaac D'Israeli's earlyworks--"Flim-Flams"--Birth of Benjamin D'Israeli--Projected periodicalthe "Institute"--The "Miniature"--Murray's acquaintance with Canning andFrere CHAPTER III MURRAY AND CONSTABLE--HUNTER AND THE FORFARSHIRE LAIRDS--MARRIAGE OFJOHN MURRAY Archibald Constable & Co. --Alexander Gibson Hunter--The _EdinburghReview_--Murray's early associations with Constable--Dispute betweenLongman and Constable--Murray appointed London Agent--He urgesreconciliation between Constable and Longman--Mr. Murray visitsEdinburgh--Engaged to Miss Elliot--Goes into Forfarshire--RudeHospitality--Murray's marriage--The D'Israelis CHAPTER IV "MARMION"--CONSTABLES AND BALLANTYNES--THE "EDINBURGH REVIEW" Murray's business prospects--Acquires a share of "Marmion"--Becomes Londonpublisher of the _Edinburgh Review_--Acquaintance with WalterScott--Constable's money transactions--Murray's remonstrance--Heseparates from Constable--The Ballantynes--Scott joins their printingbusiness--Literary themes CHAPTER V ORIGIN OF THE "QUARTERLY REVIEW" Canning's early schemes for a Penny Newspaper--The _Anti-Jacobin_--The_Edinburgh Review_--John Murray's letter to Mr. Canning--Walter Scott'sassistance--Southey's letter to Scott--Review of "Marmion" in the_Edinburgh_--Murray's conditions--Meeting with James Ballantyne atFerrybridge--Visit to Scott at Ashestiel--Letters to Scott--Scott'sletters to Murray, Ellis, and Gifford on the _Quarterly_--Arrangements forthe first number--Articles by Scott--James Mill--Mrs. Inchbald--Dr. ThomasYoung CHAPTER VI THE "QUARTERLY" LAUNCHED Meeting of Murray and Ballantyne at Boroughbridge--Walter Scott's interestin the new _Review_--Publication of the first number of the _Quarterly_--Scott's proposed "Secret History of the Court of James I. "--_Portcullis_copies--"Old English Froissart"--Opinions of the _Quarterly_--Scott'senergy and encouragement--Murray's correspondence with Mr. StratfordCanning--Murray's energy--Leigh Hunt--James Mill--Gifford'sunpunctuality--Appearance of the second number--Mr. Canning'scontributions--Appearance of No. 3--Letters from Mr. Ellis to IsaacD'Israeli--John Barrow's first connection with the _Quarterly_--RobertSouthey--Appearance of No. 4 CHAPTER VII CONSTABLE AND BALLANTYNE Murray's and Ballantyne's joint enterprises--Financialdifficulties--Murray's remonstrances--Ballantyne's recklessspeculations--And disregard of Murray's advice--Revival of Murray'sbusiness with Constable--Publication of the "Lady of the Lake"--Murrayexcluded from his promised share of it--Transfers his Edinburgh agencyto Mr. William Blackwood--Publication of No. 5 of the _Quarterly_--Southey's articles and books--Unpunctuality of the _Review_--Gifford's review of "The Daughters of Isenberg"--His letter toMiss Palmer--Dispute between Murray and Gifford--Attacks on the_Edinburgh Review_ by the _Quarterly_--Murray's disapproval of them--TheBallantynes and Constables applying for money--Nos. 8 and 9 of the_Review_--Southey's Publications--Letters from Scott--His review of the"Curse of Kehama"--Southey's dependence on the _Quarterly_--His letterto Mr. Wynn CHAPTER VIII MURRAY AND GIFFORD--RUPTURE WITH CONSTABLE--PROSPERITY OF THE"QUARTERLY" Increasing friendship between Murray and Gifford--Gifford's opinion ofhumorous articles--Mr. Pillans--Gifford's feeble health--Murray'sfinancial difficulties--Remonstrates with Constable--Correspondence withand dissociation from Constable--_Quarterly Review_ No. 12--Gifford'ssevere remarks on Charles Lamb--His remorse--_Quarterly Review_ No. 14--Murray's offer to Southey of 1, 000 guineas for his poem CHAPTER IX LORD BYRON'S WORKS, 1811 TO 1814 Lord Byron's first acquaintance with Mr. Murray--Mr. Dallas's offer toCawthorn and Miller--Murray's acceptance of "Childe Harold"--Byron'svisits to Fleet Street--Murray's letters to Byron--Gifford's opinion ofthe Poem--Publication of "Childe Harold"--Its immediate success--Byron'spresentation to the Prince of Wales--Murray effects a reconciliationbetween Byron and Scott--Letters to and from Scott--Publication of "TheGiaour, " "Bride of Abydos" and "Corsair"--Correspondence withByron--"Ode to Napoleon"--"Lara" and "Jacqueline" CHAPTER X MR. MURRAY'S REMOVAL TO 50, ALBEMARLE STREET Murray's removal to Albemarle Street--Miller's unfriendlybehaviour--Progress of the _Quarterly_--Miscellaneous publications--D'Israeli's "Calamities of Authors"--Letters from Scottand Southey--Southey's opinions on the patronage of literature--Scott'sembarrassments--Recklessness of the Ballantynes--Scott applies to Murrayfor a loan--Publication of "Waverley"--Mystery of the authorship--Mr. Murray's proposed trip to France--His letters to Mrs. Murray--Educationof his son--Announcement of Lord Byron's engagement--Mr. Murray's visitto Newstead Abbey--Murray in Edinburgh--Mr. William Blackwood--Visit toAbbotsford--Letter to Lord Byron--Letters from Blackwood--The "Vision ofDon Roderick" CHAPTER XI MURRAY'S DRAWING-ROOM--BYRON AND SCOTT--WORKS PUBLISHED IN 1815 Murray's drawing-room in Albemarle Street--A literary centre--GeorgeTicknor's account of it--Letter from Gifford--Death of his housekeeperNancy--First meeting of Byron and Scott--Recollections of John MurrayIII. --Napoleon's escape from Elba--Waterloo--Mr. Blackwood'sletter--Suppression of an article written for the _Edinburgh_--Mr. Murray's collection of portraits of authors--Mr. Scott's visit toBrussels, Waterloo, etc. --Mr. Murray's visit to Paris--Returnhome--Important diplomatic correspondence offered by Miss Waldie--MissAusten--"Emma"--Mr. Malthus's works--Letters from W. Scott CHAPTER XII VARIOUS PUBLICATIONS--CHARLES MATURIN--S. T. COLERIDGE--LEIGH HUNT Charles Maturin--His early career--His early publications--Andapplication to W. Scott--Performance of "Bertram" at DruryLane--Published by Murray--"Manuel, a Tragedy"--Murray's letter toByron--Death of Maturin--S. T. Coleridge--Correspondence about histranslation of "Faust"--"Glycine, " "Remorse, " "Christabel, " "Zapolya, "and other works--Further correspondence--Leigh Hunt--Asked to contributeto the _Quarterly_--"Story of Rimini"--Murray's letters to Byron andHunt--Negotiations between Murray and Leigh Hunt CHAPTER XIII THOMAS CAMPBELL--JOHN CAM HOBHOUSE--J. W. CROKER--JAMES HOGG, ETC. Thomas Campbell--His early works--Acquaintance with Murray--"Selectionsfrom the British Poets"--Letters to Murray--Proposed Magazine--AndSeries of Ancient Classics--Close friendship between Campbell andMurray--Murray undertakes to publish the "Selections from BritishPoets"--Campbell's explanation of the work--"Gertrude of Wyoming"--Scottreviews Campbell's poems in the _Quarterly_--Campbell's Lectures at theRoyal Institution--Campbell's satisfaction with Murray's treatment ofhim--"Now Barabbas was a publisher"--Increase of Murray'sbusiness--Dealings with Gifford--Mr. J. C. Hobhouse--His "Journey toAlbania"--Isaac D'Israeli's "Character of James I. "--Croker's "Storiesfor Children"--The division of profits--Sir John Malcolm--Increasingnumber of poems submitted to Mr. Murray--James Hogg--His works--Andletters to Murray--The "Repository"--Correspondence with Murray--Hoggasks Murray to find a wife for him CHAPTER XIV LORD BYRON'S DEALINGS WITH MR. MURRAY--_continued_ Lord Byron's marriage--Letters from Mr. Murray during the honeymoon--Mr. Fazakerly's interview with Bonaparte--Byron's pecuniaryembarrassments--Murray's offers of assistance--"Siege ofCorinth"--"Parisina"--Byron refuses remuneration--Pressed to give themoney to Godwin, Maturin, and Coleridge--Murray's remonstrance--Gifford's opinion of the "Siege of Corinth" and Mr. D'Israeli's--Byron leaves England--Sale of his Library--The "Sketch fromPrivate Life"--Mr. Sharon Turner's legal opinion--Murray's letter on thearrival of the MS. Of "Childe Harold, " Canto III. [Transcriber's Note: two pages missing from source document] CHAPTER XIX WORKS PUBLISHED IN 1817-18--CORRESPONDENCE, ETC. Works published by Murray and Blackwood jointly--Illness ofScott--Efforts to help the Ettrick Shepherd--Murray's offers ofassistance--Scott reviews the "Wake"--Hogg's house at Eltrive--Scott andthe _Quarterly_--"Rob Roy"--The "Scottish Regalia"--"The Heart ofMidlothian"--Appeal to Scott for an article--"Lord Orford'sLetters"--Murray and James Hogg at Abbotsford--Conclusion of Hogg'scorrespondence--Robert Owen--Increased number of would-be poets--SharonTurner--Gifford's illness--Croker and Barrow edit _Quarterly Review_ CHAPTER XX HALLAM--BASIL HALL. --CRABBE--HOPE--HORACE AND JAMES SMITH Mr. Hallam--Sir H. Ellis's "Embassy to China"--Correspondence with LadyAbercorn about new books--Proposed _Monthly Register_--Mr. Croker'scondemnation of the scheme--Crabbe's Works--Mr. Murray's offer--Mr. Rogers's negotiations--Hope's "Anastasius"--"Rejected Addresses"--Colonel Macirone's action against the _Quarterly_--Murray'sentertainments--Mrs. Bray's account of them CHAPTER XXI MEMOIRS OF LADY HERVEY AND HORACEWALPOLE--BELZONI--MILMAN--SOUTHEY--MRS. RUNDELL, ETC. Lady Hervey's Letters--Mr. Croker's letter about the editing ofthem--Horace Walpole's Memoirs--Mr. Murray's correspondence with LordHolland--The Suffolk papers, edited by Mr. Croker--Mrs. Delany'sLetters--Letter from Mr. Croker--Horace Walpole's "Reminiscences, "edited by Miss Berry--Tomline's "Life of Pitt"--Giovanni Belzoni--Hisearly career and works--His sensitiveness--His death--Examples of hisstrength--Rev. H. H. Milman's Works, "Fazio, " "Samor, " "The Fall ofJerusalem, " "Martyr of Antioch, " "Belshazzar"--Murray's dealings withMilman--Benjamin Disraeli--Letters from Southey about his articles onCromwell--The New Churches, etc. --"The Book of the Church"--WarrenHastings, etc--The Carbonari--Mr. Eastlake--Mrs. Graham--Galignani'spirated edition of Byron--Mrs. Rundell's "Cookery Book"--Dispute withLongman's--An injunction obtained CHAPTER XXII WASHINGTON IRVING--UGO FOSCOLO--LADY CAROLINE LAMB--"HAJJI BABA"--MRS. MARKHAM'S HISTORIES Washington Irving--His early dealings with Murray--He comes toEngland--His description of a dinner at Murray's--"The SketchBook"--Published in England by Miller--Afterwards undertaken byMurray--Terms of purchase--Irving's ill-success in business--"Bracebridge Hall"--James Fenimore Cooper--Ugo Foscolo--Hisearly career--First article in the _Quarterly_--Letter from Mr. T. Mitchell--Foscolo's peculiarities--Digamma Cottage--His Lectures--Deathof Foscolo--Lady C. Lamb--"Glenarvon"--"Penruddock"--"Ada Reis"--Letterfrom the Hon. Wm. Lamb--Lord J. Russell--His proposed History ofEurope--Mr. James Morier's "Hajji Baba"--Letter of Mirza AbulHassan--Mrs. Markham's "History of England"--Allan Cunningham CHAPTER XXIII GIFFORD'S RETIREMENT FROM THE EDITORSHIP OF THE "QUARTERLY"--AND DEATH Gifford's failing health--Difficulty of finding a successor--Barrow'sassistance--Gifford's letter to Mr. Canning--Irregularity of thenumbers--Southey's views as to the Editorship--Gifford's letter to Mr. Canning--Appointment of Mr. J. T. Coleridge--Murray's announcement of theappointment to Gifford--Close of Mr. Gifford's career--Hiscorrespondence with Murray--Letter from Mr. R. Hay to the present Mr. Murray about Gifford CHAPTER XXIV THE "REPRESENTATIVE" Murray's desire to start a new periodical--Benjamin Disraeli--Projectedmorning paper--Benjamin Disraeli's early career and writings--Letters toMurray about "Aylmer Papillon"--Benjamin Disraeli's increasing intimacywith Murray--Origin of the scheme to start a daily paper--South Americanspeculation--Messrs. Powles--Agreement to start a daily paper--the_Representative_--Benjamin Disraeli's journey to consult Sir W. Scottabout the editorship--His letters to Murray--Visit to Chiefswood--Progress of the negotiation-Mr. Lockhart's reluctance toassume the editorship--Letter from Mr. I. D'Israeli to Murray--Mr. Lockhart's first introduction to Murray--His letter about theeditorship--Sir W. Scott's letter to Murray--Editorship of _Quarterly_offered to Lockhart--Murray's letter to Sir W. Scott--Mr. Lockhartaccepts the editorship of the _Quarterly_--Disraeli's activity inpromoting the _Representative_--His letters to Murray--Premisestaken--Arrangements for foreign correspondence--Letters to Mr. Maas--Engagement of Mr. Watts and Mr. S. C. Hall--Mr. Disraeli ceases totake part in the undertaking--Publication of the _Representative_--Dr. Maginn--Failure of the _Representative_--Effect of the strain onMurray's health--Letters from friends--The financial crisis--Failure ofConstable and Ballantyne--The end of the _Representative_--Coolnessbetween Murray and Mr. D'Israeli CHAPTER XXV MR. LOCKHART AS EDITOR OF THE "QUARTERLY"--HALLAM WORDSWORTH--DEATH OFCONSTABLE The editorship of the _Quarterly_--Mr. Lockhart appointed--Letter fromSir W. Scott, giving his opinion of Lockhart's abilities andcharacter--Letters from Mr. Lockhart--Mr. Croker's article on "Parolesd'un Croyant"--Charles Butler--Blanco White--Controversies, etc. --Wordsworth's Works--Letter from Mr. Lockhart--Renewed intercoursebetween Murray and Constable CHAPTER XXVI SIR WALTER'S LAST YEARS South American speculation--Captain Head, R. E. --His rapid rides acrossthe Pampas--His return home and publication of his work--Results of hismission--Mr. Disraeli and Mr. Powles--Letter from Mr. B. Disraeli--Irving's "Life of Columbus"--His agent, Col. Aspinwall--Letterof warning from Mr. Sharon Turner--Southey's opinion--"The Conquest ofGranada"--Lockhart's and Croker's opinions--The financial result oftheir publication--Correspondence between Irving and Murray--"Tales ofthe Alhambra"--Murray's subsequent lawsuit with Bonn about thecopyrights--Review of Hallam's "Constitutional History" in the_Quarterly_--Mr. Hallam's remonstrance--Letter from Murray--Letter fromMr. Mitchell--Southey's discontent--Sir W. Scott and Lockhart--Scott'sarticles for the _Quarterly_--Sir H. Davy's "Salmonia"--Anecdote of LordNelson--The Duke of Wellington--Murray's offer to Scott for a History ofScotland--Sale of Sir W. Scott's copyrights--Murray's offer for "Talesof a Grandfather"--Scott's reply--Scott's closing years--Murray'sresignation of his one-fourth share of "Marmion"--Scott's lastcontributions to the _Quarterly_--His death--Mr. John Murray's accountof the Theatrical Fund Dinner CHAPTER XXVII NAPIER'S "PENINSULAR WAR"--CROKER'S "BOSWELL"--"THE FAMILY LIBRARY" ETC. Napier's "History of the Peninsular War"--Origin of the work--Col. Napier's correspondence with Murray--Publication of Vol. I. --Controversyaroused by it--Murray ceases to publish the work--His letter to the_Morning Chronicle_--The Duke of Wellington's Despatches--Croker'sedition of "Boswell's Johnson"--Correspondence with Croker, Lockhart, etc. --Publication of the book--Its value--Letter from Mrs. Shelley--Mr. Henry Taylor's "Isaac Comnenus"--"Philip van Artevelde"--"The FamilyLibrary" and the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge--Theprogress of "The Family Library"--Milman's "History of theJews"--Controversy aroused by it--Opinion of the Jews CHAPTER XXVIII MOORE'S "LIFE OF BYRON" Murray purchases the remainder of Byron's Poems--Leigh Hunt's"Recollections"--Moore selected as the biographer of Byron--Collectionof Letters and Papers--Lockhart and Scott's opinion of thework--Publication of the first volume of Byron's "Life"--Mrs. Shelley'sletter--Publication of the second volume--Letters from Mrs. Somervilleand Croker--Capt. Medwin's Conversations--Pecuniary results of LordByron's "Life"--Reviews of Moore's works in the _Quarterly_--Moore onEditors--Complete edition of "Byron's Works"--Letters from CountessGuiccioli and Sir R. Peel--Thorwaldsen's statue of Lord Byron--Refusedat Westminster Abbey, but erected in Trinity College Library, Cambridge MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY CHAPTER I JOHN MACMURRAY OR MURRAY The publishing house of Murray dates from the year 1768, in which yearJohn MacMurray, a lieutenant of Marines, having retired from the serviceon half-pay, purchased the bookselling business of William Sandby, atthe sign of the "Ship, " No. 32, Fleet Street, opposite St. Dunstan'sChurch. John MacMurray was descended from the Murrays of Athol. His uncle, Colonel Murray, was "out" in the rising of 1715, under the Earl of Mar, served under the Marquis of Tullibardine, the son of his chief, the Dukeof Athol, and led a regiment in the abortive fight of Sheriffmuir. Afterthe rebellion Colonel Murray retired to France, where he served underthe exiled Duke of Ormonde, who had attached himself to the StuartCourt. The Colonel's brother Robert followed a safer course. He prefixed the"Mac" to his name; settled in Edinburgh; adopted the law as aprofession, and became a Writer to the Signet. He had a family of threedaughters, Catherine, Robina, and Mary Anne; and two sons, Andrew andJohn. John, the younger of Robert MacMurray's sons, was born at Edinburgh in1745. After receiving a good general education, he entered the RoyalMarines under the special patronage of Sir George Yonge, Bart. , [Footnote: Sir George Yonge was Governor of the Cape of Good Hope, andsubsequently Secretary at War; he died in 1812. ] a well-known officialof the last century, and his commission as second lieutenant was datedJune 24, 1762. Peace was signed at the treaty of Paris in 1763, andyoung MacMurray found himself quartered at Chatham, where the monotonyof the life to a young man of an active and energetic temperament becamealmost intolerable. He determined therefore to retire on half-pay at theage of twenty-three, and become a London bookseller! It is not improbable that he was induced to embark on his proposedenterprise by his recent marriage with Nancy Wemyss, daughter of CaptainWemyss, then residing at Brompton, near Chatham. While residing at Chatham, MacMurray renewed his acquaintance withWilliam Falconer, the poet, and author of "The Shipwreck, " who, likehimself, was a native of Edinburgh. To this friend, who was then on the eve of sailing to India, he wrote: BROMPTON, KENT, _October_ 16, 1768. DEAR WILL, Since I saw you, I have had the intention of embarking in a scheme thatI think will prove successful, and in the progress of which I had an eyetowards your participating. Mr. Sandby, Bookseller, opposite St. Dunstan's Church, Fleet Street, has entered into company with Snow andDenne, Bankers. I was introduced to this gentleman about a week ago, upon an advantageous offer of succeeding him in his old business; which, by the advice of my friends, I propose to accept. Now, although I havelittle reason to fear success by myself in this undertaking, yet I thinkso many additional advantages would accrue to us both, were your forcesand mine joined, that I cannot help mentioning it to you, and making youthe offer of entering into company. He resigns to me the lease of the house, the goodwill, etc. ; and I onlytake his bound stock, and fixtures, at a fair appraisement, which willnot amount to much beyond £400, and which, if ever I mean to part with, cannot fail to bring in nearly the same sum. The shop has been longestablished in the Trade; it retains a good many old customers; and I amto be ushered immediately into public notice by the sale of a newedition of "Lord Lyttelton's Dialogues"; and afterwards by a likeedition of his "History. " These Works I shall sell by commission, upon acertain profit, without risque; and Mr. Sandby has promised to continueto me, always, his good offices and recommendations. These are the general outlines; and if you entertain a notion that theconjunction will suit you, advise me, and you shall be assumed uponequal terms; for I write to you before the affair is finally settled;not that I shall refuse it if you don't concur (for I am determined onthe trial by myself); but that I think it will turn out better were wejoined; and this consideration alone prompts me to write to you. ManyBlockheads in the Trade are making fortunes; and did we not succeed aswell as they, I think it must be imputed only to ourselves. Make Mrs. McMurray's compliments and mine to Mrs. Falconer; we hope she has reapedmuch benefit from the saltwater bath. Consider what I have proposed; andsend me your answer soon. Be assured in the meantime, that I remain, Dear Sir, Your affectionate and humble servant, JOHN McMURRAY. P. S. --My advisers and directors in this affair have been Thomas Cumming, Esq. , Mr. Archibald Paxton, Mr. James Paterson of Essex House, andMessrs. J. And W. Richardson, Printers. These, after deliberatereflection, have unanimously thought that I should accept Mr. Sandby'soffer. Falconer's answer to this letter has not been preserved. It did notdelay his departure from Dover in the _Aurora_ frigate. The vesseltouched at the Cape; set sail again, and was never afterwards heard of. It is supposed that she was either burnt at sea, or driven northward bya storm and wrecked on the Madagascar coast. Falconer intended to haveprefixed some complimentary lines to Mr. Murray to the third edition of"The Shipwreck, " but they were omitted in the hurry of leaving Londonand England for India. Notwithstanding the failure of MacMurray to obtain the aid of Falconerin his partnership, he completed alone his contract with Mr. Sandby. Hisfather at Edinburgh supplied him with the necessary capital, and hebegan the bookselling business in November 1768. He dropped the prefix"Mac" from his surname; put a ship in full sail at the head of hisinvoices; and announced himself to the public in the following terms: "John Murray (successor to Mr. Sandby), Bookseller and Stationer, at No. 32, over against St. Dunstan's Church, in Fleet Street, London, sellsall new Books and Publications. Fits up Public or Private Libraries inthe neatest manner with Books of the choicest Editions, the best Print, and the richest Bindings. Also, executes East India or foreignCommissions by an assortment of Books and Stationary suited to theMarket or Purpose for which it is destined; all at the most reasonablerates. " Among the first books he issued were new editions of Lord Lyttelton's"Dialogues of the Dead, " and of his "History of King Henry the Second, "in stately quarto volumes, as well as of Walpole's "Castle of Otranto. "He was well supported by his friends, and especially by his old brotherofficers, and we find many letters from all parts of the worldrequesting him to send consignments of books and magazines, the choiceof which was, in many cases, left entirely to his own discretion. In1769 he received a letter from General Sir Robert Gordon, then in India, who informed him that he had recommended him to many of his comrades. _Sir R. Gordon to John Murray_. "Brigadier-General Wedderburn has not forgotten his old school-fellow, J. McMurray. Send me British news, and inform me of all political andother affairs at home. " [He also added that Colonel Mackenzie, anotherold friend, is to be his patron. ] "I hope, " says Sir E. Gordon, inanother letter, "that you find more profit and pleasure from your newemployment than from that of the sword, which latter, you may remember, I endeavoured to dissuade you from returning to; but a little trial, andsome further experience, at your time of life, cannot hurt you.... Mybest compliments to Mrs. Murray, who I suppose will not be sorry foryour laying aside the wild Highland 'Mac' as unfashionable and evendangerous in the circuit of Wilkes's mob; but that, I am convinced, wasyour smallest consideration. " The nature of Mr. Murray's business, and especially his consignments todistant lands, rendered it necessary for him to give long credit, whilethe expense and the risk of bringing out new books added a fresh strainon his resources. In these circumstances, he felt the need of freshcapital, and applied to his friend Mr. William Kerr, Surveyor of theGeneral Post Office for Scotland, for a loan. Mr. Kerr responded in akindly letter. Though he could not lend much at the time, he sent Mr. Murray £150, "lest he might be prejudiced for want of it, " and added aletter of kind and homely advice. In order to extend his business to better advantage, Mr. Murrayendeavoured to form connections with booksellers in Scotland andIreland. In the first of these countries, as the sequel will show, thefirm established permanent and important alliances. To push the trade inIreland he employed Thomas Cumming, a Quaker mentioned in Boswell's"Life of Johnson, " who had been one of his advisers as to the purchaseof Mr. Sandby's business. _Mr. T. Gumming to John Murray_. "On receipt of thine I constantly applied to Alderman Faulkener, andshowed him the first Fable of Florian, but he told me that he would notgive a shilling for any original copy whatever, as there is no law oreven custom to secure any property in books in this kingdom [Ireland]. From him, I went directly to Smith and afterwards to Bradley, etc. Theyall gave me the same answer.... Sorry, and very sorry I am, that Icannot send a better account of the first commission thou hast favouredme with here. Thou may'st believe that I set about it with a perfectzeal, not lessened from the consideration of the troubles thou hast onmy account, and the favours I so constantly receive from thee; norcertainly that my good friend Dr. Langhorne was not altogether out ofthe question. None of the trade here will transport books at their ownrisque. This is not a reading, but a hard-drinking city; 200 or 250 areas many as a bookseller, except it be an extraordinary work indeed, everthrows off at an impression. " Mr. Murray not only published the works of others, but became an authorhimself. He wrote two letters in the _Morning Chronicle_ in defence ofhis old friend Colonel (afterwards Sir) Robert Gordon, who had beencensured for putting an officer under arrest during the siege of Broach, in which Gordon had led the attack. The Colonel's brother, Gordon ofGordonstown, wrote to Murray, saying, "Whether you succeed or not, yourtwo letters are admirably written; and you have obtained great merit andreputation for the gallant stand you have made for your friend. " TheColonel himself wrote (August 20, 1774): "I cannot sufficiently thankyou, my dear sir, for the extraordinary zeal, activity, and warmth offriendship, with which you so strenuously supported and defended mycause, and my honour as a soldier, when attacked so injuriously byColonel Stuart, especially when he was so powerfully supported. " Up to this time Mr. Murray's success had been very moderate. He hadbrought out some successful works; but money came in slowly, and hischief difficulty was the want of capital. He was therefore under thenecessity of refusing to publish works which might have done somethingto establish his reputation. At this juncture, i. E. In 1771, an uncle died leaving a fortune of£17, 000, of which Mr. Murray was entitled to a fourth share. On thestrength of this, his friend Mr. Kerr advanced to him a further sum of£500. The additional capital was put into the business, but even thenhis prosperity did not advance with rapid strides; and in 1777 we findhim writing to his friend Mr. Richardson at Oxford. _John Murray to Mr. Richardson_. DEAR JACK, I am fatigued from morning till night about twopenny matters, if any ofwhich is forgotten I am complained of as a man who minds not hisbusiness. I pray heaven for a lazy and lucrative office, and then Ishall with alacrity turn my shop out of the window. A curious controversy occurred in 1778 between Mr. Mason, executor ofThomas Gray the poet, and Mr. Murray, who had published a "PoeticalMiscellany, " in which were quoted fifty lines from three passages inGray's works. Mr. Murray wrote a pamphlet in his own defence, and the incident ismentioned in the following passage from Boswell's "Life": "Somebody mentioned the Rev. Mr. Mason's prosecution of Mr. Murray, thebookseller, for having inserted in a collection only fifty lines ofGray's Poems, of which Mr. Mason had still the exclusive property, underthe Statute of Queen Anne; and that Mr. Mason had persevered, notwithstanding his being requested to name his own terms ofcompensation. Johnson signified his displeasure at Mr. Mason's conductvery strongly; but added, by way of showing that he was not surprised atit, 'Mason's a Whig. ' Mrs. Knowles (not hearing distinctly): 'What! aprig, Sir?' Johnson: 'Worse, Madam; a Whig! But he is both!'" Mr. Murray had considerable intercourse with the publishers ofEdinburgh, among the chief of whom were Messrs. Creech & Elliot, and bytheir influence he soon established a connection with the professors ofEdinburgh University. Creech, who succeeded Mr. Kincaid in his businessin 1773, occupied a shop in the Luckenbooths, facing down the HighStreet, and commanding a prospect of Aberlady Bay and the north coast ofHaddingtonshire. Being situated near the Parliament House--the centre ofliterary and antiquarian loungers, as well as lawyers--Creech's place ofbusiness was much frequented by the gossipers, and was known as_Creech's Levee_. Creech himself, dressed in black-silk breeches, withpowdered hair and full of humorous talk, was one of the most conspicuousmembers of the group. He was also an author, though this was the leastof his merits. He was an appreciative patron of literature, and gavelarge sums for the best books of the day. Mr. Elliot, whose place of business was in the Parliament Close, andwhose daughter subsequently married Mr. Murray's son the subject of thisbiography, was a publisher of medical and surgical works, and Mr. Murraywas his agent for the sale of these in London. We find from Mr. Elliot'sletters that he was accustomed to send his parcels of books to London bythe Leith fleet, accompanied by an armed convoy. In June 1780 he wrote:"As the fleet sails this evening, and the schooner carries 20 guns, Ihope the parcel will be in London in four or five days"; and shortlyafterwards: "I am sending you four parcels of books by the _Carran_, which mounts 22 guns, and sails with the _Glasgow_ of 20 guns. " Thereason of the Edinburgh books being conveyed to London guarded by armedships, was that war was then raging, and that Spain, France, and Hollandwere united against England. The American Colonies had also rebelled, and Paul Jones, holding their commission, was hovering along the EastCoast with three small ships of war and an armed brigantine. It wastherefore necessary to protect the goods passing between Leith andLondon by armed convoys. Sometimes the vessels on their return werequarantined for a time in Inverkeithing Bay. The first Mrs. Murray died, leaving her husband childless, and hemarried again. By his second wife he had three sons and two daughters, two of the sons, born in 1779 and 1781 respectively, died in infancy, while the third, John, born in 1778, is the subject of this Memoir. In1782 he writes to his friend the Rev. John Whitaker: "We have one sonand daughter, the son above four years, and the daughter above twoyears, both healthy and good-natured. " In June 1782 Mr. Murray had a paralytic stroke, by which he, for a time, lost the use of his left side, and though he shortly recovered, andcontinued his work as before, he was aware of his dangerous position. Toa friend going to Madeira in September 1791 he wrote: "Whether we shallever meet again is a matter not easily determined. The stroke by which Isuffered in 1782 is only suspended; it will be repeated, and I mustfall in the contest. " In the meantime Mr. Murray made arrangements for the education of hisson. He was first sent for a year to the High School of Edinburgh. Whilethere he lived with Mr. Robert Kerr, author of several works onChemistry and Natural History, published by Mr. Murray. Having passed ayear in Edinburgh, the boy returned to London, and after a time was sentto a school at Margate. There he seems to have made some progress. To afriend Mr. Murray wrote: "He promises, I think, to write well, althoughhis master complains a little of his indolence, which I am afraid heinherits from me. If he does not overcome it, _it_ will overcome him. "In a later letter he said: "The school is not the best, but the peopleare kind to him, and his health leaves no alternative. He writes a goodhand, is fond of figures, and is coming forward both in Latin andFrench. Yet he inherits a spice of indolence, and is a little impatientin his temper. His appearance--open, modest, and manly--is much in hisfavour. He is grown a good deal, and left us for Margate (after hisholiday) as happy as could be expected. " In the course of the following year Mr. Murray sent the boy to awell-known school at Gosport, kept by Dr. Burney, one of his old Mends. Burney was a native of the North of Ireland, and had originally beencalled MacBurney, but, like Murray, he dropped the Mac. While at Dr. Burney's school, young Murray had the misfortune to losethe sight of his right eye. The writing-master was holding his penknifeawkwardly in his hand, point downwards, and while the boy, who wasshowing up an exercise, stooped to pick up the book which had fallen, the blade ran into his eye and entirely destroyed the sight. To a friendabout to proceed to Gosport, Mr. Murray wrote: "Poor John has met with asad accident, which you will be too soon acquainted with when you reachGosport. His mother is yet ignorant of it, and I dare not tell her. " Eventually the boy was brought to London for the purpose of ascertainingwhether something might be done by an oculist for the restoration of hissight. But the cornea had been too deeply wounded; the fluid of the eyehad escaped; nothing could be done for his relief, and he remained blindin that eye to the end of his life. [Footnote: Long afterwards Chantreythe sculptor, who had suffered a similar misfortune, exclaimed, "What!are you too a brother Cyclops?" but, as the narrator of the story usedto add, Mr. Murray could see better with one eye than most people withtwo. ] His father withdrew him from Dr. Burney's school, and sent him inJuly 1793 to the Rev. Dr. Roberts, at Loughborough House, Kennington. Incommitting him to the schoolmaster's charge, Mr. Murray sent thefollowing introduction: "Agreeable to my promise, I commit to you the charge of my son, and, asI mentioned to you in person, I agree to the terms of fifty guineas. Theyouth has been hitherto well spoken of by the gentleman he has beenunder. You will find him sensible and candid in the information you maywant from him; and if you are kind enough to bestow pains upon him, theobligation on my part will be lasting. The branches to be learnt arethese: Latin, French, Arithmetic, Mercantile Accounts, Elocution, History, Geography, Geometry, Astronomy, the Globes, Mathematics, Philosophy, Dancing, and Martial Exercise. " Certainly, a goodly array of learning, knowledge, and physical training! To return to the history of Mr. Murray's publications. Some of his bestbooks were published after the stroke of paralysis which he hadsustained, and among them must be mentioned Mitford's "History ofGreece, " Lavater's work on Physiognomy, and the first instalment ofIsaac D'Israeli's "Curiosities of Literature. " The following extract from a letter to the Rev. Mr. Whitaker, datedDecember 20, 1784, takes us back to an earlier age. "Poor Dr. Johnson's remains passed my door for interment this afternoon. They were accompanied by thirteen mourning coaches with four horseseach; and after these a cavalcade of the carriages of his friends. Hewas about to be buried in Westminster Abbey. " In the same year the Rev. Alexander Fraser of Kirkhill, near Inverness, communicated to Mr. Murray his intention of publishing the Memoirs ofLord Lovat, the head of his clan. Mr. Eraser's father had received theMemoirs in manuscript from Lord Lovat, with an injunction to publishthem after his death. "My father, " he said, "had occasion to see hisLordship a few nights before his execution, when he again enjoined himto publish the Memoirs. " General Fraser, a prisoner in the Castle ofEdinburgh, had requested, for certain reasons, that the publicationshould be postponed; but the reasons no longer existed, and the Memoirswere soon after published by Mr. Murray, but did not meet with anysuccess. The distressed state of trade and the consequent anxieties of conductinghis business hastened Mr. Murray's end. On November 6, 1793, SamuelHighley, his principal assistant, wrote to a correspondent: "Mr. Murraydied this day after a long and painful illness, and appointed asexecutors Dr. G. A. Paxton, Mrs. Murray, and Samuel Highley. The businesshereafter will be conducted by Mrs. Murray. " The Rev. Donald Grant, D. D. , and George Noble, Esq. , were also executors, but the latter didnot act. The income of the property was divided as follows: one half to theeducation and maintenance of Mr. Murray's three children, and the otherhalf to his wife so long as she remained a widow. But in the event ofher marrying again, her share was to be reduced by one-third and herexecutorship was to cease. John Murray began his publishing career at the age of twenty-three. Hewas twenty-five years in business, and he died at the comparativelyearly age of forty-eight. That publishing books is not always amoney-making business may be inferred from the fact that during thesetwenty-five years he did not, with all his industry, double his capital. CHAPTER II JOHN MURRAY (II. )--BEGINNING OF HIS PUBLISHING CAREER--ISAAC D'ISRAELI, ETC. John Murray the Second--the "Anax of Publishers, " according to LordByron--was born on November 27, 1778. He was his father's only survivingson by his second marriage, and being only fifteen at his father'sdeath, was too young to enter upon the business of the firm, which wascarried on by Samuel Highley--the "faithful shopman" mentioned in theelder Murray's will--for the benefit of his widow and family. What hisfather thought of him, of his health, spirits, and good nature, willhave been seen from the preceding chapter. Young Murray returned to school, and remained there for about two yearslonger, until the marriage of his mother to Lieutenant Henry Paget, ofthe West Norfolk Militia, on September 28, 1795, when he returned to 32, Meet Street, to take part in the business. Mrs. Paget ceased to be anexecutor, retired from Fleet Street, and went to live at Bridgenorthwith her husband, taking her two daughters--Jane and Mary AnneMurray--to live with her, and receiving from time to time the moneynecessary for their education. The executors secured the tenancy of No. 32, Fleet Street, part of thestock and part of the copyrights, for the firm of Murray & Highley, between whom a partnership was concluded in 1795, though Murray wasstill a minor. In the circumstances Mr. Highley of course took theprincipal share of the management, but though a very respectable person, he was not much of a business man, and being possessed by an almostmorbid fear of running any risks, he brought out no new works, took noshare in the new books that were published, and it is doubtful whetherhe looked very sharply after the copyrights belonging to the firm. Hewas mainly occupied in selling books brought out by other publishers. The late Mr. Murray had many good friends in India, who continued tosend home their orders to the new firm of Murray & Highley. Amongst themwere Warren Hastings and Joseph Hume. Hume had taken out with him anassortment of books from the late Mr. Murray, which had proved veryuseful; and he wrote to Murray and Highley for more. Indeed, he became aregular customer for books. Meanwhile Murray fretted very much under the careless and indifferentmanagement of Highley. The executors did not like to be troubled withhis differences with his partner, and paid very little attention to himor his affairs. Since his mother's remarriage and removal toBridgenorth, the young man had literally no one to advise with, and wascompelled to buffet with the troubles and difficulties of life alone. Though inexperienced, he had, however, spirit and common sense enough tosee that he had but little help to expect from his partner, and thedifficulties of his position no doubt contributed to draw forth anddevelop his own mental energy. He was not a finished scholar, but hadacquired a thorough love of knowledge and literature, and a keenperception of the beauties of our great English classics. By acquiringand cultivating a purity of taste, he laid the foundations of that quickdiscrimination which, combined with his rapidly growing knowledge of menand authors, rendered him afterwards so useful, and even powerful, inthe pursuit of his profession. Mr. Murray came of age on November 27, 1799; but he was prudent enoughto continue with Highley for a few years longer. After four years more, he determined to set himself free to follow his own course, and theinnumerable alterations and erasures in his own rough draft of thefollowing letter testify to the pains and care which he bestowed on thismomentous step. _John Murray to Mr. Highley_. GREAT QUEEN STREET, _Friday, November 19, 1802. _ MR. HIGHLEY, I propose to you that our partnership should be dissolved on thetwenty-fifth day of March next: That the disposal of the lease of the house and every other matter ofdifference that may arise respecting our dissolution shall be determinedby arbitrators--each of us to choose one--and that so chosen they shallappoint a third person as umpire whom they may mutually agree uponprevious to their entering upon the business: I am willing to sign a bond to this effect immediately, and I think thatI shall be able to determine my arbitrator some day next week. As I know this proposal to be as fair as one man could make to anotherin a like situation, and in order to prevent unpleasant altercation orunnecessary discussion, I declare it to be the last with which I intendto trouble you. I take this opportunity of saying that, however much we may differ uponmatters of business, I most sincerely wish you well. JOHN MURRAY. In the end they agreed to draw lots for the house, and Murray had thegood fortune to remain at No. 32, Fleet Street. Mr. Highley removed toNo. 24 in the same street, and took with him, by agreement, theprincipal part of the medical works of the firm. Mr. Murray now startedon his own account, and began a career of publication almost unrivalledin the history of letters. Before the dissolution of partnership, Mr. Murray had seen the firstrepresentation of Column's Comedy of "John Bull" at Covent GardenTheatre, and was so fascinated by its "union of wit, sentiment, andhumour, " that the day after its representation he wrote to Mr. Colman, and offered him £300 for the copyright. No doubt Mr. Highley would havethought this a rash proceeding. _John Murray to Mr. Colman_. "The truth is that during my minority I have been shackled to a drone ofa partner; but the day of emancipation is at hand. On the twenty-fifthof this month [March 1803] I plunge alone into the depths of literaryspeculation. I am therefore honestly ambitious that my first appearancebefore the public should be such as will at once stamp my character andrespectability. On this account, therefore, I think that your Play wouldbe more advantageous to me than to any other bookseller; and as 'I amnot covetous of Gold, ' I should hope that no trifling considerationwill be allowed to prevent my having the honour of being Mr. Colman'spublisher. You see, sir, that I am endeavouring to interest yourfeelings, both as a Poet and as a Man. " Mr. Colman replied in a pleasant letter, thanking Mr. Murray for hisliberal offer. The copyright, however, had been sold to the proprietorof the theatre, and Mr. Murray was disappointed in this, his firstindependent venture in business. The times were very bad. Money was difficult to be had on any terms, andMr. Murray had a hard task to call in the money due to Murray & Highley, as well as to collect the sums due to himself. Mr. Joseph Hume, not yet the scrupulous financier which he grew to be, among others, was not very prompt in settling his accounts; and Mr. Murray wrote to him, on July 11, 1804: "On the other side is a list of books (amount £92 8s. 6d. ), containingall those for which you did me the favour to write: and I trust thatthey will reach you safely.... If in future you could so arrange that myaccount should be paid by some house in town within six months after thegoods are shipped, I shall be perfectly satisfied, and shall executeyour orders with much more despatch and pleasure. I mention this, notfrom any apprehension of not being paid, but because my circumstanceswill not permit me to give so large an extent of credit. It affords megreat pleasure to hear of your advancement; and I trust that your healthwill enable you to enjoy all the success to which your talents entitleyou. " He was, for the same reason, under the necessity of declining to publishseveral new works offered to him, especially those dealing with medicaland poetical subjects. Mr. Archibald Constable of Edinburgh, and Messrs. Bell & Bradfute, Mr. Murray's agents in Edinburgh, were also communicated with as to thesettlement of their accounts with Murray & Highley. "I expected, " hesaid, "to have been able to pay my respects to you both this summer[1803], but my _military duties_, and the serious aspect of the times, oblige me to remain at home. " It was the time of a patriotic volunteermovement, and Mr. Murray was enrolled as an ensign in the 3rd Regimentof Royal London Volunteers. It cannot now be ascertained what was the origin of the acquaintancebetween the D'Israeli and Murray families, but it was of old standing. The first John Murray published the first volumes of Isaac D'Israeli's"Curiosities of Literature" (1791), and though no correspondence betweenthem has been preserved, we find frequent mention of the founder of thehouse in Isaac D'Israeli's letters to John Murray the Second. Hisexperiences are held up for his son's guidance, as for example, whenIsaac, urging the young publisher to support some petition to the EastIndia Company, writes, "It was a ground your father trod, and I supposethat connection cannot do you any harm"; or again, when dissuading himfrom undertaking some work submitted to him, "You can mention to Mr. Harley the fate of Professor Musaeus' 'Popular Tales, ' which never sold, and how much your father was disappointed. " On another occasion we findD'Israeli, in 1809, inviting his publisher to pay a visit to a yet oldergeneration, "to my father, who will be very glad to see you at Margate. " Besides the "Curiosities of Literature, " and "Flim-Flams, " the last avolume not mentioned by Lord Beaconsfield in the "Life" of his fatherprefixed to the 1865 edition of the "Curiosities of Literature, " Mr. D'Israeli published through Murray, in 1803, a small volume of"Narrative Poems" in 4to. They consisted of "An Ode to his FavouriteCritic"; "The Carder and the Currier, a Story of Amorous Florence";"Cominge, a Story of La Trappe"; and "A Tale addressed to a Sybarite. "The verses in these poems run smoothly, but they contain no wit, nopoetry, nor even any story. They were never reprinted. The following letter is of especial interest, as fixing the date of anevent which has given rise to much discussion--the birth of BenjaminDisraeli. _Mr. Isaac D'Israeli to John Murray_. _December_ 22, 1804. [Footnote: Mr. D'Israeli was living at this time inKing's Road (now 1, John Street), Bedford Row, in a corner houseoverlooking Gray's Inn Gardens. ] MY DEAR SIR, Mrs. D'Israeli will receive particular gratification from theinteresting note you have sent us on the birth of our boy--when sheshall have read it. In the meanwhile accept my thanks, and my bestcompliments to your sister. The mother and infant are both doing well. Ever yours. I. D'I. Some extracts from their correspondence will afford an insight into thenature of the friendship and business relations which existed betweenIsaac D'Israeli and his young publisher as well as into the charactersof the two men themselves. From a letter dated Brighton, August 5, 1805, from Mr. D'Israeli to JohnMurray: "Your letter is one of the repeated specimens I have seen of your happyart of giving interest even to commonplace correspondence, and I, who amso feelingly alive to the 'pains and penalties' of postage, mustacknowledge that such letters, ten times repeated, would please me asoften. We should have been very happy to see you here, provided it occasionedno intermission in your more serious occupations, and could have addedto your amusements. With respect to the projected 'Institute, ' [Footnote: This was a work atone time projected by Mr. Murray, but other more pressing literaryarrangements prevented the scheme being carried into effect. ] if thattitle be English--doubtless the times are highly favourable to patronizea work skilfully executed, whose periodical pages would be at onceuseful information, and delightful for elegant composition, embellishedby plates, such as have never yet been given, both for their subjectsand their execution. Literature is a perpetual source opened to us; butthe Fine Arts present an unploughed field, and an originality ofcharacter ... But Money, Money must not be spared in respect to rich, beautiful, and interesting Engravings. On this I have something tocommunicate. Encourage Dagley, [Footnote: The engraver of thefrontispiece of "Flim-Flams. "] whose busts of Seneca and Scarron arepleasingly executed; but you will also want artists of name. I have afriend, extremely attached to literature and the fine arts, a gentlemanof opulent fortune; by what passed with him in conversation, I havereason to believe that he would be ready to assist by money to aconsiderable extent. Would that suit you? How would you arrange withhim? Would you like to divide your work in _Shares_? He is an intimatefriend of West's, and himself too an ingenious writer. How came you to advertise 'Domestic Anecdotes'? Kearsley printed 1, 250copies. I desire that no notice of the authors of that work may be knownfrom _your_ side. * * * * * At this moment I receive your packet of poems, and Shee's letter. Iperceive that he is impressed by your attentions and your ability. Itwill always afford me one of my best pleasures to forward your views; Iclaim no merit from this, but my discernment in discovering yourtalents, which, under the genius of Prudence (the best of all Genii forhuman affairs), must inevitably reach the goal. The literary productionsof I. D['Israeli] and others may not augment the profits o£ your trade inany considerable degree; but to get the talents of such writers at yourcommand is a prime object, and others will follow. I had various conversations with Phillips [Footnote: Sir RichardPhillips, bookseller. This is the publisher whose book on philosophyGeorge Borrow was set to translate into German, and who recommended himto produce something in the style of "The Dairyman's Daughter"!] here;he is equally active, but more _wise_. He owns his _belles-lettres_books have given no great profits; in my opinion he must have lost evenby some. But he makes a fortune by juvenile and useful compilations. Youknow I always told you he wanted _literary taste_--like an atheist, whois usually a disappointed man, he thinks all _belles lettres_ arenonsense, and denies the existence of _taste_; but it exists! and Iflatter myself you will profit under that divinity. I have much to sayon this subject and on him when we meet. At length I have got through your poetry: it has been a weary task! Thewriter has a good deal of fire, but it is rarely a very bright flame. Here and there we see it just blaze, and then sink into mediocrity. Heis too redundant and tiresome.... 'Tis a great disadvantage to read themin MS. , as one cannot readily turn to passages; but life is too short tobe peeping into other peoples' MSS. _I prefer your prose to your verse_. Let me know if you receive it safely, and pray give no notion to any onethat I have seen the MS. " _Mr. D'Israeli to John Murray_. "It is a most disagreeable office to give opinions on MSS. ; one readsthem at a moment when one has other things in one's head--then one isobliged to fatigue the brain with _thinking_; but if I can occasionallyhinder you from publishing nugatory works, I do not grudge the pains. Atthe same time I surely need not add, how very _confidential_ suchcommunications ought to be. " _Mr. I. D'Israeli to John Murray_. I am delighted by your apology for not having called on me after I hadtaken my leave of you the day before; but you can make an unnecessaryapology as agreeable as any other act of kindness.... You are sanguine in your hope of a good sale of "Curiosities, " it willafford us a mutual gratification; but when you consider it is not a newwork, though considerably improved I confess, and that those kinds ofworks cannot boast of so much novelty as they did about ten years ago, Iam somewhat more moderate in my hopes. What you tell me of F. F. From Symond's, is _new_ to me. I sometimesthrow out in the shop _remote hints_ about the sale of books, all thewhile meaning only _mine_; but they have no skill in construing thetimid wishes of a modest author; they are not aware of his suppressedsighs, nor see the blushes of hope and fear tingling his cheek; they areprovokingly silent, and petrify the imagination.... Believe me, with the truest regard, Yours ever, I. D'ISRAELI. _Mr. D'Israeli to John Murray_. _Saturday, May_ 31, 1806. KING'S ROAD. MY DEAR FRIEND, It is my wish to see you for five minutes this day, but as you must bemuch engaged, and I am likely to be prevented reaching you this morning, I shall only trouble you with a line. Most warmly I must impress on your mind the _necessity_ of taking theadvice of a physician. Who? You know many. We have heard extraordinaryaccounts of Dr. Baillie, and that (what is more extraordinary) he is notmercenary.... I have written this to impress on your mind this point. Seeing you as wesee you, and your friend at a fault, how to decide, and you without somerelative or domestic friend about you, gives Mrs. D'I. And myself veryserious concerns--for you know we do take the warmest interest in yourwelfare--and your talents and industry want nothing but health to makeyou yet what it has always been one of my most gratifying hopes toconceive of you. Yours very affectionately, I. D'ISRAELI. A circumstance, not without influence on Murray's future, occurred aboutthis time with respect to the "Miniature, " a volume of comparativelysmall importance, consisting of essays written by boys at Eton, andoriginally published at Windsor by Charles Knight. Through Dr. Kennell, Master of the Temple, his friend and neighbour, who lived close at hand, Murray became acquainted with the younger Kennell, Mr. StratfordCanning, Gally Knight, the two sons of the Marquis Wellesley, and otheryoung Etonians, who had originated and conducted this School magazine. Thirty-four numbers appeared in the course of a year, and were thenbrought out in a volume by Mr. Knight at the expense of the authors. Thetransaction had involved them in debt. "Whatever chance of success ourhopes may dictate, " wrote Stratford Canning, "yet our apprehensionsteach us to tremble at the possibility of additional expenses, " and thesheets lay unsold on the bookseller's hands. Mr. Murray, who wasconsulted about the matter, said to Dr. Rennell, "Tell them to send theunsold sheets to me, and I will pay the debt due to the printer. " Thewhole of the unsold sheets were sent by the "Windsor Waggon" to Mr. Murray's at Fleet Street. He made waste-paper of the whole bundle--therewere 6, 376 numbers in all, --brought out a new edition of 750 copies, printed in good type, and neatly bound, and announced to StratfordCanning that he did this at his own cost and risk, and would make overto the above Etonians half the profits of the work. The young authorswere highly pleased by this arrangement, and Stratford Canning wrote toMurray (October 20, 1805): "We cannot sufficiently thank you for yourkind attention to our concerns, and only hope that the success of the_embryo_ edition may be equal to your care. " How great was theimportance of the venture in his eyes may be judged from the naïveallusion with which he proceeds: "It will be a week or two before wecommit it to the press, for amidst our other occupations the business ofthe school must not be neglected, and that by itself is no trivialemployment. " By means of this transaction Murray had the sagacity to anticipate anopportunity of making friends of Canning and Frere, who were never tiredof eulogizing the spirit and enterprise of the young Fleet Streetpublisher. Stratford Canning introduced him to his cousin George, thegreat minister, whose friendship and support had a very considerableinfluence in promoting and establishing his future prosperity. It isscarcely necessary to add that the new edition of the "Miniature"speedily became waste paper. CHAPTER III MURRAY AND CONSTABLE--HUNTER AND THE FORFARSHIRE LAIRDS--MARRIAGE OFJOHN MURRAY The most important publishing firm with which Mr. Murray was connectedat the outset of his career was that of Archibald Constable & Co. , ofEdinburgh. This connection had a considerable influence upon Murray'sfuture fortunes. Constable, who was about four years older than Murray, was a man ofgreat ability, full of spirit and enterprise. He was by nature generous, liberal, and far-seeing. The high prices which he gave for the best kindof literary work drew the best authors round him, and he raised thepublishing trade of Scotland to a height that it had never beforereached, and made Edinburgh a great centre of learning and literature. In 1800 he commenced the _Farmer's Magazine_, and in the following yearacquired the property of the _Scots Magazine, _ a venerable repertory ofliterary, historical, and antiquarian matter; but it was not until theestablishment of the _Edinburgh Review_, in October 1802, thatConstable's name became a power in the publishing world. In the year following the first issue of the _Review_, Constable tookinto partnership Alexander Gibson Hunter, eldest son of David Hunter, ofBlackness, a Forfarshire laird. The new partner brought a considerableamount of capital into the firm, at a time when capital was greatlyneeded in that growing concern. His duties were to take charge of theledger and account department, though he never took much interest in hiswork, but preferred to call in the help of a clever arithmetical clerk. It is unnecessary to speak of the foundation of the _Edinburgh Review_. It appeared at the right time, and was mainly supported by the talentsof Jeffrey, Brougham, Sydney Smith, Francis Horner, Dr. Thomas Brown, Lord Murray, and other distinguished writers. The first numberimmediately attracted public attention. Mr. Joseph Mawman was the Londonagent, but some dissatisfaction having arisen with respect to hismanagement, the London sale was transferred to the Messrs. Longman, withone half share in the property of the work. During the partnership of Murray and Highley, they had occasionalbusiness transactions with Constable of Edinburgh. Shortly after thepartnership was dissolved in March 1803, Murray wrote as follows to Mr. Constable: _April_ 25, 1803. "I have several works in the press which I should be willing to consignto your management in Edinburgh, but that I presume you have alreadysufficient business upon your hands, and that you would not find mineworth attending to. If so, I wish that you would tell me of somevigorous young bookseller, like myself, just starting into business, upon whose probity, punctuality, and exertion you think I might rely, and I would instantly open a correspondence with him; and in return itwill give me much pleasure to do any civil office for you in London. Ishould be happy if any arrangement could be made wherein we might proveof reciprocal advantage; and were you from your superabundance to pickme out any work of merit of which you would either make me the publisherin London, or in which you would allow me to become a partner, I daresay the occasion would arise wherein I could return the compliment, andyou would have the satisfaction of knowing that your book was in thehands of one who has not yet so much business as to cause him to neglectany part of it. " Mr. Constable's answer was favourable. In October 1804 Mr. Murray, atthe instance of Constable, took as his apprentice Charles Hunter, theyounger brother of A. Gibson Hunter, Constable's partner. Theapprenticeship was to be for four or seven years, at the option ofCharles Hunter. These negotiations between the firms, and theirincreasing interchange of books, showed that they were gradually drawingnearer to each other, until their correspondence became quite friendlyand even intimate. Walter Scott was now making his appearance as anauthor; Constable had published his "Sir Tristram" in May 1804, and his"Lay of the Last Minstrel" in January 1805. Large numbers of these workswere forwarded to London and sold by Mr. Murray. At the end of 1805 differences arose between the Constable and Longmanfirms as to the periodical works in which they were interested. Theeditor and proprietors of the _Edinburgh Review_ were of opinion thatthe interest of the Longmans in two other works of a similarcharacter--the _Annual Review_ and the _Eclectic_--tended to lessentheir exertions on behalf of the _Edinburgh_. It was a matter that mighteasily have been arranged; but the correspondents were men of hottempers, and with pens in their hands, they sent stinging letters fromLondon to Edinburgh, and from Edinburgh to London. Rees, Longman'spartner, was as bitter in words on the one side as Hunter, Constable'spartner, was on the other. At length a deadly breach took place, and itwas resolved in Edinburgh that the publication of the _Edinburgh Review_should be transferred to John Murray, Fleet Street. Alexander GibsonHunter, Constable's partner, wrote to Mr. Murray to tell of the ruptureand to propose a closer alliance with him. Mr. Murray replied: _John Murray to Mr. A. G. Hunter. December 7, 1805_. "With regard to the important communication of your last letter, Iconfess the surprise with which I read it was not without some mixtureof regret. The extensive connections betwixt your house and Longman'scannot be severed at once without mutual inconvenience, and perhapsmutual disadvantages, your share of which a more protracteddismemberment might have prevented. From what I had occasion to observe, I did not conceive that your concerns together would ever again movewith a cordiality that would render them lasting; but still, I imaginedthat mutual interest and forbearance would allow them to subside intothat indifference which, without animosity or mischief, would leaveeither party at liberty to enter upon such new arrangements as offeredto their separate advantage. I do not, however, doubt but that allthings have been properly considered, and perhaps finally settled forthe best; but Time, the only arbitrator in these cases, must decide. "In your proposed engagements with Mr. Davies, you will become betteracquainted with a man of great natural talents, and thoroughly versed inbusiness, which he regulates by the most honourable principles. As formyself, you will find me exceedingly assiduous in promoting your views, into which I shall enter with feelings higher than those of mereinterest. Indeed, linked as our houses are at present, we have a naturaltendency to mutual good understanding, which will both prevent andsoften those asperities in business which might otherwise enlarge intodisagreement. Country orders [referring to Constable & Co. 's 'generalorder'] are a branch of business which I have ever totally declined asincompatible with my more serious plans as a publisher. But _your_commissions I shall undertake with pleasure, and the punctuality withwhich I have attempted to execute _your first order_ you will, I hope, consider as a specimen of my disposition to give you satisfaction inevery transaction in which we may hereafter be mutually engaged. " It was a great chance for a young man entering life with a moderateamount of capital, to be virtually offered an intimate connection withone of the principal publishing houses of the day. It was one of thosechances which, "taken at the flood, lead on to fortune, " but there wasalso the question of honour, and Mr. Murray, notwithstanding his desirefor opening out a splendid new connection in business, would do nothinginconsistent with the strictest honour. He was most unwilling to thrusthimself in between Constable and Longman. Instead, therefore, of jumpingat Constable's advantageous offer, his feelings induced him to promote areconciliation between the parties; and he continued to enjoinforbearance on the part of both firms, so that they might carry on theirbusiness transactions as before. Copies of the correspondence betweenConstable and the Longmans were submitted to referees (Murray andDavies), and the following was Mr. Murray's reply, addressed to Messrs. Constable & Co. : _John Murray to Messrs. Constable & Co_. _December_ 14, 1805. GENTLEMEN, Mr. Hunter's obliging letter to me arrived this morning. That which heenclosed with yours to his brother last night, Charles gave me to read. The contents were very flattering. Indeed, I cannot but agree with Mr. H. That his brother has displayed very honourable feelings, upon hearingof the probable separation of your house, and that of Messrs. Longman &Co. Mr. Longman was the first who mentioned this to him, and indeed fromthe manner in which Charles related his conversation upon the affair, Icould not but feel renewed sensations of regret at the unpleasanttermination of a correspondence, which, had it been conducted upon Mr. Longman's own feelings, would have borne, I think, a very differentaspect. Longman spoke of you both with kindness, and mildly complainedthat he had perceived a want of confidence on your part, ever since hisjunction with Messrs. Hurst & Orme. He confessed that the correspondencewas too harsh for him to support any longer; but, he added, "_if we mustpart, let us part like friends_. " I am certain, from what Charlesreported to me, that Mr. L. And I think Mr. R. [Rees] are hurt by thissudden disunion. Recollect how serious every dispute becomes upon paper, when a manwrites a thousand asperities merely to show or support his superiorability. Things that would not have been spoken, or perhaps even thoughtof in conversation, are stated and horribly magnified _upon paper_. Consider how many disputes have arisen in the world, in which bothparties were so violent in what they believed to be the support oftruth, and which to the public, and indeed to themselves a few yearsafterwards, appeared unwise, because the occasion or cause of it was notworth contending about. Consider that you are, all of you, men who candepend upon each other's probity and honour, and where these essentialsare not wanting, surely in mere matters of business the rest may bepalliated by mutual bearance and forbearance. Besides, you are soconnected by various publications, your common property, and some ofthem such as will remain so until the termination of your lives, thatyou cannot effect an entire disunion, and must therefore be subject toeternal vexations and regrets which will embitter every transaction andsettlement between you. You know, moreover, that it is one of the misfortunes of our nature, that disputes are always the most bitter in proportion to formerintimacy. And how much dissatisfaction will it occasion if either of youare desirous in a year or two of renewing that intimacy which you arenow so anxious to dissolve--to say nothing of your relative utility toeach other--a circumstance which is never properly estimated, exceptwhen the want of the means reminds us of what we have been at such painsto deprive ourselves. Pause, my dear sirs, whilst to choose be yet inyour power; show yourselves superior to common prejudice, and by animmediate exercise of your acknowledged pre-eminence of intellect, suffer arrangements to be made for an accommodation and for a renewal ofthat connexion which has heretofore been productive of honour andprofit. I am sure I have to apologize for having ventured to say so muchto men so much my superiors in sense and knowledge of the world andtheir own interest; but sometimes the meanest bystander may perceivedisadvantages in the movements of the most skilful players. You will not, I am sure, attribute anything which I have said to aninsensibility to the immediate advantages which will arise to myselffrom a determination opposite to that which I have taken the liberty ofsuggesting. It arises from a very different feeling. I should be verylittle worthy of your great confidence and attention to my interest uponthis occasion, if I did not state freely the result of my humbleconsideration of this matter; and having done so, I do assure you thatif the arrangements which you now propose are carried into effect, Iwill apply the most arduous attention to your interest, to which I willturn the channel of my own thoughts and business, which, I am proud tosay, is rising in proportion to the industry and honourable principleswhich have been used in its establishment. I am every day adding to amost respectable circle of literary connexions, and I hope, a few monthsafter the settlement of your present affairs, to offer shares to you ofworks in which you will feel it advantageous to engage. Besides, as Ihave at present no particular bias, no enormous works of my own whichwould need all my care, I am better qualified to attend to any that youmay commit to my charge; and, being young, my business may be formedwith a disposition, as it were, towards yours; and thus growing up withit, we are more likely to form a durable connexion than can be expectedwith persons whose views are imperceptibly but incessantly divergingfrom each other. Should you be determined--_irrevocably_ determined (but consider!) uponthe disunion with Messrs. Longman, I will just observe that when personshave been intimate, they have discovered each other's vulnerable points;it therefore shows no great talent to direct at them shafts ofresentment. It is easy both to write and to say ill-natured, harsh, andcutting things of each other. But remember that this power is _mutual_, and in proportion to the poignancy of the wound which you would inflictwill be your own feelings when it is returned. It is therefore a maximwhich I laid down soon after a separation which I _had_, never to say ordo to my late colleague what he could say or do against me in return. Iknew that I had the personal superiority, but what his own ingenuitycould not suggest, others could write for him. I must apologise again for having been so tedious, but I am sure thatthe same friendliness on your part which has produced these hasty butwell-meant expostulations will excuse them. After this, I trust it isunnecessary for me to state with how much sincerity, I am, dear sirs, Your faithful friend, JOHN MURRAY. Ten days after this letter was written, Mr. Murray sent a copy of it toMessrs. Longman & Co. , and wrote: _John Murray to Messrs. Longman & Co_, _December_ 24, 1805. GENTLEMEN, The enclosed letter will show that I am not ignorant that amisunderstanding prevails betwixt your house and that of Messrs. Constable & Co. With the cause, however, I am as yet unacquainted;though I have attempted, but in vain, to obviate a disunion which I mostsincerely regret. Whatever arrangements with regard to myself may takeplace in consequence will have arisen from circumstances which it wasnot in my power to prevent; and they will not therefore be suffered tointerfere in any way with those friendly dispositions which willcontinue, I trust, to obtain between you and, gentlemen, Your obedient servant, J. MURRAY. But the split was not to be avoided. It appears, however, that by thecontract entered into by Constable with Longmans in 1803, the latter hadacquired a legal right precluding the publication of the _EdinburghReview_ by another publisher without their express assent. Such assentwas not given, and the London publication of the _Edinburgh_ continuedin Longman's hands for a time; but all the other works of Constable wereat once transferred to Mr. Murray. Mr. Constable invited Murray to come to Edinburgh to renew theirpersonal friendship, the foundations of which had been laid during Mr. Murray's visit to Edinburgh in the previous year; and now that theirunion was likely to be much closer, he desired to repeat the visit. Mr. Murray had another, and, so far as regarded his personal happiness, amuch more important object in view. This arose out of the affectionwhich he had begun to entertain for Miss Elliot, daughter of the lateCharles Elliot, publisher, with whom Mr. Murray's father had been insuch constant correspondence. The affection was mutual, and it seemedprobable that the attachment would ripen into a marriage. Now that his reputation as a publisher was becoming established, Mr. Murray grew more particular as to the guise of the books which heissued. He employed the best makers of paper, the best printers, and thebest book-binders. He attended to the size and tone of the paper, andquality of the type, the accuracy of the printing, and the excellence ofthe illustrations. All this involved a great deal of correspondence. Wefind his letters to the heads of departments full of details as to theturn-out of his books. Everything, from the beginning to the end of theissue of a work--the first inspection of the MS. , the consultation withconfidential friends as to its fitness for publication, the form inwhich it was to appear, the correction of the proofs, the binding, title, and final advertisement--engaged his closest attention. Besidesthe elegant appearance of his books, he also aimed at raising thestandard of the literature which he published. He had to criticize aswell as to select; to make suggestions as to improvements where themanuscript was regarded with favour, and finally to launch the book atthe right time and under the best possible auspices. It might almost besaid of the publisher, as it is of the poet, that he is born, not made. And Mr. Murray appears, from the beginning to the end of his career, tohave been a born publisher. In August 1806, during the slack season in London, Mr. Murray made hispromised visit to Edinburgh. He was warmly received by Constable andHunter, and enjoyed their hospitality for some days. After businessmatters had been disposed of, he was taken in hand by Hunter, the juniorpartner, and led off by him to enjoy the perilous hospitality of theForfarshire lairds. Those have been called the days of heroic drinking. Intemperanceprevailed to an enormous extent. It was a time of greaterlicentiousness, perhaps, in all the capitals of Europe, and thisnorthern one among the rest, than had been known for a long period. Menof the best education and social position drank like the Scandinavianbarbarians of olden times. Tavern-drinking, now almost unknown among theeducated and professional classes of Edinburgh, was then carried by allranks to a dreadful excess. Murray was conducted by Hunter to his father's house of Eskmount inForfarshire, where he was most cordially received, and in accordancewith the custom of the times the hospitality included invitations todrinking bouts at the neighbouring houses. An unenviable notoriety in this respect attached to William Maule(created Baron Panmure 1831). He was the second son of the eighth Earlof Dalhousie, but on succeeding, through his grandmother, to the estatesof the Earls of Panmure, he had assumed the name of Maule in lieu ofthat of Ramsay. Much against his will, Murray was compelled to take part in some ofthese riotous festivities with the rollicking, hard-drinking Forfarshirelairds, and doubtless he was not sorry to make his escape at lengthuninjured, if not unscathed, and to return to more congenial society inEdinburgh. His attachment to Miss Elliot ended in an engagement. In the course of his correspondence with Miss Elliot's trustees, Mr. Murray gave a statement of his actual financial position at the time: "When I say, " he wrote, "that my capital in business amounts to fivethousand pounds, I meant it to be understood that if I quitted businessto-morrow, the whole of my property being sold, even disadvantageously, it would leave a balance in my favour, free from debt or anyincumbrance, of the sum above specified. But you will observe that, continuing it as I shall do in business, I know it to be far moreconsiderable and productive. I will hope that it has not been thoughtuncandid in me if I did not earlier specify the amount of mycircumstances, for I considered that I had done this in the mostdelicate and satisfactory way when I took the liberty of referring youto Mr. Constable to whom I consequently disclosed my affairs, and whoseknowledge of my connexions in business might I thought have operatedmore pleasingly to Miss Elliot's friends than any communication frommyself. " The correspondence with Miss Elliot went on, and at length it wasarranged that Mr. Murray should proceed to Edinburgh for the marriage. He went by mail in the month of February. A tremendous snowstorm set inon his journey north. From a village near Doncaster he wrote toConstable: "The horses were twice blown quite round, unable to face thehorrid blast of cold wind, the like of which I have never known before. There was at the same time a terrible fall of snow, which completelyobscured everything that could be seen from the coach window. The snowbecame of great depth, and six strong horses could scarcely pull usthrough. We are four hours behind time. " From Doncaster he went toDurham in a postchaise; and pushing onward, he at last reached Edinburghafter six days' stormy travelling. While at Edinburgh, Mr. Murray resided with Mr. Sands, one of the lateCharles Elliot's trustees. The marriage took place on March 6, 1807, andthe newly married pair at once started for Kelso, in spite of the roadsbeing still very bad, and obstructed by snow. Near Blackshields thehorses fell down and rolled over and over. The postboy's leg was broken, and the carriage was sadly damaged. A neighbouring blacksmith was calledto the rescue, and after an hour and a half the carriage wassufficiently repaired to be able to proceed. A fresh pair of horses wasobtained at the next stage, and the married couple reached Kelso insafety. They remained there a few days, waiting for Mrs. Elliot, whowas to follow them; and on her arrival, they set out at once for thesouth. The intimacy which existed between Mr. Murray and Mr. D'Israeli will beobserved from the fact that the latter was selected as one of themarriage trustees. A few days after the arrival of the married pair inLondon, they were invited to dine with Mr. D'Israeli and his friends. Mr. Alexander Hunter, whom Mr. Murray had invited to stay with himduring his visit to London, thus describes the event: "Dressed, and went along with the Clan Murray to dine at Mr. D'Israeli's, where we had a most sumptuous banquet, and a very largeparty, in honour of the newly married folks. There was a very beautifulwoman there, Mrs. Turner, wife of Sharon Turner, the Anglo-Saxonhistorian, who, I am told, was one of the Godwin school! If they be allas beautiful, accomplished, and agreeable as this lady, they must be adeuced dangerous set indeed, and I should not choose to trust myselfamongst them. "Our male part of the company consisted mostly of literarymen--Cumberland, Turner, D'Israeli, Basevi, Prince Hoare, and Cervetto, the truly celebrated violoncello player. Turner was the most able andagreeable of the whole by far; Cumberland, the most talkative andeccentric perhaps, has a good sprinkling of learning and humour in hisconversation and anecdote, from having lived so long amongst the eminentmen of his day, such as Johnson, Foote, Garrick, and such like. But hisconversation is sadly disgusting, from his tone of irony and detractionconveyed in a cunning sort of way and directed constantly against the_Edinburgh Review_, Walter Scott (who is a 'poor ignorant boy, and nopoet, ' and never wrote a five-feet line in his life), and such otherd----d stuff. " CHAPTER IV "MARMION"--CONSTABLES AND BALLANTYNES--THE "EDINBURGH REVIEW" Mr. Murray was twenty-nine years old at the time of his marriage. Thathe was full of contentment as well as hope at this time may be inferredfrom his letter to Constable three weeks after his marriage: _John Murray to Mr. Constable_. _March 27, 1807_. "I declare to you that I am every day more content with my lot. Neithermy wife nor I have any disposition for company or going out; and you mayrest assured that I shall devote all my attention to business, and thatyour concerns will not be less the object of my regard merely becauseyou have raised mine so high. Every moment, my dear Constable, I feelmore grateful to you, and I trust that you will over find me yourfaithful friend. --J. M. " Some of the most important events in Murray's career occurred during thefirst year of his married life. Chief among them may perhaps bementioned his part share in the publication of "Marmion" (in February1808)--which brought him into intimate connection with Walter Scott--andhis appointment for a time as publisher in London of the _EdinburghReview_; for he was thus brought into direct personal contact with thoseforces which ultimately led to the chief literary enterprise of hislife--the publication of the _Quarterly Review_. Mr. Scott called upon Mr. Murray in London shortly after the return ofthe latter from his marriage in Edinburgh. "Mr. Scott called upon me on Tuesday, and we conversed for an hour.... He appears very anxious that 'Marmion' should be published by theKing's birthday.... He said he wished it to be ready by that time forvery particular reasons; and yet he allows that the poem is notcompleted, and that he is yet undetermined if he shall make his herohappy or otherwise. " The other important event, to which allusion has been made, was thetransfer to Mr. Murray of part of the London agency for the _EdinburghReview_. At the beginning of 1806 Murray sold 1, 000 copies of the_Review_ on the day of its publication, and the circulation was steadilyincreasing. Constable proposed to transfer the entire London publicationto Murray, but the Longmans protested, under the terms of their existingagreement. In April 1807 they employed as their attorney Mr. SharonTurner, one of Murray's staunchest allies. Turner informed him, througha common friend, of his having been retained by the Longmans; but Murraysaid he could not in any way "feel hurt at so proper and indispensable apursuit of his profession. " The opinion of counsel was in favour of theMessrs. Longman's contention, and of their "undisputable rights toone-half of the _Edinburgh Review_ so long as it continues to bepublished under that title. " Longman & Co. Accordingly obtained an injunction to prevent thepublication of the _Edinburgh Review_ by any other publisher in Londonwithout their express consent. Matters were brought to a crisis by the following letter, written by theeditor, Mr. Francis Jeffrey, to Messrs. Constable & Co. : _June 1_, 1807. GENTLEMEN, I believe you understand already that neither I nor any of the originaland regular writers in the _Review_ will ever contribute a syllable to awork belonging to booksellers. It is proper, however, to announce thisto you distinctly, that you may have no fear of hardship ordisappointment in the event of Mr. Longman succeeding in his claim tothe property of this work. If that claim be not speedily rejected orabandoned, it is our fixed resolution to withdraw entirely from the_Edinburgh Review_; to publish to all the world that the conductor andwriters of the former numbers have no sort of connection with those thatmay afterwards appear; and probably to give notice of our intention toestablish a new work of a similar nature under a different title. I have the honour to be, gentlemen, Your very obedient servant, F. JEFFREY. A copy of this letter was at once forwarded to Messrs. Longman. Constable, in his communication accompanying it, assured the publishersthat, in the event of the editor and contributors to the _EdinburghReview_ withdrawing from the publication and establishing a newperiodical, the existing _Review_ would soon be of no value either toproprietors or publishers, and requested to be informed whether theywould not be disposed to transfer their interest in the property, and, if so, on what considerations. Constable added: "We are apprehensivethat the editors will not postpone for many days longer that publicnotification of their secession, which we cannot help anticipating asthe death-blow of the publication. " Jeffrey's decision seems to have settled the matter. Messrs. Longmanagreed to accept £1, 000 for their claim of property in the title andfuture publication of the _Edinburgh Review_. The injunction wasremoved, and the London publication of the _Review_ was forthwithtransferred to John Murray, 32, Fleet Street, under whose auspices No. 22 accordingly appeared. Thus far all had gone on smoothly. But a little cloud, at first nobigger than a man's hand, made its appearance, and it grew and grewuntil it threw a dark shadow over the friendship of Constable andMurray, and eventually led to their complete separation. This was thesystem of persistent drawing of accommodation bills, renewals of bills, and promissory notes. Constable began to draw heavily upon Murray inApril 1807, and the promissory notes went on accumulating until theyconstituted a mighty mass of paper money. Murray's banker cautioned himagainst the practice. But repeated expostulation was of no use againstthe impetuous needs of Constable & Co. Only two months after thetransfer of the publication of the _Review_ to Mr. Murray, we find himwriting to "Dear Constable" as follows: _John Murray to Mr. Archd. Constable_. _October 1, 1807_. "I should not have allowed myself time to write to you to-day, were notthe occasion very urgent. Your people have so often of late omitted togive you timely notice of the day when my acceptances fell due, that Ihave suffered an inconvenience too great for me to have expressed toyou, had it not occurred so often that it is impossible for me toundergo the anxiety which it occasions. A bill of yours for £200 was dueyesterday, and I have been obliged to supply the means for paying it, without any notice for preparation.... I beg of you to insist upon thisbeing regulated, as I am sure you must desire it to be, so that I mayreceive the cash for your bills two days at least before they are due. " Mr. Murray then gives a list of debts of his own (including some ofConstable's) amounting to £1, 073, which he has to pay in the followingweek. From a cash account made out by Mr. Murray on October 3, itappears that the bill transactions with Constable had become enormous;they amounted to not less than £10, 000. The correspondence continued in the same strain, and it soon becameevident that this state of things could not be allowed to continue. Reconciliations took place from time to time, but interruptions againoccurred, mostly arising from the same source--a perpetual flood ofbills and promissory notes, from one side and the other--until Murrayfound it necessary to put an end to it peremptorily. Towards the end of1808 Messrs. Constable established at No. 10 Ludgate Street a Londonhouse for the sale of the _Edinburgh Review_, and the other works inwhich they were concerned, under the title of Constable, Hunter, Park &Hunter. This, doubtless, tended to widen the breach between Constableand Murray, though it left the latter free to enter into arrangementsfor establishing a Review of his own, an object which he had alreadycontemplated. There were many books in which the two houses had a joint interest, and, therefore, their relations could not be altogether discontinued. "Marmion" was coming out in successive editions; but the correspondencebetween the publishers grew cooler and cooler, and Constable hadconstant need to delay payments and renew bills. Mr. Murray had also considerable bill transactions with Ballantyne & Co. Of Edinburgh. James and John Ballantyne had been schoolfellows of WalterScott at Kelso, and the acquaintance there formed was afterwardsrenewed. James Ballantyne established the _Kelso Mail_ in 1796, but atthe recommendation of Scott, for whom he had printed a collection ofballads, he removed to Edinburgh in 1802. There he printed the "BorderMinstrelsy, " for Scott, who assisted him with money. Ballantyne was infrequent and intimate correspondence with Murray from the year 1806, andhad printed for him Hogg's "Ettrick Shepherd, " and other works. It was at this time that Scott committed the great error of his life. His professional income was about £1, 000 a year, and with the profits ofhis works he might have built Abbotsford and lived in comfort andluxury. But in 1805 he sacrificed everything by entering intopartnership with James Ballantyne, and embarking in his printing concernalmost the whole of the capital which he possessed. He was bound to thefirm for twenty years, and during that time he produced his greatestworks. It is true that but for the difficulties in which he was latterlyimmersed, we might never have known the noble courage with which he metand rose superior to misfortune. In 1808 a scheme of great magnitude was under contemplation by Murrayand the Ballantynes. It was a uniform edition of the "BritishNovelists, " beginning with De Foe, and ending with the novelists at theclose of last century; with biographical prefaces and illustrative notesby Walter Scott. A list of the novels, written in the hand of JohnMurray, includes thirty-six British, besides eighteen foreign authors. The collection could not have been completed in less than two hundredvolumes. The scheme, if it did not originate with Walter Scott, had atleast his cordial support. Mr. Murray not unreasonably feared the cost of carrying such anundertaking to completion. It could not have amounted to less thantwenty thousand pounds. Yet the Ballantynes urged him on. They furnishedstatements of the cost of printing and paper for each volume. "It reallystrikes me, " said James Ballantyne, "the more I think of and examine it, to be the happiest speculation that has ever been thought of. " This undertaking eventually fell through. Only the works of De Foe wereprinted by the Messrs. Ballantyne, and published by Mr. Murray. Theattention of the latter became absorbed by a subject of much greaterimportance to him--the establishment of the _Quarterly Review_. This fora time threw most of his other schemes into the shade. CHAPTER V ORIGIN OF THE "QUARTERLY REVIEW" The publication of a Tory Review was not the result of a suddeninspiration. The scheme had long been pondered over. Mr. Canning hadimpressed upon Mr. Pitt the importance of securing the newspaper press, then almost entirely Whiggish or Revolutionary, on the side of hisadministration. To combat, in some measure, the democratic principlesthen in full swing, Mr. Canning, with others, started, in November 1797, the _Anti-Jacobin, or Weekly Examiner_. The _Anti-Jacobin_ ceased to be published in 1798, when Canning, havingbeen appointed Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, found histime fully occupied by the business of his department, as well as by hisparliamentary duties, and could no longer take part in that cleverpublication. Four years later, in October 1802, the first number of the _EdinburghReview_ was published. It appeared at the right time, and, as the firstquarterly organ of the higher criticism, evidently hit the mark at whichit aimed. It was conducted by some of the cleverest literary young menin Edinburgh--Jeffrey, Brougham, Sydney Smith, Francis Horner, Dr. Thomas Brown, and others. Though Walter Scott was not a founder of the_Review_, he was a frequent contributor. In its early days the criticism was rude, and wanting in delicateinsight; for the most part too dictatorial, and often unfair. ThusJeffrey could never appreciate the merits of Wordsworth, Southey, andColeridge. "This will never do!" was the commencement of his review ofWordsworth's noblest poem. Jeffrey boasted that he had "crushed the'Excursion. '" "He might as well say, " observed Southey, "that he couldcrush Skiddaw. " Ignorance also seems to have pervaded the articlewritten by Brougham, in the second number of the _Edinburgh_, on Dr. Thomas Young's discovery of the true principles of interferences in theundulatory theory of light. Sir John Herschell, a more competentauthority, said of Young's discovery, that it was sufficient of itselfto have placed its author in the highest rank of scientific immortality. The situation seemed to Mr. Murray to warrant the following letter: _John Murray to the Right Hon. George Canning_. _September 25, 1807. _ Sir, I venture to address you upon a subject that is not, perhaps, undeserving of one moment of your attention. There is a work entitledthe _Edinburgh Review_, written with such unquestionable talent that ithas already attained an extent of circulation not equalled by anysimilar publication. The principles of this work are, however, soradically bad that I have been led to consider the effect that suchsentiments, so generally diffused, are likely to produce, and to thinkthat some means equally popular ought to be adopted to counteract theirdangerous tendency. But the publication in question is conducted with somuch ability, and is sanctioned with such high and decisive authority bythe party of whose opinions it is the organ, that there is little hopeof producing against it any effectual opposition, unless it arise fromyou, Sir, and your friends. Should you, Sir, think the idea worthy ofencouragement, I should, with equal pride and willingness, engage myarduous exertions to promote its success; but as my object is nothingshort of producing a work of the greatest talent and importance, I shallentertain it no longer if it be not so fortunate as to obtain the highpatronage which I have thus taken the liberty to solicit. Permit me, Sir, to add that the person who addresses you is noadventurer, but a man of some property, and inheriting a business thathas been established for nearly a century. I therefore trust that myapplication will be attributed to its proper motives, and that yourgoodness will at least pardon its obtrusion. I have the honour to be, Sir, Your must humble and obedient Servant, John Murray. So far as can be ascertained, Mr. Canning did not answer this letter inwriting. But a communication was shortly after opened with him throughMr. Stratford Canning, whose acquaintance Mr. Murray had made throughthe publication of the "Miniature, " referred to in a preceding chapter. Mr. Canning was still acting as Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and was necessarily cautious, but Mr. Stratford Canning, his cousin, wasnot bound by any such official restraints. In January 1808 he introducedMr. Gifford to Mr. Murray, and the starting of the proposed newperiodical was the subject of many consultations between them. Walter Scott still continued to write for the _Edinburgh_, notwithstanding the differences of opinion which existed between himselfand the editor as to political questions. He was rather proud of the_Review_, inasmuch as it was an outgrowth of Scottish literature. Scotteven endeavoured to enlist new contributors, for the purpose ofstrengthening the _Review_. He wrote to Robert Southey in 1807, invitinghim to contribute to the _Edinburgh_. The honorarium was to be tenguineas per sheet of sixteen pages. This was a very tempting invitationto Southey, as he was by no means rich at the time, and the pay was morethan he received for his contributions to the _Annual Register_, but hereplied to Scott as follows: _Mr. Southey to Mr. Scott_. _December, 1807_. "I have scarcely one opinion in common with it [the _Edinburgh Review_]upon any subject.... Whatever of any merit I might insert there wouldaid and abet opinions hostile to my own, and thus identify me with asystem which I thoroughly disapprove. This is not said hastily. Theemolument to be derived from writing at ten guineas a sheet, Scotchmeasure, instead of seven pounds for the _Annual_, would beconsiderable; the pecuniary advantage resulting from the differentmanner in which my future works would be handled [by the _Review_]probably still more so. But my moral feelings must not be compromised. To Jeffrey as an individual I shall ever be ready to show every kind ofindividual courtesy; but of Judge Jeffrey of the _Edinburgh Review_ Imust ever think and speak as of a bad politician, a worse moralist, anda critic, in matters of taste, equally incompetent and unjust. "[Footnote: "The Life and Correspondence of Robert Southey, " iii. Pp. 124-5. ] Walter Scott, before long, was led to entertain the same opinionof the _Edinburgh Review_ as Southey. A severe and unjust review of"Marmion, " by Jeffrey, appeared in 1808, accusing Scott of a mercenaryspirit in writing for money (though Jeffrey himself was writing formoney in the same article), and further irritating Scott by assertingthat he "had neglected Scottish feelings and Scottish characters. ""Constable, " writes Scott to his brother Thomas, in November 1808, "orrather that Bear, his partner [Mr. Hunter], has behaved by me of latenot very civilly, and I owe Jeffrey a flap with a foxtail on account ofhis review of 'Marmion, ' and thus doth the whirligig of time bring aboutmy revenges. " Murray, too, was greatly annoyed by the review of "Marmion. " "Scott, " heused to say, "may forgive but he can never forget this treatment"; and, to quote the words of Mr. Lockhart: "When he read the article on'Marmion, ' and another on foreign politics, in the same number of the_Edinburgh Review_, Murray said to himself, 'Walter Scott has feelings, both as a gentleman and a Tory, which these people must now havewounded; the alliance between him and the whole clique of the _EdinburghReview_ is now shaken'"; and, as far at least as the political part ofthe affair was concerned, John Murray's sagacity was not at fault. Mr. Murray at once took advantage of this opening to draw closer thebonds between himself and Ballantyne, for he well knew who was theleading spirit in the firm, and showed himself desirous of obtaining theLondon agency of the publishing business, which, as he rightlydiscerned, would soon be started in connection with the Canongate Press, and in opposition to Constable. The large increase of work which Murraywas prepared to place in the hands of the printers induced Ballantyne toinvite him to come as far as Ferrybridge in Yorkshire for a personalconference. At this interview various new projects were discussed--amongthem the proposed Novelists' Library--and from the information which hethen obtained as to Scott's personal feelings and literary projects, Murray considered himself justified in at once proceeding to Ashestiel, in order to lay before Scott himself, in a personal interview, his greatscheme for the new Review. He arrived there about the middle of October1808, and was hospitably welcomed and entertained. He stated his plans, mentioned the proposed editor of the Review, the probable contributors, and earnestly invited the assistance of Scott himself. During Murray's visit to Ashestiel No. 26 of the _Edinburgh Review_arrived. It contained an article entitled "Don Cevallos on theOccupation of Spain. " It was long supposed that the article was writtenby Brougham, but it has since been ascertained that Jeffrey himself wasthe author of it. This article gave great offence to the friends ofrational liberty and limited monarchy in this country. Scott forthwithwrote to Constable: "The _Edinburgh Review had_ become such as to renderit impossible for me to become a contributor to it; _now_ it is such asI can no longer continue to receive or read it. " "The list of the then subscribers, " said Mr. Cadell to Mr. Lockhart, "exhibits, in an indignant dash of Constable's pen opposite Mr. Scott'sname, the word 'STOPT!'" Mr. Murray never forgot his visit to Ashestiel. Scott was kindnessitself; Mrs. Scott was equally cordial and hospitable. Richard Heber wasthere at the time, and the three went out daily to explore the sceneryof the neighbourhood. They visited Melrose Abbey, the Tweed, andDryburgh Abbey, not very remote from Melrose, where Scott was himself tolie; they ascended the Eildon Hills, Scott on his sheltie often stoppingby the way to point out to Murray and Heber, who were on foot, somebroad meadow or heather-clad ground, as a spot where some legend heldits seat, or some notable deed had been achieved during the wars of theBorders. Scott thus converted the barren hillside into a region ofinterest and delight. From the top of the Eildons he pointed out thescene of some twenty battles. Very soon after his return to London, Murray addressed the followingletter to Mr. Scott: _John Murray to Mr. Scott_. _October_ 26, 1808. DEAR SIR, Although the pressure of business since my return to London hasprevented me writing to you sooner, yet my thoughts have, I assure you, been almost completely employed upon the important subjects of theconversation with which you honoured me during the time I wasexperiencing the obliging hospitality of Mrs. Scott and yourself atAshestiel. Then, after a reference to the Novelists' Library mentioned in the lastchapter, the letter continues: "I have seen Mr. William Gifford, hinting distantly at a Review; headmitted the most imperious necessity for one, and that too in a waythat leads me to think that he has had very important communicationsupon the subject.... I feel more than ever confident that the higherpowers are exceedingly desirous for the establishment of somecounteracting publication; and it will, I suspect, remain only for yourappearance in London to urge some very formidable plan into activity. " This letter was crossed in transit by the following: _Mr. Scott to John Murray_. ASHESTIEL, BY SELKIRK, _October_ 30, 1808. DEAR SIR, "Since I had the pleasure of seeing you I have the satisfaction to findthat Mr. Gifford has accepted the task of editing the intended Review. This was communicated to me by the Lord Advocate, who at the same timerequested me to write Mr. Gifford on the subject. I have done so atgreat length, pointing out whatever occurred to me on the facilities ordifficulties of the work in general, as well as on the editorialdepartment, offering at the same time all the assistance in my power toset matters upon a good footing and to keep them so. I presume he willhave my letter by the time this reaches you, and that he willcommunicate with you fully upon the details. I am as certain as of myexistence that the plan will answer, provided sufficient attention isused in procuring and selecting articles of merit. " What Scott thought of Murray's visit to Ashestiel may be inferred fromhis letter to his political confidant, George Ellis, of which, as it hasalready appeared in Scott's Life, it is only necessary to give extractshere: _Mr. Scott to Mr. George Ellis_. _November_ 2, 1808. DEAR ELLIS, "We had, equally to our joy and surprise, a flying visit from Heberabout three weeks ago. He staid but three days, but, between old storiesand new, we made them very merry in their passage. During his stay, JohnMurray, the bookseller in Fleet Street, who has more real knowledge ofwhat concerns his business than any of his brethren--at least, than anyof them that I know--came to canvass a most important plan, of which Iam now, in "dern privacie, " to give you the outline. I had most stronglyrecommended to our Lord Advocate (the Right Hon. J. C. Colquhoun) tothink of some counter measures against the _Edinburgh Review_. Which, politically speaking, is doing incalculable damage. I do not mean thisin a party way; the present ministry are not all I could wish them, for(Canning excepted) I doubt there is among them too much_self-seeking.... _ But their political principles are sound Englishprinciples, and, compared to the greedy and inefficient horde whichpreceded them, they are angels of light and purity. It is obvious, however, that they want defenders, both in and out of doors. Pitt's "Love and fear glued many friends to him; And now he's fallen, those tough co-mixtures melt. " Then, after a reference to the large circulation (9, 000) and mischievouspolitics of the _Edinburgh Review_, he proceeds: "Now, I think there is balm in Gilead for all this, and that the curelies in instituting such a Review in London as should be conductedtotally independent of bookselling influence, on a plan as liberal asthat of the _Edinburgh_, its literature as well supported, and itsprinciples English and constitutional. Accordingly, I have been given tounderstand that Mr. William Gifford is willing to become the conductorof such a work, and I have written to him, at the Lord Advocate'sdesire, a very voluminous letter on the subject. Now, should this plansucceed, you must hang your birding-piece on its hook, take down yourold Anti-Jacobin armour, and "remember your swashing blow. " It is notthat I think this projected Review ought to be exclusively orprincipally political; this would, in my opinion, absolutely counteractits purpose, which I think should be to offer to those who love theircountry, and to those whom we would wish to love it, a periodical workof criticism conducted with equal talent, but upon sounder principles. Is not this very possible? In point of learning, you Englishmen have tentimes our scholarship; and, as for talent and genius, "Are not Abana andPharpar, rivers of Damascus, better than any of the rivers in Israel?"Have we not yourself and your cousin, the Roses, Malthus, Matthias, Gifford, Heber, and his brother? Can I not procure you a score ofblue-caps who would rather write for us than for the _Edinburgh Review_if they got as much pay by it? "A good plot, good friends, and full ofexpectation--an excellent plot, very good friends!" Heber's fear was lest we should fail in procuring regular steadycontributors; but I know so much of the interior discipline of reviewingas to have no apprehension of that. Provided we are once set a-going bya few dashing numbers, there would be no fear of enlisting regularcontributors; but the amateurs must bestir themselves in the firstinstance. From the Government we should be entitled to expectconfidential communications as to points of fact (so far as fit to bemade public) in our political disquisitions. With this advantage, ourgood cause and St. George to boot, we may at least divide the field withour formidable competitors, who, after all, are much better at cuttingthan parrying, and whose uninterrupted triumph has as much unfitted themfor resisting a serious attack as it has done Buonaparte for the Spanishwar. Jeffrey is, to be sure, a man of the most uncommon versatility oftalent, but what then? "General Howe is a gallant commander, There are others as gallant as he. " Think of all this, and let me hear from you very soon on the subject. Canning is, I have good reason to know, very anxious about the plan. Imentioned it to Robert Dundas, who was here with his lady for a few dayson a pilgrimage to Melrose, and he highly approved of it. Though noliterary man, he is judicious, _clair-voyant_, and uncommonlysound-headed, like his father, Lord Melville. With the exceptions I havementioned, the thing continues a secret.... Ever yours, Walter Scott. " _Mr. Scott to John Murray_. _November_ 2, 1808. I transmitted my letter to Mr. Gifford through the Lord Advocate, andleft it open that Mr. Canning might read it if he thought it worthwhile. I have a letter from the Advocate highly approving my views, so Isuppose you will very soon hear from Mr. Gifford specifically on thesubject. It is a matter of immense consequence that something shall beset about, and that without delay.... The points on which I chiefly insisted with Mr. Gifford were that theReview should be independent both as to bookselling and ministerialinfluences--meaning that we were not to be advocates of party throughthick and thin, but to maintain constitutional principles. Moreover, Istated as essential that the literary part of the work should be assedulously attended to as the political, because it is by means of thatalone that the work can acquire any firm and extended reputation. Moreover yet, I submitted that each contributor should draw money forhis article, be his rank what it may. This general rule has been ofgreat use to the _Edinburgh Review_. Of terms I said nothing, exceptthat your views on the subject seemed to me highly liberal. I do not addfurther particulars because I dare say Mr. Gifford will show you theletter, which is a very long one. Believe me, my dear Sir, with sincereregard, Your faithful, humble Servant, Walter Scott. In a subsequent letter to Mr. Ellis, Scott again indicates what heconsiders should be the proper management of the proposed Review. "Let me touch, " he says, "a string of much delicacy--the politicalcharacter of the Review. It appears to me that this should be of aliberal and enlarged nature, resting upon principles--indulgent andconciliatory as far as possible upon mere party questions, but stern indetecting and exposing all attempts to sap our constitutional fabric. Religion is another slippery station; here also I would endeavour to beas impartial as the subject will admit of.... The truth is, there ispolicy, as well as morality, in keeping our swords clear as well assharp, and not forgetting the Gentleman in the Critic. The publicappetite is soon gorged with any particular style. The common Reviews, before the appearance of the _Edinburgh_, had become extremely mawkish;and, unless when prompted by the malice of the bookseller or reviewer, gave a dawdling, maudlin sort of applause to everything that reachedeven mediocrity. The _Edinburgh_ folks squeezed into their sauce plentyof acid, and were popular from novelty as well as from merit. The minorReviews, and other periodical publications, have _outréd_ the matterstill further, and given us all abuse and no talent.... This, therefore, we have to trust to, that decent, lively, and reflecting criticism, teaching men not to abuse books, but to read and to judge them, willhave the effect of novelty upon a public wearied with universal effortsat blackguard and indiscriminating satire. I have a long and verysensible letter [Footnote: Given below, under date November 15, 1808. ]from John Murray, the bookseller, in which he touches upon this pointvery neatly. " Scott was most assiduous in his preparations for the first number. Hewrote to his brother, Thomas Scott, asking him to contribute an article;to Charles Kirkpatrick Sharpe, of Christ Church, Oxford; to Mr. Morritt, of Rokeby Park, Yorkshire; and to Robert Southey, of Keswick, askingthem for contributions. To Mr. Sharpe he says: "The Hebers are engaged, item Rogers, Southey, Moore (Anacreon), andothers whose reputations Jeffrey has murdered, and who are rising to crywoe upon him, like the ghosts in 'King Richard. '" Scott's letter to Gilford, the intended editor, was full of excellentadvice. It was dated "Edinburgh, October 25, 1808. " We quote from itseveral important passages: "John Murray, of Fleet Street, " says Scott, "a young bookseller ofcapital and enterprise, and with more good sense and propriety ofsentiment than fall to the share of most of the trade, made me a visitat Ashestiel a few weeks ago; and as I found he had had somecommunication with you upon the subject, I did not hesitate tocommunicate my sentiments to him on this and some other points of theplan, and I thought his ideas were most liberal and satisfactory. "The office of Editor is of such importance, that had you not beenpleased to undertake it, I fear the plan would have fallen wholly to theground. The full power of control must, of course, be vested in theeditor for selecting, curtailing, and correcting the contributions tothe Review. But this is not all; for, as he is the person immediatelyresponsible to the bookseller that the work (amounting to a certainnumber of pages, more or less) shall be before the public at a certaintime, it will be the editor's duty to consider in due turn the articlesof which each number ought to consist, and to take measures forprocuring them from the persons best qualified to write upon such andsuch subjects. But this is sometimes so troublesome, that I foresee withpleasure you will soon be obliged to abandon your resolution of writingnothing yourself. At the same time, if you will accept of my services asa sort of jackal or lion's provider, I will do all in my power to assistin this troublesome department of editorial duty. "But there is still something behind, and that of the last consequence. One great resource to which the _Edinburgh_ editor turns himself, and bywhich he gives popularity even to the duller articles of his _Review_, is accepting contributions from persons of inferior powers of writing, provided they understand the books to which their criticisms relate; andas such are often of stupefying mediocrity, he renders them palatable bythrowing in a handful of spice, namely, any lively paragraph orentertaining illustration that occurs to him in reading them over. Bythis sort of veneering he converts, without loss of time or hindrance tobusiness, articles, which in their original state might hang in themarket, into such goods as are not likely to disgrace those among whichthey are placed. This seems to be a point in which an editor'sassistance is of the last consequence, for those who possess theknowledge necessary to review books of research or abstrusedisquisitions, are very often unable to put the criticisms into areadable, much more a pleasant and captivating form; and as theirscience cannot be attained 'for the nonce, ' the only remedy is to supplytheir deficiencies, and give their lucubrations a more popular turn. "There is one opportunity possessed by you in a particular degree--thatof access to the best sources of political information. It would not, certainly, be advisable that the work should assume, especially at theoutset, a professed political character. On the contrary, the articleson science and miscellaneous literature ought to be of such a quality asmight fairly challenge competition with the best of our contemporaries. But as the real reason of instituting the publication is the disgustingand deleterious doctrine with which the most popular of our Reviewsdisgraces its pages, it is essential to consider how this warfare shouldbe managed. On this ground, I hope it is not too much to expect fromthose who have the power of assisting us, that they should on topics ofgreat national interest furnish the reviewers, through the medium oftheir editor, with accurate views of points of fact, so far as they arefit to be made public. This is the most delicate and yet most essentialpart of our scheme. "On the one hand, it is certainly not to be understood that we are to beheld down to advocate upon all occasions the cause of administration. Such a dereliction of independence would render us entirely useless forthe purpose we mean to serve. On the other hand, nothing will render thework more interesting than the public learning, not from any vaunt ofours, but from their own observation, that we have access to early andaccurate information on points of fact. The _Edinburgh Review_ hasprofited much by the pains which the Opposition party have taken topossess the writers of all the information they could give them onpublic matters. Let me repeat that you, my dear sir, from enjoying theconfidence of Mr. Canning, and other persons in power, may easily obtainthe confidential information necessary to give credit to the work, andcommunicate it to such as you may think proper to employ in laying itbefore the public. " Mr. Scott further proceeded, in his letter to Mr. Gifford, to discussthe mode and time of publication, the choice of subjects, the persons tobe employed as contributors, and the name of the proposed Review, thusthoroughly identifying himself with it. "Let our forces, " he said, "for a number or two, consist of volunteersor amateurs, and when we have acquired some reputation, we shall soonlevy and discipline our forces of the line. After all, the matter isbecome very serious--eight or nine thousand copies of the _EdinburghReview_ are regularly distributed, merely because there is no otherrespectable and independent publication of the kind. In this city(Edinburgh), where there is not one Whig out of twenty men who read thework, many hundreds are sold; and how long the generality of readerswill continue to dislike politics, so artfully mingled with informationand amusement, is worthy of deep consideration. But it is not yet toolate to stand in the breach; the first number ought, if possible, to beout in January, and if it can burst among them like a bomb, withoutprevious notice, the effect will be more striking. "Of those who might be intrusted in the first instance you are a muchbetter judge than I am. I think I can command the assistance of a friendor two here, particularly William Erskine, the Lord Advocate'sbrother-in-law and my most intimate friend. In London, you have Malthus, George Ellis, the Roses, _cum pluribus aliis_. Richard Heber was with mewhen Murray came to my farm, and, knowing his zeal for the good cause, Ilet him into our counsels. In Mr. Frere we have the hopes of a potentally. The Rev. Reginald Heber would be an excellent coadjutor, and whenI come to town I will sound Matthias. As strict secrecy would of coursebe observed, the diffidence of many might be overcome. For scholars youcan be at no loss while Oxford stands where it did; and I think therewill be no deficiency in the scientific articles. " Thus instructed, Gifford proceeded to rally his forces. There was nowant of contributors. Some came invited, some came unsought; but, as thematter was still a secret, the editor endeavoured to securecontributions through his personal friends. For instance, he called uponMr. Rogers to request him to secure the help of Moore. "I must confess, " said Rogers to Moore, "I heard of the new quarterlywith pleasure, as I thought it might correct an evil we had longlamented together. Gifford wishes much for contributors, and isexceedingly anxious that you should assist him as often as you canafford time.... All this in _confidence_ of course, as the secret is notmy own. " Gifford also endeavoured to secure the assistance of Southey, throughhis friend, Mr. Grosvenor Bedford. Southey was requested to write forthe first number an article on the Affairs of Spain. This, however, hedeclined to do; but promised to send an article on the subject ofMissionaries. "Let not Gifford, " he wrote to Bedford, in reply to his letter, "supposeme a troublesome man to deal with, pertinacious about trifles, orstanding upon punctilios of authorship. No, Grosvenor, I am a quiet, patient, easy-going hack of the mule breed; regular as clockwork in mypace, sure-footed, bearing the burden which is laid on me, and onlyobstinate in choosing my own path. If Gifford could see me by thisfireside, where, like Nicodemus, one candle suffices me in a large room, he would see a man in a coat 'still more threadbare than his own' whenhe wrote his 'Imitation, ' working hard and getting little--a baremaintenance, and hardly that; writing poems and history for posteritywith his whole heart and soul; one daily progressive in learning, not solearned as he is poor, not so poor as proud, not so proud as happy. " _Mr. James Ballantyne to John Murray_. _October_ 28, 1808. "Well, you have of course heard from Mr. Scott of the progress of the'Great Plan. ' Canning bites at the hook eagerly. A review termed by Mr. Jeffrey _a tickler_, is to appear of Dryden in this No. Of the_Edinburgh_. By the Lord! they will rue it. You know Scott's presentfeelings, excited by the review of 'Marmion. ' What will they be whenthat of Dryden appears?" It was some time, however, before arrangements could be finally made forbringing out the first number of the _Quarterly_. Scott could not as yetpay his intended visit to London, and after waiting for about a month, Murray sent him the following letter, giving his further opinion as tothe scope and object of the proposed Review: _John Murray to Mr. Scott_. _November_ 15, 1808. DEAR SIR, I have been desirous of writing to you for nearly a week past, as Inever felt more the want of a personal conversation. I will endeavour, however, to explain myself to you, and will rely on your confidence andindulgence for secrecy and attention in what I have to communicate. Ihave before told you that the idea of a new Review has been revolving inmy mind for nearly two years, and that more than twelve months ago Iaddressed Mr. Canning on the subject. The propriety, if not thenecessity, of establishing a journal upon principles opposite to thoseof the _Edinburgh Review_ has occurred to many men more enlightened thanmyself; and I believe the same reason has prevented others, as it hasdone myself, from attempting it, namely, the immense difficulty ofobtaining talent of sufficient magnitude to render success even_doubtful_. By degrees my plan has gradually floated up to this height. But thereexists at least an equal difficulty yet--that peculiar talent in aneditor of rendering our other great resources advantageous to the bestpossible degree. This, I think, may be accomplished, but it must beeffected by your arduous assistance, at least for a little time. Ourfriend Mr. Gifford, whose writings show him to be both a man of learningand wit, has lived too little in the world lately to have obtained thatdelicacy and tact whereby he can feel at one instant, and habitually, whatever may gratify public desire and excite public attention andcuriosity. But this you know to be a leading feature in the talents ofMr. Jeffrey and his friends; and that, without the most happy choice ofsubjects, as well as the ability to treat them well--catching the"manners living as they rise"--the _Edinburgh Review_ could not haveattained the success it has done; and no other Review, howeverpreponderating in solid merit, will obtain sufficient attention withoutthem. Entering the field too, as we shall do, against an army commandedby the most skilful generals, it will not do for us to leave any of ourbest officers behind as a reserve, for they would be of no use if wewere defeated at first. We must enter with our most able commanders atonce, and we shall then acquire confidence, if not reputation, andincrease in numbers as we proceed. Our first number must contain the most valuable and striking informationin politics, and the most interesting articles of general literature andscience, written by our most able friends. If our plan appears to be soadvantageous to the ministers whose measures, to a certain extent, weintend to justify, to support, to recommend and assist, that they havepromised their support; when might that support be so advantageouslygiven, either for their own interests or ours, as at the commencement, when we are most weak, and have the most arduous onset to make, and whenwe do and must stand most in need of help? If our first number be notwritten with the greatest ability, upon the most interesting topics, itwill not excite public attention. No man, even the friend of theprinciples we adopt, will leave the sprightly pages of the _EdinburghReview_ to read a dull detail of staid morality, or dissertations onsubjects whose interest has long fled. I do not say this from any, even the smallest doubt, of our having allthat we desire in these respects in our power; but because I amapprehensive that without your assistance it will not be drawn intoaction, and my reason for this fear I will thus submit to you. Youmentioned in your letter to Mr. Gifford, that our Review should openwith a grand article on Spain--meaning a display of the politicalfeeling of the people, and the probable results of this importantcontest. I suggested to Mr. Gifford that Mr. Frere should be written to, which he said was easy, and that he thought he would do it; for Frerecould not only give the facts upon the subject, but could write thembetter than any other person. But having, in my project, given the nameof Southey as a person who might assist occasionally in a number or twohence, I found at our next interview that Mr. Gifford, who does not knowMr. Southey, had spoken to a friend to ask Mr. S. To write the articleupon Spain. It is true that Mr. Southey knows a great deal about Spain, and on another occasion would have given a good article upon thesubject; but at present _his_ is not the kind of knowledge which wewant, and it is, moreover, trusting our secret to a stranger, who has, by the way, a directly opposite bias in politics. Mr. Gifford also told me, with very great stress, that among thearticles he had submitted to you was [one on] Hodgson's Translation ofJuvenal, which at no time could be a very interesting article for us, and having been published more than six months ago, would probably be avery stupid one. Then, you must observe, that it would necessarilyinvolve a comparison with Mr. Gifford's own translation, which must ofcourse be praised, and thus show an _individual_ feeling--the leastspark of which, in our early numbers, would both betray and ruin us. Hetalks of reviewing _himself_ a late translation of "Persius, " for(_entre nous_) a similar reason. He has himself nearly completed atranslation, which will be published in a few months. In what I have said upon this most exceedingly delicate point, and whichI again submit to your most honourable confidence, I have no otherobject but just to show you without reserve how we stand, and toexemplify what I set out with--that without skilful and judiciousmanagement we shall totally mistake the road to the accomplishment ofthe arduous task which we have undertaken, and involve the cause andevery individual in not merely defeat, but disgrace. I must at the sametime observe that Mr. Gifford is the most obliging and well-meaning manalive, and that he is perfectly ready to be instructed in those pointsof which his seclusion renders him ignorant; and all that I wish andmean is, that we should strive to open clearly the view which is soobvious to us--that our first number must be a most brilliant one inevery respect; and to effect this, we must avail ourselves of anyvaluable political information we can command. Those persons who havethe most interest in supporting the Review must be called uponimmediately for their strenuous personal help. The fact must be obviousto you, --that if Mr. Canning, Mr. Frere, Mr. Scott, Mr. Ellis, and Mr. Gifford, with their immediate and true friends, will exert themselvesheartily in every respect, so as to produce with secrecy only _one_remarkably attractive number, their further labour would becomparatively light. With such a number in our hands, we might selectand obtain every other help that we required; and then the persons namedwould only be called upon for their information, facts, hints, advice, and occasional articles. But without this--without producing a numberthat shall at least equal, if not excel, the best of the _EdinburghReview_, it were better not to be attempted. We should do more harm toour cause by an unsuccessful attempt; and the reputation of the_Edinburgh Review_ would be increased inversely to our fruitlessopposition.... With respect to bookselling interference with the Review, I am equally convinced with yourself of its total incompatibility with areally respectable and valuable critical journal. I assure you thatnothing can be more distant from my views, which are confined to theardour which I feel for the cause and principles which it will be ourobject to support, and the honour of professional reputation which wouldobviously result to the publisher of so important a work. It were sillyto suppress that I shall not be sorry to derive from it as much profitas I can satisfactorily enjoy, consistent with the liberal scale uponwhich it is my first desire to act towards every writer and friendconcerned in the work. Respecting the terms upon which the editor shallbe placed at first, I have proposed, and it appears to be satisfactoryto Mr. Gifford, that he shall receive, either previous to, orimmediately after, the publication of each number, the sum of 160guineas, which he is to distribute as he thinks proper, without anyquestion or interference on my part; and that in addition to this, heshall receive from me the sum of £200 annually, merely as the editor. This, Sir, is much more than I can flatter myself with the return of, for the first year at least; but it is my intention that his salaryshall ever increase proportionately to the success of the work under hismanagement. The editor has a most arduous office to perform, and thesuccess of the publication must depend in a great measure upon hisactivity. I am, dear Sir, Your obliged and faithful Servant, John Murray. It will be observed from this letter, that Mr. Murray was aware that, besides skilful editing, sound and practical business management wasnecessary to render the new Review a success. The way in which heinforms Mr. Scott about Gifford's proposed review of "Juvenal" and"Persius, " shows that he fully comprehended the situation, and thedangers which would beset an editor like Gifford, who lived for the mostpart amongst his books, and was, to a large extent, secluded from theactive world. On the same day Scott was writing to Murray: _Mr. Scott to John Murray_. Edinburgh, _November_ 15, 1808. Dear Sir, I received two days ago a letter from Mr. Gifford highly approving ofthe particulars of the plan which I had sketched for the _Review_. Butthere are two points to be considered. In the first place, I cannot bein town as I proposed, for the Commissioners under the Judicial Bill, towhom I am to act as clerk, have resolved that their final sittings shallbe held _here_, so that I have now no chance of being in London beforespring. This is very unlucky, as Mr. Gifford proposes to wait for myarrival in town to set the great machine a-going. I shall write to himthat this is impossible, and that I wish he would, with your assistanceand that of his other friends, make up a list of the works which thefirst number is to contain, and consider what is the extent of the aidhe will require from the North. The other circumstance is, that Mr. Gifford pleads the state of his health and his retired habits assequestrating him from the world, and rendering him less capable ofactive exertion, and in the kindest and most polite manner he expresseshis hope that he should receive very extensive assistance and supportfrom me, without which he is pleased to say he would utterly despair ofsuccess. Now between ourselves (for this is strictly confidential) I amrather alarmed at this prospect. I am willing, and anxiously so, to doall in my power to serve the work; but, my dear sir, you know how manyof our very ablest hands are engaged in the _Edinburgh Review_, and whata dismal work it will be to wring assistance from the few whoseindolence has left them neutral. I can, to be sure, work like a horsemyself, but then I have two heavy works on my hands already, namely, "Somers" and "Swift. " Constable had lately very nearly relinquished thelatter work, and I now heartily wish it had never commenced; but twovolumes are nearly printed, so I conclude it will now go on. If thiswork had not stood in the way, I should have liked Beaumont and Fletchermuch better. It would not have required half the research, and occupiedmuch less time. I plainly see that, according to Mr. Gifford's view, Ishould have almost all the trouble of a co-editor, both in collectingand revising the articles which are to come from Scotland, as well as insupplying all deficiencies from my own stores. These considerations cannot, however, operate upon the first number, sopray send me a list of books, and perhaps you may send some on aventure. You know the department I had in the _Edinburgh Review_. I willsound Southey, agreeable to Mr. Gifford's wishes, on the Spanishaffairs. The last number of the _Edinburgh Review_ has given disgustbeyond measure, owing to the tone of the article on Cevallos' _exposé_. Subscribers are falling off like withered leaves. I retired my name among others, after explaining the reasons both to Mr. Jeffrey and Mr. Constable, so that there never was such an opening for anew _Review_. I shall be glad to hear what you think on the subject ofterms, for my Northern troops will not move without pay; but there is nohurry about fixing this point, as most of the writers in the firstnumber will be more or less indifferent on the subject. For my ownshare, I care not what the conditions are, unless the labour expectedfrom me is to occupy a considerable portion of time, in which case theymight become an object. While we are on this subject, I may as wellmention that as you incur so large an outlay in the case of the Novels, I would not only be happy that my remuneration should depend on theprofits of the work, but I also think I could command a few hundreds toassist in carrying it on. By the way, I see "Notes on Don Quixote" advertised. This was a plan Ihad for enriching our collection, having many references by me for thepurpose. I shall be sorry if I am powerfully anticipated. Perhaps thebook would make a good article in the _Review_. Can you get me"Gaytoun's Festivous Notes on Don Quixote"? I think our friend Ballantyne is grown an inch taller on the subjects ofthe "Romances. " Believe me, dear Sir, Yours very truly, Walter Scott. Gifford is much pleased with you personally. _John Murray to Mr. Scott_. _November_ 19, 1808. "Mr. Gifford has communicated to me an important piece of news. He methis friend, Lord Teignmouth, and learned from him that he and theWilberforce party had some idea of starting a journal to oppose the_Edinburgh Review_, that Henry Thornton and Mr. [Zachary] Macaulay wereto be the conductors, that they had met, and that some able men werementioned. Upon sounding Lord T. As to their giving us their assistance, he thought this might be adopted in preference to their own plans.... Itwill happen fortunately that we intend opening with an article on themissionaries, which, as it will be written in opposition to thesentiments in the _Edinburgh Review_, is very likely to gain that largebody of which Wilberforce is the head. I have collected from everyMissionary Society in London, of which there are no less than five, alltheir curious reports, proceedings and history, which, I know, SydneySmith never saw; and which I could only procure by personal application. Southey will give a complete view of the subject, and if he will enterheartily into it, and do it well, it will be as much as he can do forthe first number. These transactions contain, amidst a great deal offanaticism, the most curious information you can imagine upon thehistory, literature, topography and manners of nations and countries ofwhich we are otherwise totally ignorant.... If you have occasion towrite to Southey, pray urge the vast importance of this subject, andentreat him to give it all his ability. I find that a new volume ofBurns' ('The Reliques') will be published by the end of this month, which will form the subject of another capital article under your hands. I presume 'Sir John Carr (Tour in Scotland)' will be another article, which even you, I fancy, will like; 'Mrs. Grant of Laggan, ' too, andperhaps your friend Mr. Cumberland's 'John de Lancaster' .... Are younot sufficiently well acquainted with Miss (Joanna) Baillie, both toconfide in her, and command her talents? If so, you will probably thinkof what may suit her, and what may apply to her. Mr. Heber, too, wouldapply to his brother at your request, and his friend Coplestone, whowill also be written to by a friend of Gifford's.... " Scott was very desirous of enlisting George Canning among thecontributors to the Quarterly. He wrote to his friend Ellis: _Mr. Scott to Mr. G. Ellis_. "As our start is of such immense consequence, don't you think Mr. Canning, though unquestionably our Atlas, might for a day find aHercules on whom to devolve the burden of the globe, while he writes forus a review? I know what an audacious request this is, but suppose heshould, as great statesmen sometimes do, take a political fit of thegout, and absent himself from a large ministerial dinner which mightgive it him in good earnest--dine at three on a chicken and pint ofwine, and lay the foundation of at least one good article? Let us butonce get afloat, and our labour is not worth talking about; but, tillthen, all hands must work hard. " This suggestion was communicated by George Ellis to Gifford, the choseneditor, and on December 1, Murray informed Scott that the article onSpain was proceeding under Mr. Canning's immediate superintendence. Canning and Gifford went down to Mr. Ellis's house at Sunninghill, wherethe three remained together for four days, during which time the articlewas hatched and completed. On receiving the celebrated "Declaration of Westminster" on the SpanishWar, Scott wrote to Ellis: "Tell Mr. Canning that the old women of Scotland will defend the countrywith their distaffs, rather than that troops enough be not sent to makegood so noble a pledge. Were the thousands that have mouldered away inpetty conquests or Lilliputian expeditions united to those we have nowin that country, what a band would Sir John Moore have under him!... Jeffrey has offered terms of pacification, engaging that no partypolitics should again appear in his _Review_. I told him I thought itwas now too late, and reminded him that I had often pointed out to himthe consequences of letting his work become a party tool. He said 'hedid not fear for the consequences--there were but four men he feared asopponents. ' 'Who are these?' 'Yourself for one. ' 'Certainly you pay me agreat compliment; depend upon it I will endeavour to deserve it. ' 'Why, you would not join against me?' 'Yes, I would, if I saw a properopportunity: not against you personally, but against your politics. ''You are privileged to be violent. ' 'I don't ask any privilege for undueviolence. But who are your other foemen?' 'George Ellis and Southey. 'The other he did not name. All this was in great good humour; and nextday I had a very affecting note from him, in answer to an invitation todinner. He has no suspicion of the _Review_ whatever. " In the meantime, Mr. Murray continued to look out for furthercontributors. Mr. James Mill, of the India House, in reply to a requestfor assistance, wrote: "You do me a great deal of honour in the solicitude you express to haveme engaged in laying the foundation stone of your new edifice, which Ihope will be both splendid and durable; and it is no want of zeal orgratitude that delays me. But this ponderous Geography, a porter's, orrather a horse's load, bears me down to a degree you can hardlyconceive. What I am now meditating from under it is to spare time to dowell and leisurely the Indian article (my favourite subject) for yournext number. Besides, I shall not reckon myself less a founder from itshaving been only the fault of my previous engagements that my firstarticle for you appears only in the second number, and not in the firstpart of your work. " Another contributor whom Mr. Murray was desirous to secure was Mrs. Inchbald, authoress of the "Simple Story. " The application was made toher through one of Murray's intimate friends, Mr. Hoppner, the artist. Her answer was as follows: _Mrs. Inchbald to Mr. Hoppner_. _December_ 31, 1808. My dear Sir, As I wholly rely upon your judgment for the excellency ofthe design in question, I wish you to be better acquainted with myabilities as a reviewer before I suffer my curiosity to be furthergratified in respect to the plan of the work you have undertaken, or thenames of those persons who, with yourself, have done me the very greathonour to require my assistance. Before I see you, then, and possessmyself of your further confidence, it is proper that I should acquaintyou that there is only one department of a Review for which I am in theleast qualified, and that one combines plays and novels. Yet the veryfew novels I have read, of later publications, incapacitates me againfor detecting plagiary, or for making such comparisons as propercriticism may demand. You will, perhaps, be surprised when I tell youthat I am not only wholly unacquainted with the book you have mentionedto me, but that I never heard of it before. If it be in French, therewill be another insurmountable difficulty; for, though I read French, and have translated some French comedies, yet I am not so perfectlyacquainted with the language as to dare to write remarks upon a Frenchauthor. If Madame Cottin's "Malvina" be in English, you wish it speedilyreviewed, and can possibly have any doubt of the truth of my presentreport, please to send it me; and whatever may be the contents, I willimmediately essay my abilities on the work, or immediately return it asa hopeless case. Yours very faithfully, E. Inchbald. On further consideration, however, Mrs. Inchbald modestly declined tobecome a contributor. Notwithstanding her great merits as an author, shehad the extremest diffidence in her own abilities. _Mrs. Inchbald to John Murray_. "The more I reflect on the importance of the contributions intended forthis work, the more I am convinced of my own inability to become acontributor. The productions in question must, I am convinced, be of acertain quality that will demand far more acquaintance with books, andmuch more general knowledge, than it has ever been my good fortune toattain. Under these circumstances, finding myself, upon matureconsideration, wholly inadequate to the task proposed, I beg you willaccept of this apology as a truth, and present it to Mr. Hoppner on thefirst opportunity; and assure him that it has been solely my reluctanceto yield up the honour he intended me which has tempted me, for aninstant, to be undecided in my reply to his overture. --I am, Sir, withsincere acknowledgments for the politeness of your letter to me, "E. Inchbald. " And here the correspondence dropped. It is now difficult to understand the profound secrecy with which theprojection of the new Review was carried on until within a fortnight ofthe day of its publication. In these modern times widespreadadvertisements announce the advent of a new periodical, whereas thenboth publisher and editor enjoined the utmost secrecy upon all with whomthey were in correspondence. Still, the day of publication was verynear, when the _Quarterly_ was, according to Scott, to "burst like abomb" among the Whigs of Edinburgh. The only explanation of the secrecyof the preliminary arrangements is that probably down to the last it wasdifficult to ascertain whether enough materials could be accumulated toform a sufficiently good number before the first _Quarterly Review_ waslaunched into the world. CHAPTER VI THE "QUARTERLY" LAUNCHED While Mr. Gifford was marshalling his forces and preparing for the issueof the first number of the _Quarterly_, Mr. Murray was correspondingwith James Ballantyne of Edinburgh as to the works they were jointlyengaged in bringing out, and also with respect to the northern agency ofthe new _Review_. An arrangement was made between them that they shouldmeet at Boroughbridge, in Yorkshire, at the beginning of January 1809, for the purpose of concocting their plans. Ballantyne proposed to leaveEdinburgh on January 5, and Murray was to set out from London on thesame day, both making for Boroughbridge. A few days before Ballantyneleft Edinburgh he wrote to Murray: "I shall not let a living soul know of my intended journey. Entiresecrecy seems necessary at present. I dined yesterday _tête-à-tête_ withMr. Scott, and had a great deal of highly important conversation withhim. He showed me a letter bidding a final farewell to the house ofConstable. " It was mid-winter, and there were increasing indications of a heavystorm brewing. Notwithstanding the severity of the weather, however, both determined to set out for their place of meeting in Yorkshire. Twodays before Ballantyne left Edinburgh, he wrote as follows: _Mr. Ballantyne to John Murray_. _January_ 4, 1809. Dear Murray, It is blowing the devil's weather here; but no matter--ifthe mail goes, I go. I shall travel by the mail, and shall, instantly onarriving, go to the "Crown, " hoping to find you and an imperial dinner. By the bye, you had better, on your arrival, take places north andsouth for the following day. In four or five hours after your receivingthis, I expect to shake your princely paw. Thine, J. B. Scott also sent a note by the hand of Ballantyne to tell of his completerupture with Constable owing to "Mr. Hunter's extreme incivility. " As a result of these negotiations the Ballantynes were appointedpublishers of the new Review in Edinburgh, and, with a view to a morecentral position, they took premises in South Hanover Street. Scottwrote with reference to this: _Mr. Scott to John Murray_. _February_, 1809. I enclose the promised "Swift, " and am now, I think, personally out ofyour debt, though I will endeavour to stop up gaps if I do not receivethe contributions I expect from others. Were I in the neighbourhood ofyour shop in London I could soon run up half a sheet of triflingarticles with a page or two to each, but that is impossible here forlack of materials. When the Ballantynes open shop you must take care to have them suppliedwith food for such a stop-gap sort of criticism. I think we will neveragain feel the pressure we have had for this number; the harvest hasliterally been great and the labourers few. Yours truly, W. S. _Mr. James Ballantyne. To John Murray_. _January_ 27, 1809. "I see or hear of nothing but good about the _Review_. Mr. Scott is atthis moment busy with two articles, besides the one he has sent. Inconversation a few days since, I heard a gentleman ask him, 'Pray, sir, do you think the _Quarterly Review_ will be equal to the _Edinburgh_?'His answer was, 'I won't be quite sure of the first number, because ofcourse there are difficulties attending the commencement of every workwhich time and habit can alone smooth away. But I think the first numberwill be a good one, and in the course of three or four, _I think we'llsweat them!_'" The first number of the _Quarterly Review_ was published at the end ofFebruary, 1809. Like most first numbers, it did not entirely realize thesanguine views of its promoters. It did not burst like a thunder-clap onthe reading public; nor did it give promise to its friends that a newpolitical power had been born into the world. The general tone was moreliterary than political; and though it contained much that was wellworth reading, none of its articles were of first-rate quality. Walter Scott was the principal contributor, and was keenly interested inits progress, though his mind was ever teeming with other new schemes. The allusion in the following letter to his publication of "manyunauthenticated books, " if unintentional, seems little less thanprophetic. _Mr. Scott to John Murray_. Edinburgh, _February_ 25, 1809. Dear Sir, I see with pleasure that you will be out on the first. Yet I wish Icould have seen my articles in proof, for I seldom read over my thingsin manuscript, and always find infinite room for improvement at theprinter's expense. I hope our hurry will not be such another time as todeprive me of the chance of doing the best I can, which depends greatlyon my seeing the proofs. Pray have the goodness to attend to this. I have made for the Ballantynes a little selection of poetry, to beentitled "English Minstrelsy"; I also intend to arrange for them a firstvolume of English Memoirs, to be entitled--"Secret History of the Courtof James I. " To consist of: Osborne's "Traditional Memoirs. " Sir Anthony Welldon's "Court and Character of James I. " Heylin's "Aulicus Coquinariae. " Sir Edward Peyton's "Rise and Fall of the House of Stewart. " I will add a few explanatory notes to these curious memoirs, and hope tocontinue the collection, as (thanks to my constant labour on "Somers")it costs me no expense, and shall cost the proprietors none. You mayadvertise the publications, and Ballantyne, equally agreeable to his ownwish and mine, will let you choose your own share in them. I have acommission for you in the way of art. I have published manyunauthenticated books, as you know, and may probably bring forward manymore. Now I wish to have it in my power to place on a few copies of eacha decisive mark of appropriation. I have chosen for this purpose adevice borne by a champion of my name in a tournament at Stirling! Itwas a gate and portcullis, with the motto CLAUSUS TUTUS ERO. I have itengraved on a seal, as you may remark on the enclosure, but it is donein a most blackguard style. Now what I want is to have this same gatewayand this same portcullis and this same motto of _clausus tutus ero_, which is an anagram of _Walterus Scotus_ (taking two single _U_'s forthe _W_), cut upon wood in the most elegant manner, so as to make asmall vignette capable of being applied to a few copies of every workwhich I either write or publish. This fancy of making _portcullis_copies I have much at heart, and trust to you to get it accomplished forme in the most elegant manner. I don't mind the expense, and perhaps Mr. Westall might be disposed to make a sketch for me. I am most anxious to see the _Review_. God grant we may lose no ground;I tremble when I think of my own articles, of two of which I have but anindefinite recollection. What would you think of an edition of the "Old English Froissart, " say500 in the small _antique quarto_, a beautiful size of book; thespelling must be brought to an uniformity, the work copied (as I couldnot promise my beautiful copy to go to press), notes added andillustrations, etc. , and inaccuracies corrected. I think Johnes would bedriven into most deserved disgrace, and I can get the use of a mostcurious MS. Of the French Froissart in the Newbattle Library, probablythe finest in existence after that of Berlin. I am an enthusiast aboutBerners' Froissart, and though I could not undertake the drudgery ofpreparing the whole for the press, yet Weber [Footnote: Henry Weber, Scott's amanuensis. ] would do it under my eye upon the most reasonableterms. I would revise every part relating to English history. I have several other literary schemes, but defer mentioning them till Icome to London, which I sincerely hope will be in the course of a monthor six weeks. I hear Mr. Canning is anxious about our _Review_. Constable says it is a Scotch job. I could not help quizzing Mr. RobertMiller, who asked me in an odd sort of way, as I thought, why it was notout? I said very indifferently I knew nothing about it, but heard avague report that the Edition was to be much enlarged on account of theexpected demand. I also inclose a few lines to my brother, and am, dearSir, Very truly yours, W. Scott. It is universally agreed here that Cumberland is five hundred degreesbeneath contempt. Ballantyne, Scott's partner, and publisher of the _Review_ in Edinburgh, hastened to communicate to Murray their joint views as to the success ofthe work. _Mr. Ballantyne to John Murray_. _February_ 28, 1809. My dear Murray, I received the _Quarterly_ an hour ago. Before taking it to Mr. Scott, Ihad just time to look into the article on Burns, and at the generalaspect of the book. It looks uncommonly well.... The view of Burns'character is better than Jeffrey's. It is written in a more congenialtone, with more tender, kindly feeling. Though not perhaps written withsuch elaborate eloquence as Jeffrey's, the thoughts are more original, and the style equally powerful. The two first articles (and perhaps therest are not inferior) will confer a name on the _Review_. But why do Itrouble you with _my_ opinions, when I can give you Mr. Scott's? He hasjust been reading the Spanish article beside me, and he again and againinterrupted himself with expressions of the strongest admiration. Three days later, Ballantyne again wrote: "I have now read 'Spain, ' 'Burns, ' 'Woman, ' 'Curran, ' 'Cid, ' 'Carr, ''Missionaries. ' Upon the whole, I think these articles most excellent. Mr. Scott is in high spirits; but he says there are evident marks ofhaste in most of them. With respect to his own articles, he much regretsnot to have had the opportunity of revising them. He thinks the'Missionaries' very clever; but he shakes his head at 'Sidney, ' 'Woman, 'and 'Public Characters. ' Our copies, which we expected this morning, have not made their appearance, which has given us no small anxiety. Weare panting to hear the public voice. Depend upon it, _if_ our exertionsare continued, the thing will do. Would G. Were as active as Scott andMurray!" Murray had plenty of advisers. Gifford said he had too many. His friend, Sharon Turner, was ready with his criticism on No. 1. He deplored theappearance of the article by Scott on "Carr's Tour in Scotland. "[Footnote: Scott himself had written to Murray about this, which hecalls "a whisky-frisky article, " on June 30. "I take the advantage offorwarding Sir John's _Review_, to send you back his letters under thesame cover. He is an incomparable goose, but as he is innocent andgood-natured, I would not like it to be publicly known that theflagellation comes from my hand. Secrecy therefore will oblige me. "] _Mr. Sharon Turner to John Murray_. "I cannot endure the idea of an individual being wounded merely becausehe has written a book. If, as in the case of the authors attacked in the'Baviad, ' the works censured were vitiating our literature--or, as inthe case of Moore's Poems, corrupting our morals--if they weredenouncing our religious principles, or attacking those politicalprinciples on which our Government subsists--let them be criticisedwithout mercy. The _salus publica_ demands the sacrifice. But to make anindividual ridiculous merely because he has written a foolish, if it bea harmless book, is not, I think, justifiable on any moral principle ... I repeat my principle. Whatever tends to vitiate our literary taste, ourmorals, our religious or political principles, may be fairly at themercy of criticism. So, whatever tends to introduce false science, falsehistory, indeed, falsehood in any shape, exposes itself to the censor'srod. But harmless, inoffensive works should be passed by. Where is thebravery of treading on a worm or crushing a poor fly? Where the utility?Where the honour?" An edition of 4, 000 copies had been printed; this was soon exhausted, and a second edition was called for. Mr. Scott was ample in his encouragements. "I think, " he wrote to Murray, "a firm and stable sale will be settledhere, to the extent of 1, 000 or 1, 500 even for the next number.... I amquite pleased with my ten guineas a sheet for my labour in writing, andfor additional exertions. I will consider them as overpaid by success inthe cause, especially while that success is doubtful. " Ballantyne wrote to Murray in March: "Constable, I am told, has consulted Sir Samuel Romilly, and means, after writing a book against me, to prosecute me for _stealing hisplans!_ Somebody has certainly stolen his brains!" The confederates continued to encourage each other and to incite togreater effort the procrastinating Gifford. The following rathermysterious paragraph occurs in a letter from Scott to Murray dated March19, 1809. "I have found means to get at Mr. G. , and have procured a letter to bewritten to him, which may possibly produce one to you signed Rutherfordor Richardson, or some such name, and dated from the North of England;or, if he does not write to you, enquiry is to be made whether he wouldchoose you should address him. The secrecy to be observed in thisbusiness must be most profound, even to Ballantyne and all the world. Ifyou get articles from him (which will and must draw attention) you mustthrow out a false scent for enquirers. I believe this unfortunate manwill soon be in London. " In reply, Mr. Murray wrote on March 24 to Mr. Scott, urging him to cometo London, and offering, "if there be no plea for charging your expensesto Government, " to "undertake that the _Review_ shall pay them as far asone hundred guineas. " To this Scott replied: _Mr. Scott to John Murray_. Edinburgh, _March_ 27, 1809. I have only time to give a very short answer to your letter. Some veryimportant business detains me here till Monday or Tuesday, on the lastof which days at farthest I will set off for town, and will be with youof course at the end of the week. As to my travelling expenses, ifGovernment pay me, good and well; if they do not, depend on it I willnever take a farthing from you. You have, my good friend, enough ofexpense to incur in forwarding this great and dubious undertaking, andGod forbid I should add so unreasonable a charge as your liberalitypoints at. I am very frank in money matters, and always take my pricewhen I think I can give money's worth for money, but this is quiteextravagant, and you must think no more of it. Should I want money forany purpose I will readily make _you_ my banker and give you value inreviews. John Ballantyne's last remittance continues to go off briskly;the devil's in you in London, you don't know good writing when you getit. All depends on our cutting in before the next _Edinburgh_, wheninstead of following their lead they shall follow ours. Mrs. Scott is my fellow-traveller in virtue of an old promise. I am, dear Sir, yours truly, Walter Scott. _April_ 4, at night. I have been detained a day later than I intended, but set off to-morrowat mid-day. I believe I shall get _franked_, so will have my generosityfor nothing. I hope to be in London on Monday. In sending out copies of the first number, Mr. Murray was not forgetfulof one friend who had taken a leading part in originating the _Review_. In 1808 Mr. Stratford Canning, when only twenty years of age, had beenselected to accompany Mr. Adair on a special mission to Constantinople. The following year, on Mr. Adair being appointed H. B. M. Minister to theSublime Porte, Stratford Canning became Secretary of Legation. Mr. Murray wrote to him: _John Murray to Mr. Stratford Canning_. 32, Fleet St. , London, _March_ 12, 1809. Dear Sir, It is with no small degree of pleasure that I send, for the favour ofyour acceptance, the first number of the _Quarterly Review_, a workwhich owes its birth to your obliging countenance and introduction of meto Mr. Gifford. I flatter myself that upon the whole you will not bedissatisfied with our first attempt, which is universally allowed to beso very respectable. Had you been in London during its progress, itwould, I am confident, have been rendered more deserving of publicattention. The letter goes on to ask for information on foreign works of importanceor interest. Mr. Stratford Canning replied: "With regard to the comission which you have given me, it is, I fear, completely out of my power to execute it. Literature neither resides atConstantinople nor passes through it. Even were I able to obtain thepublications of France and Germany by way of Vienna, the road is socircuitous, that you would have them later than others who contrive tosmuggle them across the North Sea. Every London newspaper that retailsits daily sixpennyworth of false reports, publishes the French, theHamburgh, the Vienna, the Frankfort, and other journals, full as soon aswe receive any of them here. This is the case at all times; at presentit is much worse. We are entirely insulated. The Russians block up theusual road through Bucharest, and the Servians prevent the passage ofcouriers through Bosnia. And in addition to these difficulties, thepresent state of the Continent must at least interrupt all literaryworks. You will not, I am sure, look upon these as idle excuses. Thingsmay probably improve, and I will not quit this country withoutcommissioning some one here to send you anything that may be of use toso promising a publication as your _Review_. " No sooner was one number published, than preparations were made for thenext. Every periodical is a continuous work--never ending, stillbeginning. New contributors must be gained; new books reviewed; newviews criticised. Mr. Murray was, even more than the editor, thebackbone of the enterprise: he was indefatigable in soliciting newwriters for the _Quarterly_, and in finding the books fit for review, and the appropriate reviewers of the books. Sometimes the reviews wereprinted before the editor was consulted, but everything passed under thenotice of Gifford, and received his emendations and final approval. Mr. Murray went so far as to invite Leigh Hunt to contribute an articleon Literature or Poetry for the _Quarterly_. The reply came from JohnHunt, Leigh's brother. He said: _Mr. John Hunt to John Murray_. "My brother some days back requested me to present to you his thanks forthe polite note you favoured him with on the subject of the _Review_, towhich he should have been most willing to have contributed in the manneryou propose, did he not perceive that the political sentiments containedin it are in direct opposition to his own. " This was honest, and it did not interfere with the personal intercourseof the publisher and the poet. Murray afterwards wrote to Scott: "Huntis most vilely wrong-headed in politics, which he has allowed to turnhim away from the path of elegant criticism, which might have led him toeminence and respectability. " James Mill, author of the "History of British India, " sent an articlefor the second number; but the sentiments and principles not being inaccordance with those of the editor, it was not at once accepted. Onlearning this, he wrote to Mr. Murray as follows: _Mr. James Mill to John Murray_. My dear Sir, I can have no objection in the world to your delaying the article I havesent you till it altogether suits your arrangements to make use of it. Besides this point, a few words of explanation may not be altogetheruseless with regard to another. I am half inclined to suspect that theobjection of your Editor goes a little farther than you state. If so, Ibeg you will not hesitate a moment about what you are to do with it. Iwrote it solely with a view to oblige and to benefit _you personally_, but with very little idea, as I told you at our first conversation onthe subject, that it would be in my power to be of any use to you, asthe views which I entertained respecting what is good for our countrywere very different from the views entertained by the gentlemen withwhom in your projected concern you told me you were to be connected. Toconvince you, however, of my good-will, I am perfectly ready to give youa specimen, and if it appears to be such as likely to give offence toyour friends, or not to harmonise with the general style of your work, commit it to the flames without the smallest scruple. Be assured that itwill not make the smallest difference in my sentiments towards you, orrender me in the smallest degree less disposed to lend you my aid (suchas it is) on any other occasion when it may be better calculated to beof use to you. Yours very truly, J. Mill. Gifford was not a man of business; he was unpunctual. The second numberof the _Quarterly_ appeared behind its time, and the publisher felthimself under the necessity of expostulating with the editor. _John Murray to Mr. Gifford_. _May_ 11, 1809. Dear Mr. Gifford, I begin to suspect that you are not aware of the complete misery whichis occasioned to me, and the certain ruin which must attend the_Review_, by our unfortunate procrastination. Long before this, everyline of copy for the present number ought to have been in the hands ofthe printer. Yet the whole of the _Review_ is yet to print. I know notwhat to do to facilitate your labour, for the articles which you havelong had he scattered without attention, and those which I ventured tosend to the printer undergo such retarding corrections, that even bythis mode we do not advance. I entreat the favour of your exertion. Forthe last five months my most imperative concerns have yielded to this, without the hope of my anxiety or labour ceasing. "Tanti miserere laboris, " in my distress and with regret from John Murray. Mr. Gifford's reply was as follows: "The delay and confusion which have arisen must be attributed to a wantof confidential communication. In a word, you have too many advisers, and I too many masters. " At last the second number of the _Quarterly_ appeared, at the end of Mayinstead of at the middle of April. The new contributors to this numberwere Dr. D'Oyley, the Rev. Mr. Walpole, and George Canning, who, inconjunction with Sharon Turner, contributed the last article on AustrianState Papers. As soon as the second number was published, Mr. Gifford, whose healthwas hardly equal to the constant strain of preparing and editing thesuccessive numbers, hastened away, as was his custom, to the seaside. Hewrote to Mr. Murray from Ryde: _Mr. Gifford to John Murray_. _June_ 18, 1809. "I rejoice to hear of our success, and feel very anxious to carry itfurther. A fortnight's complete abstraction from all sublunary cares hasdone me much good, and I am now ready to put on my spectacles and lookabout me.... Hoppner is here, and has been at Death's door. The thirdday after his arrival, he had an apoplectic fit, from which blisters, etc. , have miraculously recovered him.... This morning I received aletter from Mr. Erskine. He speaks very highly of the second number, andof the Austrian article, which is thought its chief attraction. Theology, he says, few people read or care about. On this, I wish to saya word seriously. I am sorry that Mr. E. Has fallen into that notion, too general I fear in Scotland; but this is his own concern. I differwith him totally, however, as to the few readers which such subjectsfind; for as far as my knowledge reaches, the reverse is the fact. Thestrongest letter which I have received since I came down, in our favour, points out the two serious articles as masterly productions and ofdecided superiority. We have taught the truth I mention to the_Edinburgh Review_, and in their last number they have also attempted tobe serious, and abstain from their flippant impiety. It is not done withthe best grace, but it has done them credit, I hear.... When you make upyour parcel, pray put in some small cheap 'Horace, ' which I can no moredo without than Parson Adams _ex_ 'Aeschylus. ' I have left it somewhereon the road. Any common thing will do. " Mr. Murray sent Gifford a splendid copy of "Horace" in the next parcelof books and manuscripts. In his reply Gifford, expostulating, "Why, mydear Sir, will you do these things?" thanked him warmly for his gift. Mr. George Ellis was, as usual, ready with his criticism. Differing fromGifford, he wrote: "I confess that, to my taste, the long article on the New Testament isvery tedious, and that the progress of Socinianism is, to myapprehension, a bugbear which _we_ have no immediate reason to be scaredby; but it may alarm some people, and what I think a dull prosing pieceof orthodoxy may have its admirers, and promote our sale. " Even Constable had a good word to say of it. In a letter to his partner, Hunter, then in London, he said: "I received the _Quarterly Review_ yesterday, and immediately went anddelivered it to Mr. Jeffrey himself. It really seems a respectablenumber, but what then? Unless theirs improves and ours falls off itcannot harm us, I think. I observe that Nos. 1 and 2 extend to merelytwenty-nine sheets, so that, in fact, ours is still the cheaper of thetwo. Murray's waiting on you with it is one of the wisest things I everknew him do: you will not be behindhand with him in civility. " No. 3 of the _Quarterly_ was also late, and was not published until theend of August. The contributors were behindhand; an article was expectedfrom Canning on Spain, and the publication was postponed until thisarticle had been received, printed and corrected. The foundations of itwere laid by George Ellis, and it was completed by George Canning. Of this article Mr. Gifford wrote: "In consequence of my importunity, Mr. Canning has exerted himself andproduced the best article that ever yet appeared in any Review. " Although Mr. Gifford was sometimes the subject of opprobrium because ofhis supposed severity, we find that in many cases he softened down thetone of the reviewers. For instance, in communicating to Mr. Murray thefirst part of Dr. Thomson's article on the "Outlines of Mineralogy, " byKidd, he observed: _Mr. Gifford to John Murray_. "It is very splenitick and very severe, and much too wantonly so. Ihope, however, it is just. Some of the opprobrious language I shallsoften, for the eternal repetitions of _ignorance, absurdity, surprising, _ etc. , are not wanted. I am sorry to observe so muchNationality in it. Let this be a secret between us, for I will not havemy private opinions go beyond yourself. As for Kidd, he is a modest, unassuming man, and is not to be attacked with sticks and stones like asavage. Remember, it is only the epithets which I mean to soften; for asto the scientific part, it shall not be meddled with. " His faithful correspondent, Mr. Ellis, wrote as to the quality of thisthird number of the _Quarterly_. He agreed with Mr. Murray, that thoughprofound, it was "most notoriously and unequivocally _dull_.... We mustveto ponderous articles; they will simply sink us. " Isaac D'Israeli also tendered his advice. He was one of Mr. Murray'smost intimate friends, and could speak freely and honestly to him as tothe prospects of the _Review_. He was at Brighton, preparing his thirdvolume of the "Curiosities of Literature. " _Mr. I. D'Israeli to John Murray_. "I have bought the complete collection of Memoirs written by individualsof the French nation, amounting to sixty-five volumes, for fifteenguineas.... What can I say about the _Q. R. ?_ Certainly nothing new; ithas not yet invaded the country. Here it is totally unknown, though asusual the _Ed. Rev. _ is here; but among private libraries, I find itequally unknown. It has yet its fortune to make. You must appeal to the_feelings_ of Gifford! Has he none then? Can't you get a more active andvigilant Editor? But what can I say at this distance? The disastrousfinale of the Austrians, received this morning, is felt here as deadly. Buonaparte is a tremendous Thaumaturgus!... I wish you had such a geniusin the _Q. R. _.... My son Ben assures me you are in Brighton. He saw you!Now, he never lies. " [Footnote: Mr. Murray was in Brighton at the time. ] Thus pressed by his correspondents, Mr. Murray did his best to rescuethe _Quarterly_ from failure. Though it brought him into prominentnotice as a publisher, it was not by any means paying its expenses. Somethought it doubtful whether "the play was worth the candle. " Yet Murraywas not a man to be driven back by comparative want of success. Hecontinued to enlist a band of competent contributors. Amongst these weresome very eminent men: Mr. John Barrow of the Admiralty; the Rev. Reginald Heber, Mr. Robert Grant (afterwards Sir Robert, the Indianjudge), Mr. Stephens, etc. How Mr. Barrow was induced to become acontributor is thus explained in his Autobiography. [Footnote:"Autobiographical Memoir of Sir John Barrow, " Murray, 1847. ] "One morning, in the summer of the year 1809, Mr. Canning looked in uponme at the Admiralty, said he had often troubled me on business, but hewas now about to ask me a favour. 'I believe you are acquainted with myfriend William Gifford?' 'By reputation, ' I said, 'but not personally. ''Then, ' says he, 'I must make you personally acquainted; will you comeand dine with me at Gloucester Lodge any day, the sooner the moreagreeable--say to-morrow, if you are disengaged?' On accepting, he said, 'I will send for Gifford to meet you; I know he will be too glad tocome. ' "'Now, ' he continued, 'it is right I should tell you that, in the_Review_ of which two numbers have appeared, under the name of the_Quarterly_, I am deeply, both publicly and personally, interested, andhave taken a leading part with Mr. George Ellis, Hookham Frere, WalterScott, Rose, Southey, and some others; our object in that work being tocounteract the _virus_ scattered among His Majesty's subjects throughthe pages of the _Edinburgh Review_. Now, I wish to enlist you in ourcorps, not as a mere advising idler, but as an efficient labourer in ourfriend Gifford's vineyard. '" Mr. Barrow modestly expressed a doubt as to his competence, but in thesequel, he tells us, Mr. Canning carried his point, and "I may add, oncefor all, that what with Gifford's eager and urgent demands, and theexercise becoming habitual and not disagreeable, I did not cease writingfor the _Quarterly Review_ till I had supplied no less, rather more, than 190 articles. " The fourth number of the _Quarterly_, which was due in November, was notpublished until the end of December 1809. Gifford's excuse was the wantof copy. He wrote to Mr. Murray: "We must, upon the publication of thisnumber, enter into some plan for ensuring regularity. " Although it appeared late, the fourth number was the best that had yetbeen issued. It was more varied in its contents; containing articles byScott, Southey, Barrow, and Heber. But the most important article wascontributed by Robert Grant, on the "Character of the late C. J. Fox. "This was the first article in the _Quarterly_, according to Mr. Murray, which excited general admiration, concerning which we find a memorandumin Mr. Murray's own copy; and, what was an important test, it largelyincreased the demand for the _Review_. CHAPTER VII CONSTABLE AND BALLANTYNE During the year in which the _Quarterly_ was first given to the world, the alliance between Murray and the Ballantynes was close and intimate:their correspondence was not confined to business matters, but bearswitness to warm personal friendship. Murray was able to place much printing work in their hands, and amongstother books, "Mrs. Rundell's Cookery, " a valuable property, which hadnow reached a very large circulation, was printed at the CanongatePress. They exerted themselves to promote the sale of one another'spublications and engaged in various joint works, such, for example, asGrahame's "British Georgics" and Scott's "English Minstrelsy. " In the midst of all these transactions, however, there were not wantingsymptoms of financial difficulties, which, as in a previous instance, were destined in time to cause a severance between Murray and hisEdinburgh agents. It was the old story--drawing bills for value _not_received. Murray seriously warned the Ballantynes of the risks they wererunning in trading beyond their capital. James Ballantyne replied onMarch 30, 1809: _Mr. James Ballantyne to John Murray_. "Suffer me to notice one part of your letter respecting which you willbe happy to be put right. We are by no means trading beyond our capital. It requires no professional knowledge to enable us to avoid so fatal anerror as that. For the few speculations we have entered into our meanshave been carefully calculated and are perfectly adequate. " Yet at the close of the same letter, referring to the "BritishNovelists"--a vast scheme, to which Mr. Murray had by no means pledgedhimself--Ballantyne continues: "For this work permit me to state I have ordered a font of types, cutexpressly on purpose, at an expense of near £1, 000, and have engaged avery large number of compositors for no other object. " On June 14, James Ballantyne wrote to Murray: "I can get no books out yet, without interfering in the printing officewith business previously engaged for, and that puts me a little aboutfor cash. Independent of _this_ circumstance, upon which we reckoned, asum of £1, 500 payable to us at 25th May, yet waiting some cursed legalarrangements, but which we trust to have very shortly [_sic_]. This isall preliminary to the enclosures which I hope will not be disagreeableto you, and if not, I will trust to their receipt _accepted_, by returnof post. " Mr. Murray replied on June 20: "I regret that I should be under the necessity of returning you the twobills which you enclosed, unaccepted; but having settled lately a verylarge amount with Mr. Constable, I had occasion to grant more bills thanI think it proper to allow to be about at the same time. " This was not the last application for acceptances, and it will be foundthat in the end it led to an entire separation between the firms. The Ballantynes, however, were more sanguine than prudent. In spite ofMr. Murray's warning that they were proceeding too rapidly with thepublication of new works, they informed him that they had a "giganticscheme" in hand--the "Tales of the East, " translated by Henry Weber, Walter Scott's private secretary--besides the "Edinburgh Encyclopaedia, "and the "Secret Memoirs of the House of Stewart. " They said that Scottwas interested in the "Tales of the East, " and in one of their hopefulletters they requested Mr. Murray to join in their speculations. Hisanswer was as follows: _John Murray to Messrs. Ballantyne & Co_. _October_ 31, 1809. "I regret that I cannot accept a share in the 'Edinburgh Encyclopaedia. 'I am obliged to decline by motives of prudence. I do not know anythingof the agreement made by the proprietors, except in the palpablemismanagement of a very exclusive and promising concern. I am thereforefearful to risk my property in an affair so extremely unsuitable. "You distress me sadly by the announcement of having put the 'SecretMemoirs' to press, and that the paper for it was actually purchased sixmonths ago! How can you, my good sirs, act in this way? How can youimagine that a bookseller can afford to pay eternal advances upon almostevery work in which he takes a share with you? And how can you continueto destroy every speculation by entering upon new ones before theprevious ones are properly completed?... Why, with your influence, willyou not urge the completion of the 'Minstrelsy'? Why not go on with andcomplete the series of De Foe?... For myself, I really do not know whatto do, for when I see that you will complete nothing of your own, I amunwillingly apprehensive of having any work of mine in your power. WhatI thus write is in serious friendship for you. I entreat you to let uscomplete what we have already in hand, before we begin upon any otherspeculation. You will have enough to do to sell those in which we arealready engaged. As to your mode of exchange and so disposing of yourshares, besides the universal obloquy which attends the practice in themind of every respectable bookseller, and the certain damnation which itinvariably causes both to the book and the author, as in the case ofGrahame, if persisted in, it must end in serious loss to thebookseller.... If you cannot give me your solemn promise not to exchangea copy of Tasso, I trust you will allow me to withdraw the small sharewhich I propose to take, for the least breath of this kind would blastthe work and the author too--a most worthy man, upon whose account aloneI engaged in the speculation. " Constable, with whom Murray had never entirely broken, had always lookedwith jealousy at the operations of the house of Ballantyne. Their firmhad indeed been started in opposition to himself; and it was not withouta sort of gratification that he heard of their pecuniary difficulties, and of the friction between them and Murray. Scott's "Lady of the Lake"had been announced for publication. At the close of a letter to Murray, Constable rather maliciously remarks: _January_ 20, 1810. "I have no particular anxiety about promulgating the folly (to say theleast of it) of certain correspondents of yours in this quarter; but ifyou will ask our friend Mr. Miller if he had a letter from a shop nearlyopposite the Royal Exchange the other day, he will, I dare say, tell youof the contents. I am mistaken if their game is not well up! Indeed Idoubt much if they will survive the 'Lady of the Lake. ' She willprobably help to drown them!" An arrangement had been made with the Ballantynes that, inconsideration of their being the sole agents for Mr. Murray in Scotland, they should give him the opportunity of taking shares in any of theirpublications. Instead, however, of offering a share of the "Lady of theLake" to Mr. Murray, according to the understanding between the firms, the Ballantynes had already parted with one fourth share of the work toMr. Miller, of Albemarle Street, London, whose business was afterwardspurchased by Mr. Murray. Mr. Murray's letter to Ballantyne & Co. Thusdescribes the arrangement: _John Murray to Messrs. Ballantyne & Co_. _March_ 26, 1810. "Respecting my _Review_, you appear to forget that your engagement wasthat I should be your sole agent here, and that you were to publishnothing but what I was to have the offer of a share in. Your deviationfrom this must have led me to conclude that you did not desire or expectto continue my agent any longer. You cannot suppose that my estimationof Mr. Scott's genius can have rendered me indifferent to my exclusionfrom a share in the 'Lady of the Lake. ' I mention this as well totestify that I am not indifferent to this conduct in you as to point itout to you, that if you mean to withhold from me that portion which youcommand of the advantages of our connexion, you must surely mean toresign any that might arise from me. The sole agency for my publicationsin Edinburgh is worth to any man who understands his business £300 ayear; but this requires zealous activity and deference on one side, andgreat confidence on both, otherwise the connexion cannot be advantageousor satisfactory to either party. For this number of the _Review_ I havecontinued your name solely in it, and propose to make you as before solepublisher in Scotland; but as you have yourself adopted the plan ofdrawing upon me for the amount of each transaction, you will do me thefavour to consider what quantity you will need, and upon your remittingto me a note at six months for the amount, I shall immediately ship thequantity for you. " _Mr. James Ballantyne to John Murray_. "Your agency hitherto has been productive of little or no advantage tous, and the fault has not lain with us. We have persisted in offeringyou shares of everything begun by us, till we found the hopelessness ofwaiting any return; and in dividing Mr. Scott's poem, we found it ourduty to give what share we had to part with to those by whom we werechiefly benefited both as booksellers and printers. " This letter was accompanied with a heavy bill for printing the works ofDe Foe for Mr. Murray. A breach thus took place with the Ballantynes;the publisher of the _Quarterly_ was compelled to look out for a newagent for Scotland, and met with a thoroughly competent one in Mr. William Blackwood, the founder of the well-known publishing house inEdinburgh. To return to the progress of the _Quarterly_. The fifth number, whichwas due in February 1810, but did not appear until the end of March, contained many excellent articles, though, as Mr. Ellis said, some ofthem were contributed by "good and steady but marvellously heavyfriends. " Yet he found it better than the _Edinburgh_, which on thatoccasion was "reasonably dull. " It contained one article which became the foundation of an Englishclassic, that of Southey on the "Life of Nelson. " Of this article Murraywrote to its author: "I wish it to be made such a book as shall become the heroic text ofevery midshipman in the Navy, and the association of Nelson and Southeywill not, I think, be ungrateful to you. If it be worth your attentionin this way I am disposed to think that it will enable me to treble thesum I first offered as a slight remuneration. " Mr. Murray, writing to Mr. Scott (August 28, 1810) as to the appearanceof the new number, which did not appear till a month and a half after itwas due, remarked on the fourth article. "This, " he said, "is a reviewof the 'Daughters of Isenberg, a Bavarian Romance, ' by Mr. Gifford, towhom the authoress (Alicia T. Palmer) had the temerity to send three £1notes!" Gifford, instead of sending back the money with indignation, ashe at first proposed, reviewed the romance, and assumed that theauthoress had sent him the money for charitable purposes. _Mr. Gifford to Miss A. T. Palmer_. "Our avocations leave us but little leisure for extra-officialemployment; and in the present case she has inadvertently added to ourdifficulties by forbearing to specify the precise objects of her bounty. We hesitated for some time between the Foundling and Lying-in Hospitals:in finally determining for the latter, we humbly trust that we have notdisappointed her expectations, nor misapplied her charity. Our publisherwill transmit the proper receipt to her address. " One of the principal objections of Mr. Murray to the manner in whichMr. Gifford edited the _Quarterly_ was the war which he waged with the_Edinburgh_. This, he held, was not the way in which a respectableperiodical should be conducted. It had a line of its own to pursue, without attacking its neighbours. "Publish, " he said, "the bestinformation, the best science, the best literature; and leave the publicto decide for themselves. " Relying on this opinion he warned Gifford andhis friends against attacking Sydney Smith, and Leslie, and Jeffrey, because of their contributions to the _Edinburgh_. He thought that suchattacks had only the effect of advertising the rival journal, andrendering it of greater importance. With reference to the article onSydney Smith's "Visitation Sermon" in No. 5, Mr. George Ellis privatelywrote to Mr. Murray: "Gifford, though the best-tempered man alive, is _terribly_ severe withhis pen; but S. S. Would suffer ten times more by being turned intoridicule (and never did man expose himself so much as he did in thatsermon) than from being slashed and cauterized in that manner. " The following refers to a difference of opinion between Mr. Murray andhis editor. Mr. Gifford had resented some expression of his friend's assavouring of intimidation. _John Murray to Mr. Gifford_. _September_ 25, 1810. "I entreat you to be assured that the term 'intimidation' can never beapplied to any part of my conduct towards you, for whom I entertain thehighest esteem and regard, both as a writer and as a friend. If I amover-anxious, it is because I have let my hopes of fame as a booksellerrest upon the establishment and celebrity of this journal. My character, as well with my professional brethren as with the public, is at stakeupon it; for I would not be thought silly by the one, or a merespeculator by the other. I have a very large business, as you mayconclude by the capital I have been able to throw into this onepublication, and yet my mind is so entirely engrossed, my honour is socompletely involved in this one thing, that I neither eat, drink, norsleep upon anything else. I would rather it excelled all other journalsand I gained nothing by it, than gain £300 a year by it without troubleif it were thought inferior to any other. This, sir, is true. " Meanwhile, Mr. Murray was becoming hard pressed for money. To conducthis increasing business required a large floating capital, for longcredits were the custom, and besides his own requirements, he had tobear the constant importunities of the Ballantynes to renew their bills. On July 25, 1810, he wrote to them: "This will be the last renewal ofthe bill (£300); when it becomes due, you will have the goodness toprovide for it. " It was, however, becoming impossible to continuedealing with them, and he gradually transferred his printing business toother firms. We find him about this time ordering Messrs. George Ramsay& Co. , Edinburgh, to print 8, 000 of the "Domestic Cookery, " which wasstill having a large sale. The Constables also were pressing him for renewals of bills. Thecorrespondence of this date is full of remonstrances from Murray againstthe financial unpunctuality of his Edinburgh correspondents. On March 21, 1811, he writes: "With regard to myself, I will engage inno new work of any kind"; and again, on April 4, 1811: Dear Constable, You know how much I have distressed myself by entering heedlessly upontoo many engagements. You must not urge me to involve myself in reneweddifficulties. To return to the _Quarterly_ No. 8. Owing to the repeated delay inpublication, the circulation fell off from 5, 000 to 4, 000, and Mr. George Ellis had obviously reason when he wrote: "Hence I infer that_punctuality_ is, in our present situation, our great and onlydesideratum. " Accordingly, increased efforts were made to have the _Quarterly_published with greater punctuality, though it was a considerable timebefore success in this respect was finally reached. Gifford pruned andpared down to the last moment, and often held back the publication untilan erasure or a correction could be finally inserted. No. 9, due in February 1811, was not published until March. From thistime Southey became an almost constant contributor to the _Review_. Hewrote with ease, grace, and rapidity, and there was scarcely a numberwithout one, and sometimes two and even three articles from his pen. His prose style was charming--clear, masculine, and to the point. Thepublic eagerly read his prose, while his poetry remained unnoticed onthe shelves. The poet could not accept this view of his merits. Of the"Curse of Kehama" he wrote: "I was perfectly aware that I was planting acorns while mycontemporaries were setting Turkey beans. The oak will grow, and thoughI may never sit under its shade, my children will. Of the 'Lady of theLake, ' 25, 000 copies have been printed; of 'Kehama', 500; and if theysell in seven years I shall be surprised. " Scott wrote a kindly notice of Southey's poem. It was not his way to cutup his friend in a review. He pointed out the beauties of the poem, inorder to invite purchasers and readers. Yet his private opinion to hisfriend George Ellis was this: _Mr. Scott to Mr. G. Ellis_. "I have run up an attempt on the 'Curse of Kehama' for the _Quarterly_:a strange thing it is--the 'Curse, ' I mean--and the critique is not, asthe blackguards say, worth a damn; but what I could I did, which was tothrow as much weight as possible upon the beautiful passages, of whichthere are many, and to slur over its absurdities, of which there are nota few. It is infinite pity for Southey, with genius almost toexuberance, so much learning and real good feeling of poetry, that, withthe true obstinacy of a foolish papa, he _will_ be most attached to thedefects of his poetical offspring. This said 'Kehama' affords cruelopenings to the quizzers, and I suppose will get it roundly in the_Edinburgh Review_. I could have made a very different hand of itindeed, had the order of the day been _pour déchirer_. " It was a good thing for Southey that he could always depend upon hiscontributions to the _Quarterly_ for his daily maintenance, for he couldnot at all rely upon the income from his poetry. The failure of the _Edinburgh Annual Register_, published by Ballantyne, led to a diminution of Southey's income amounting to about £400 a year. He was thus led to write more and more for the _Quarterly_. Hisreputation, as well as his income, rose higher from his writings therethan from any of his other works. In April 1812 he wrote to his friendMr. Wynn: _Mr. Southey to Mr. Wynn_. "By God's blessing I may yet live to make all necessary provisionmyself. My means are now improving every year. I am up the hill ofdifficulty, and shall very soon get rid of the burthen which has impededme in the ascent. I have some arrangements with Murray, which are likelyto prove more profitable than any former speculations ... Hitherto Ihave been highly favoured. A healthy body, an active mind, and acheerful heart, are the three best boons Nature can bestow, and, God bepraised, no man ever enjoyed these more perfectly. " CHAPTER VIII MURRAY AND GIFFORD--RUPTURE WITH CONSTABLE--PROSPERITY OF THE"QUARTERLY" A good understanding was now established between Mr. Murray and hiseditor, and the _Quarterly_ went on improving and gradually increased incirculation. Though regular in the irregularity of its publication, thesubscribers seem to have become accustomed to the delay, and when it didmake its appearance it was read with eagerness and avidity. The interestand variety of its contents, and the skill of the editor in thearrangement of his materials, made up for many shortcomings. Murray and Gifford were in constant communication, and it is interestingto remember that the writer of the following judicious criticism hadbeen editor of the _Anti-Jacobin_ before he was editor of the_Quarterly_. _Mr. Gifford to John Murray_. _May_ 17, 1811. "I have seldom been more pleased and vexed at a time than with theperusal of the enclosed MS. It has wit, it has ingenuity, but both areabsolutely lost in a negligence of composition which mortifies me. Whywill your young friend fling away talent which might so honourablydistinguish him? He might, if be chose, be the ornament of our _Review_, instead of creating in one mingled regret and admiration. It is utterlyimpossible to insert such a composition as the present; there areexpressions which would not be borne; and if, as you say, it will besent to Jeffrey's if I do not admit it, however I may grieve, I mustsubmit to the alternative. Articles of pure humour should be writtenwith extraordinary attention. A vulgar laugh is detestable. I never sawmuch merit in writing rapidly. You will believe me when I tell you thatI have been present at the production of more genuine wit and humourthan almost any person of my time, and that it was revised and polishedand arranged with a scrupulous care which overlooked nothing. I havenot often seen fairer promises of excellence in this department than inyour correspondent; but I tell you frankly that they will all beblighted and perish prematurely unless sedulously cultivated. It is apoor ambition to raise a casual laugh in the unreflecting. The article did not appear in the _Quarterly_, and Mr. Pillans, thewriter, afterwards became a contributor to the _Edinburgh Review_. In a letter of August 25, 1811, we find Gifford writing to acorrespondent: "Since the hour I was born I never enjoyed, as far as Ican recollect, what you call _health_ for a single day. " In November, after discussing in a letter the articles which were about to appear inthe next _Review_, he concluded: "I write in pain and must break off. "In the following month Mr. Murray, no doubt in consideration of thestart which his _Review_ had made, sent him a present of £500. "I thankyou, " he answered (December 6), "very sincerely for your magnificentpresent; but £500 is a vast sum. However, you know your own business. " Yet Mr. Murray was by no means abounding in wealth. There were alwaysthose overdrawn bills from Edinburgh to be met, and Ballantyne andConstable were both tugging at him for accommodation at the same time. The business arrangements with Constable & Co. , which, save for theshort interruption which has already been related, had extended overmany years, were now about to come to an end. The following refers tothe purchase of Mr. Miller's stock and the removal of Mr. Murray'sbusiness to Albemarle Street. _John Murray to Mr. Constable_. ALBEMARLE ST. , _October_ 27, 1812. "I do not see any existing reason why we, who have so long been so veryintimate, should now be placed in a situation of negative hostility. Iam sure that we are well calculated to render to each other greatservices; you are the best judge whether your interests were ever beforeso well attended to as by me ... The great connexion which I have forthe last two years been maturing in Fleet Street I am now going to bringinto action here; and it is not with any view to, or with any relianceupon, what Miller has done, but upon what I know I can do in such asituation, that I had long made up my mind to move. It is no suddenthing, but one long matured; and it is only from the accident ofMiller's moving that I have taken his house; so that the notions which, I am told, you entertain respecting my plans are totally outside theideas upon which it was formed.... I repeat, it is in my power to do youmany services; and, certainly, I have bought very largely of you, andyou never of me; and you know very well that I will serve you heartilyif I can deal with you confidentially. " A truce was, for a time, made between the firms, but it proved hollow. The never-ending imposition of accommodation bills sent for acceptancehad now reached a point beyond endurance, having regard to Murray'scredit. The last letter from Murray to Constable & Co. Was as follows: _John Murray to Constable & Co_. _April 30_, 1813. GENTLEMEN, I did not answer the letter to which the enclosed alludes, because itsimpropriety in all respects rendered it impossible for me to do sowithout involving myself in a personal dispute, which it is my anxiousresolution to avoid: and because my determination was fully taken toabide by what I told you in my former letter, to which alone I can orcould have referred you. You made an express proposition to me, towhich, as you have deviated from it, it is not my intention to accede. The books may remain with me upon sale or return, until you please toorder them elsewhere; and in the meantime I shall continue to availmyself of every opportunity to sell them. I return, therefore, anaccount and bills, with which I have nothing to do, and desire to have aregular invoice. I am, gentlemen, yours truly, J. MURRAY. Constable & Co. Fired off a final shot on May 28 following, and thecorrespondence and business between the firms then terminated. No. 12 of the _Quarterly_ appeared in December 1811, and perhaps themost interesting article in the number was that by Canning and Ellis, onTrotter's "Life of Fox. " Gifford writes to Murray about this article: "I have not seen Canning yet, but he is undoubtedly at work by thistime. Pray take care that no one gets a sight of the slips. It will be adelightful article, but say not a word till it comes out. " A pamphlet had been published by W. S. Landor, dedicated to the Presidentof the United States, entitled, "Remarks upon Memoirs of Mr. Fox latelypublished. " Gifford was furious about it. He wrote to Murray: _Mr. Gifford to John Murray_. "I never read so rascally a thing as the Dedication. It is almost toobad for the Eatons and other publishers of mad democratic books. In thepamphlet itself there are many clever bits, but there is no taste andlittle judgment. His attacks on private men are very bad. Those on Mr. C. Are too stupid to do much harm, or, indeed, any. The Dedication isthe most abject piece of business that I ever read. It shows Landor tohave a most rancorous and malicious heart. Nothing but a rooted hatredof his country could have made him dedicate his Jacobinical book to themost contemptible wretch that ever crept into authority, and whose onlyrecommendation to him is his implacable enmity to his country. I thinkyou might write to Southey; but I would not, on any account, have youpublish such a scoundrel address. " The only entire article ever contributed to the _Review_ by Giffordhimself was that which he wrote, in conjunction with Barron Field, onFord's "Dramatic Works. " It was an able paper, but it contained apassage, the publication of which occasioned Gifford the deepest regret. Towards the conclusion of the article these words occurred: The Editor"has polluted his pages with the blasphemies of a poor maniac, who, itseems, once published some detached scenes of the 'Broken Heart. '" Thisreferred to Charles Lamb, who likened the "transcendent scene [of theSpartan boy and Calantha] in imagination to Calvary and the Cross. " NowGifford had never heard of the personal history of Lamb, nor of theoccasional fits of lunacy to which his sister Mary was subject; and whenthe paragraph was brought to his notice by Southey, through Murray, itcaused him unspeakable distress. He at once wrote to Southey [Footnote:When the subject of a memoir of Charles Lamb by Serjeant Talfourd wasunder consideration, Southey wrote to a friend: "I wish that I hadlooked out for Mr. Talfourd the letter which Gifford wrote in reply toone in which I remonstrated with him upon his designation of Lamb as apoor maniac. The words were used in complete ignorance of their peculiarbearings, and I believe nothing in the course of Gifford's life everoccasioned him so much self-reproach. He was a man with whom I had noliterary sympathies; perhaps there was nothing upon which we agreed, except great political questions; but I liked him the better ever afterfor his conduct on this occasion. "] the following letter: _Mr. W. Gifford to Mr. Southey_. _February_ 13, 1812. MY DEAR SIR, I break off here to say that I have this moment received your lastletter to Murray. It has grieved and shocked me beyond expression; but, my dear friend, I am innocent so far as the intent goes. I call God towitness that in the whole course of my life I never heard one syllableof Mr. Lamb or his family. I knew not that he ever had a sister, or thathe had parents living, or that he or any person connected with him hadever manifested the slightest tendency to insanity. In a word, I declareto you _in the most solemn manner_ that all I ever knew or ever heard ofMr. Lamb was merely his name. Had I been aware of one of thecircumstances which you mention, I would have lost my right arm soonerthan have written what I have. The truth is, that I was shocked atseeing him compare the sufferings and death of a person who justcontinues to dance after the death of his lover is announced (for thisis all his merit) to the pangs of Mount Calvary; and not choosing toattribute it to folly, because I reserved that charge for Weber, Iunhappily in the present case ascribed it to madness, for which I prayGod to forgive me, since the blow has fallen heavily when I reallythought it would not be felt. I considered Lamb as a thoughtlessscribbler, who, in circumstances of ease, amused himself by writing onany subject. Why I thought so, I cannot tell, but it was the opinion Iformed to myself, for I now regret to say I never made any inquiry uponthe subject; nor by any accident in the whole course of my life did Ihear him mentioned beyond the name. I remain, my dear Sir, Yours most sincerely, W. GIFFORD. It is unnecessary to describe in detail the further progress of the_Quarterly_. The venture was now fairly launched. Occasionally, whensome friction arose from the editorial pruning of Southey's articles, orwhen Mr. Murray remonstrated with the exclusion or inclusion of someparticular article, Mr. Gifford became depressed, or complained, "Thisbusiness begins to get too heavy for me, and I must soon have done, Ifear. " Such discouragement was only momentary. Gifford continued to editthe _Review_ for many years, until and long after its complete successhad become assured. The following extract, from a letter of Southey's to his friend Bedford, describes very happily the position which Mr. Murray had now attained. "Murray offers me a thousand guineas for my intended poem in blankverse, and begs it may not be a line longer than "Thomson's Seasons"! Irather think the poem will be a post obit, and in that case, twice thatsum, at least, may be demanded for it. What his real feelings may betowards me, I cannot tell; but he is a happy fellow, living in the lightof his own glory. The _Review_ is the greatest of all works, and it isall his own creation; he prints 10, 000, and fifty times ten thousandread its contents, in the East and in the West. Joy be with him and hisjournal!" CHAPTER IX LORD BYRON'S WORKS, 1811 TO 1814 The origin of Mr. Murray's connection with Lord Byron was as follows. Lord Byron had made Mr. Dallas [Footnote: Robert Charles Dallas(1754-1824). His sister married Captain George Anson Byron, and herdescendants now hold the title. ] a present of the MS. Of the first twocantos of "Childe Harold, " and allowed him to make arrangements fortheir publication. Mr. Dallas's first intention was to offer them to thepublisher of "English Bards and Scotch Reviewers, " but Cawthorn did notrank sufficiently high among his brethren of the trade. He was precludedfrom offering them to Longman & Co. Because of their refusal to publishthe Satire. He then went to Mr. Miller, of Albemarle Street, and leftthe manuscript with him, "enjoining the strictest secrecy as to theauthor. " After a few days' consideration Miller declined to publish thepoem, principally because of the sceptical stanzas which it contained, and also because of its denunciation as a "plunderer" of his friend andpatron the Earl of Elgin, who was mentioned by name in the originalmanuscript of the poem. After hearing from Dallas that Miller had declined to publish "ChildeHarold, " Lord Byron wrote to him from Reddish's Hotel: _Lord Byron to Mr. Miller_. _July_ 30, 1811. SIR, I am perfectly aware of the justice of your remarks, and am convincedthat if ever the poem is published the same objections will be made inmuch stronger terms. But, as it was intended to be a poem on _Ariosto'splan_, that is to say on _no plan_ at all, and, as is usual in similarcases, having a predilection for the worst passages, I shall retainthose parts, though I cannot venture to defend them. Under thesecircumstances I regret that you decline the publication, on my ownaccount, as I think the book would have done better in your hands; thepecuniary part, you know, I have nothing to do with.... But I canperfectly conceive, and indeed approve your reasons, and assure you mysensations are not _Archiepiscopal_ enough as yet to regret therejection of my Homilies. I am, Sir, your very obedient, humble servant, BYRON. "Next to these publishers, " proceeds Dallas, in his "Recollections ofthe Life of Lord Byron, " "I wished to oblige Mr. Murray, who had then ashop opposite St. Dunstan's Church, in Fleet Street. Both he and hisfather before him had published for myself. He had expressed to me hisregret that I did not carry him the 'English Bards and ScotchReviewers. ' But this was after its success; I think he would haverefused it in its embryo state. After Lord Byron's arrival I had methim, and he said he wished I would obtain some work of his Lordship'sfor him. I now had it in my power, and I put 'Childe Harold'sPilgrimage' into his hands, telling him that Lord Byron had made me apresent of it, and that I expected he would make a very liberalarrangement with me for it. "He took some days to consider, during which time he consultedhis literary advisers, among whom, no doubt, was Mr. Gifford, who was Editor of the _Quarterly Review_. That Mr. Gifford gavea favourable opinion I afterwards learned from Mr. Murray himself; butthe objections I have stated stared him in the face, and he was kept insuspense between the desire of possessing a work of Lord Byron's and thefear of an unsuccessful speculation. We came to this conclusion: that heshould print, at his expense, a handsome quarto edition, the profits ofwhich I should share equally with him, and that the agreement for thecopyright should depend upon the success of this edition. When I toldthis to Lord Byron he was highly pleased, but still doubted thecopyright being worth my acceptance, promising, however, if the poemwent through the edition, to give me other poems to annex to 'ChildeHarold. '" Mr. Murray had long desired to make Lord Byron's acquaintance, and nowthat Mr. Dallas had arranged with him for the publication of the firsttwo cantos of "Childe Harold, " he had many opportunities of seeing Byronat his place of business. The first time that he saw him was when hecalled one day with Mr. Hobhouse in Fleet Street. He afterwards lookedin from time to time, while the sheets were passing through the press, fresh from the fencing rooms of Angelo and Jackson, and used to amusehimself by renewing his practice of "Carte et Tierce, " with hiswalking-cane directed against the book-shelves, while Murray was readingpassages from the poem, with occasional ejaculations of admiration; onwhich Byron would say, "You think that a good idea, do you, Murray?"Then he would fence and lunge with his walking-stick at some specialbook which he had picked out on the shelves before him. As Murrayafterwards said, "I was often very glad to get rid of him!" A correspondence took place with regard to certain omissions, alterations, and improvements which were strongly urged both by Mr. Dallas and the publisher. Mr. Murray wrote as follows: _John Murray to Lord Byron_. _September_ 4, 1811. MY LORD, An absence of some days, passed in the country, has prevented me fromwriting earlier, in answer to your obliging letters. [Footnote: Theseletters are given in Moore's "Life and Letters of Lord Byron. "] I havenow, however, the pleasure of sending you, under a separate cover, thefirst proof sheets of your poem; which is so good as to be entitled toall your care in rendering it perfect. Besides its general merits, thereare parts which, I am tempted to believe, far excel anything that youhave hitherto published; and it were therefore grievous indeed if you donot condescend to bestow upon it all the improvements of which your mindis so capable. Every correction already made is valuable, and thiscircumstance renders me more confident in soliciting your furtherattention. There are some expressions concerning Spain and Portugalwhich, however just at the time they were conceived, yet, as they do notharmonise with the now prevalent feeling, I am persuaded would sogreatly interfere with the popularity which the poem is, in otherrespects, certainly calculated to excite, that, in compassion to yourpublisher, who does not presume to reason upon the subject, otherwisethan as a mere matter of business, I hope your goodness will induce youto remove them; and with them perhaps some religious sentiments whichmay deprive me of some customers amongst the Orthodox. Could I flattermyself that these suggestions were not obtrusive, I would hazardanother, --that you would add the two promised cantos, and complete thepoem. It were cruel indeed not to perfect a work which contains so muchthat is excellent. Your fame, my Lord, demands it. You are raising amonument that will outlive your present feelings; and it shouldtherefore be constructed in such a manner as to excite no otherassociation than that of respect and admiration for your character andgenius. I trust that you will pardon the warmth of this address, when Iassure you that it arises, in the greatest degree, from a sincere regardfor your best reputation; with, however, some view to that portion of itwhich must attend the publisher of so beautiful a poem as you arecapable of rendering in the 'Romaunt of Childe Harold. '" In compliance with the suggestions of the publisher, Byron altered andimproved the stanzas relating to Elgin and Wellington. With respect tothe religious, or anti-religious sentiments, Byron wrote to Murray: "Asfor the 'orthodox, ' let us hope they will buy on purpose to abuse--youwill forgive the one if they will do the other. " Yet he did alter StanzaVIII, and inserted what Moore calls a "magnificent stanza" in place ofone that was churlish and sneering, and in all respects very muchinferior. Byron then proceeded to another point. "Tell me fairly, did you show theMS. To some of your corps?" "I will have no traps for applause, " hewrote to Mr. Murray, at the same time forbidding him to show themanuscript of "Childe Harold" to his Aristarchus, Mr. Gifford, though hehad no objection to letting it be seen by any one else. But it was toolate. Mr. Gifford had already seen the manuscript, and pronounced afavourable opinion as to its great poetic merits. Byron was notsatisfied with this assurance, and seemed, in his next letter, to bevery angry. He could not bear to have it thought that he wasendeavouring to ensure a favourable review of his work in the_Quarterly_. To Mr. Dallas he wrote (September 23, 1811): "I _will_ be angry with Murray. It was a book-selling, back-shop, Paternoster Row, paltry proceeding; and if the experiment had turned outas it deserved, I would have raised all Fleet Street, and borrowed thegiant's staff from St. Dunstan's Church, to immolate the betrayer oftrust. I have written to him as he was never written to before by anauthor, I'll be sworn; and I hope you will amplify my wrath, till it hasan effect upon him. " Byron at first objected to allow the new poem to be published with hisname, thinking that this would bring down upon him the enmity of hiscritics in the North, as well as the venom of the southern scribblers, whom he had enraged by his Satire. At last, on Mr. Murray's strongrepresentation, he consented to allow his name to be published on thetitle-page as the author. Even to the last, however, his doubts weregreat as to the probable success of the poem; and he more than oncetalked of suppressing it. In October 1811 Lord Byron wrote from Newstead Abbey to his friend Mr. Hodgson: [Footnote: The Rev. Francis Hodgson was then residing atCambridge as Fellow and Tutor of King's College. He formed an intimatefriendship with Byron, who communicated with him freely as to hispoetical as well as his religious difficulties. Hodgson afterwardsbecame Provost of Eton. ] "'Childe Harold's Pilgrimage' must wait till Murray's is finished. He ismaking a tour in Middlesex, and is to return soon, when high matter maybe expected. He wants to have it in quarto, which is a cursed unsaleablesize; but it is pestilent long, and one must obey one's publisher. " The whole of the sheets were printed off in the following month ofJanuary; and the work was published on March 1, 1812. Of the firstedition only 500 copies, demy quarto, were printed. It is unnecessary to say with what applause the book was received. Theimpression it produced was as instantaneous as it proved to be lasting. Byron himself briefly described the result of the publication in hismemoranda: "I awoke one morning and found myself famous. " The publisherhad already taken pains to spread abroad the merits of the poem. Many ofhis friends had re-echoed its praises. The attention of the public wasfixed upon the work; and in three days after its appearance the wholeedition was disposed of. When Mr. Dallas went to see Lord Byron at hishouse in St. James's Street, he found him loaded with letters fromcritics, poets, and authors, all lavish of their raptures. A handsomenew edition, in octavo, was proposed, to which his Lordship agreed. Eventually Mr. Murray consented to give Mr. Dallas £600 for thecopyright of the poem; although Mr. Gifford and others were of opinionthat it might prove a bad bargain at that price. There was, however, oneexception, namely Mr. Rogers, who told Mr. Murray not to bedisheartened, for he might rely upon its turning out the most fortunatepurchase he had ever made; and so it proved. Three thousand copies ofthe second and third editions of the poem in octavo were printed; andthese went off in rapid succession. On the appearance of "Childe Harold's Pilgrimage" Lord Byron became anobject of interest in the fashionable world of London. His poem was thesubject of conversation everywhere, and many literary, noble, and royalpersonages desired to make his acquaintance. In the month of June he wasinvited to a party at Miss Johnson's, at which His Royal Highness thePrince Regent was present. As Lord Byron had not yet been to Court, itwas not considered etiquette that he should appear before His RoyalHighness. He accordingly retired to another room. But on the Princebeing informed that Lord Byron was in the house, he expressed a desireto see him. Lord Byron was sent for, and the following is Mr. Murray'saccount of the conversation that took place. _John Murray to Mr. Scott_. _June_ 27, 1812. DEAR SIR, I cannot refrain, notwithstanding my fears of intrusion, from mentioningto you a conversation which Lord Byron had with H. R. H. The PrinceRegent, and of which you formed the leading subject. He was at anevening party at Miss Johnson's this week, when the Prince, hearing thatLord Byron was present, expressed a desire to be introduced to him; andfor more than half an hour they conversed on poetry and poets, withwhich the Prince displayed an intimacy and critical taste which at oncesurprised and delighted Lord Byron. But the Prince's great delight wasWalter Scott, whose name and writings he dwelt upon and recurred toincessantly. He preferred him far beyond any other poet of the time, repeated several passages with fervour, and criticized them faithfully. He spoke chiefly of the 'Lay of the Last Minstrel, ' which he expressedhimself as admiring most of the three poems. He quoted Homer, and evensome of the obscurer Greek poets, and appeared, as Lord Byron supposes, to have read more poetry than any prince in Europe. He paid, of course, many compliments to Lord Byron, but the greatest was "that he ought tobe offended with Lord B. , for that he had thought it impossible for anypoet to equal Walter Scott, and that he had made him find himselfmistaken. " Lord Byron called upon me, merely to let off the raptures ofthe Prince respecting you, thinking, as he said, that if I were likelyto have occasion to write to you, it might not be ungrateful for you tohear of his praises. In reply Scott wrote to Mr. Murray as follows, enclosing a letter toLord Byron, which has already been published in the Lives of bothauthors: _Mr. Scott to John Murray_. EDINBURGH, _July 2_, 1812. MY DEAR SIR, I have been very silent, partly through pressure of business and partlyfrom idleness and procrastination, but it would be very ungracious todelay returning my thanks for your kindness in transmitting the veryflattering particulars of the Prince Regent's conversation with LordByron. I trouble you with a few lines to his Lordship expressive of mythanks for his very handsome and gratifying communication, and I hope hewill not consider it as intrusive in a veteran author to pay my debt ofgratitude for the high pleasure I have received from the perusal of'Childe Harold, ' which is certainly the most original poem which we havehad this many a day.... Your obliged, humble Servant, WALTER SCOTT. This episode led to the opening of an agreeable correspondence betweenScott and Byron, and to a lasting friendship between the two poets. The fit of inspiration was now on Lord Byron. In May 1813 appeared "TheGiaour, " and in the midst of his corrections of successive editions ofit, he wrote in four nights his second Turkish story, "Zuleika, "afterwards known as "The Bride of Abydos. " With respect to the business arrangement as to the two poems, Mr. Murraywrote to Lord Byron as follows: _John Murray to Lord Byron_. _November_ 18, 1813. MY DEAR LORD, I am very anxious that our business transactions should occurfrequently, and that they should be settled immediately; for shortaccounts are favourable to long friendships. I restore "The Giaour" to your Lordship entirely, and for it, the "Brideof Abydos, " and the miscellaneous poems intended to fill up the volumeof the small edition, I beg leave to offer you the sum of One ThousandGuineas; and I shall be happy if you perceive that my estimation of yourtalents in my character of a man of business is not much under myadmiration of them as a man. I do most heartily accept the offer of your portrait, as the most noblemark of friendship with which you could in any way honour me. I doassure you that I am truly proud of being distinguished as yourpublisher, and that I shall ever continue, Your Lordship's faithful Servant, JOHN MURRAY. With reference to the foregoing letter we read in Lord Byron's Diary: "Mr. Murray has offered me one thousand guineas for 'The Giaour' and'The Bride of Abydos. ' I won't. It is too much: though I am stronglytempted, merely for the say of it. No bad price for a fortnight's (aweek each) what?--the gods know. It was intended to be called poetry. " The "Bride of Abydos" was received with almost as much applause as the"Giaour. " "Lord Byron, " said Sir James Mackintosh, "is the author of theday; six thousand of his 'Bride of Abydos' have been sold within amonth. " "The Corsair" was Lord Byron's next poem, written with great vehemence, literally "struck off at a heat, " at the rate of about two hundred linesa day, --"a circumstance, " says Moore, "that is, perhaps, wholly withouta parallel in the history of genius. " "The Corsair" was begun on the18th, and finished on the 31st of December, 1813. A sudden impulse induced Lord Byron to present the copyright of thispoem also to Mr. Dallas, with the single stipulation that he would offerit for publication to Mr. Murray, who eventually paid Mr. Dallas fivehundred guineas for the copyright, and the work was published inFebruary 1814. The following letters will give some idea of thereception it met with. _John Murray to Lord Byron_. _February_ 3, 1814. MY LORD, I have been unwilling to write until I had something to say, an occasionto which I do not always restrict myself. I am most happy to tell youthat your last poem _is_--what Mr. Southey's is _called_--_a CarmenTriumphale_. Never, in my recollection, has any work, since the "Letterof Burke to the Duke of Bedford, " excited such a ferment--a fermentwhich, I am happy to say, will subside into lasting fame. I sold, on theday of publication--a thing perfectly unprecedented--10, 000 copies.... Gifford did what I never knew him do before--he repeated severalpassages from memory. " The "Ode to Napoleon Bonaparte, " which appeared in April 1814, was onthe whole a failure. It was known to be Lord Byron's, and itspublication was seized upon by the press as the occasion for many bittercriticisms, mingled with personalities against the writer's genius andcharacter. He was cut to the quick by these notices, and came to thedetermination to buy back the whole of the copyrights of his works, andsuppress every line he had ever written. On April 29, 1814, he wrote toMr. Murray: _Lord Byron to John Murray_. _April_ 29, 1814. I enclose a draft for the money; when paid, send the copyrights. Irelease you from the thousand pounds agreed on for "The Giaour" and"Bride, " and there's an end.... For all this, it might be well to assignsome reason. I have none to give, except my own caprice, and I do notconsider the circumstance of consequence enough to requireexplanation.... It will give me great pleasure to preserve youracquaintance, and to consider you as my friend. Believe me very truly, and for much attention, Yours, etc. , BYRON. Mr. Murray was of course very much concerned at this decision, andremonstrated. Three days later Lord Byron revoked his determination. ToMr. Murray he wrote (May 1, 1814): "If your present note is serious, and it really would be inconvenient, there is an end of the matter; tear my draft, and go on as usual: inthat case, we will recur to our former basis. " Before the end of the month Lord Byron began the composition of his nextpoem, "Lara, " usually considered a continuation of "The Corsair. " It waspublished conjointly with Mr. Rogers's "Jacqueline. " "Rogers and I, "said Lord Byron to Moore, "have almost coalesced into a joint invasionof the public. Whether it will take place or not, I do not yet know, andI am afraid 'Jacqueline' (which is very beautiful) will be in badcompany. But in this case, the lady will not be the sufferer. " The two poems were published anonymously in the following August (1814):Murray allowed 500 guineas for the copyright of each. CHAPTER X MR. MURRAY'S REMOVAL TO 50, ALBEMARLE STREET We must now revert to the beginning of 1812, at which time Mr. WilliamMiller, who commenced business in Bond Street in 1791, and had in 1804removed to 50, Albemarle Street, desired to retire from "the Trade. " Hecommunicated his resolve to Mr. Murray, who had some time held theintention of moving westward from Fleet Street, and had been on thepoint of settling in Pall Mall. Murray at once entered into anarrangement with Miller, and in a letter to Mr. Constable of Edinburghhe observed: _John Murray to Mr. A. Constable_. _May_ 1, 1812. "You will probably have heard that Miller is about to retire, and that Ihave ventured to undertake to succeed him. I had for some timedetermined upon moving, and I did not very long hesitate about acceptinghis offer. I am to take no part of his stock but such as I may deemexpedient, and for it and the rest I shall have very long credit. Howfar it may answer, I know not; but if I can judge of my own views, Ithink it may prove an advantageous opening. Miller's retirement is veryextraordinary, for no one in the trade will believe that he has made afortune; but from what he has laid open to me, it is clear that he hassucceeded. In this arrangement, I propose of course to dispose of mypresent house, and my medical works, with other parts of my business. Ihave two offers for it, waiting my decision as to terms.... I am toenter at Miller's on September 29th next. " [Footnote: The Fleet Streetbusiness was eventually purchased by Thomas and George Underwood. Itappears from the "Memoirs of Adam Black" that Black was for a short timea partner with the Underwoods. Adam Black quitted the business in 1813. Upon the failure of the Underwoods in 1831, Mr. Samuel Highley, son ofMr. Murray's former partner, took possession, and the name of Highleyagain appeared over the door. ] The terms arranged with Mr. Miller were as follows: The lease of thehouse, No. 50, Albemarle Street, was purchased by Mr. Murray, togetherwith the copyrights, stock, etc. , for the sum of £3, 822 12_s_. 6_d_. ;Mr. Miller receiving as surety, during the time the purchase moneyremained unpaid, the copyright of "Domestic Cookery, " of the _QuarterlyReview_, and the one-fourth share in "Marmion. " The debt was not finallypaid off until the year 1821. Amongst the miscellaneous works which Mr. Murray published shortly afterhis removal to Albemarle Street were William Sotheby's translation ofthe "Georgies of Virgil"--the most perfect translation, according toLord Jeffrey, of a Latin classic which exists in our language; RobertBland's "Collection from the Greek Anthology"; Prince Hoare's "Epochs ofthe Arts"; Lord Glenbervie's work on the "Cultivation of Timber";Granville Penn's "Bioscope, or Dial of Life explained"; John HermanMerivale's "Orlando in Roncesvalles"; and Sir James Hall's splendid workon "Gothic Architecture. " Besides these, there was a very importantcontribution to our literature--in the "Miscellaneous Works of Gibbon"in 5 volumes, for the copyright of which Mr. Murray paid Lord Sheffieldthe sum of £1, 000. In 1812 he published Sir John Malcolm's "Sketch of the Sikhs, " and inthe following year Mr. Macdonald Kinneir's "Persia. " Mr. D'Israeli's"Calamities of Authors" appeared in 1812, and Murray forwarded copies ofthe work to Scott and Southey. _Mr. Scott to John Murray_. _July_ 2, 1812. I owe you best thanks for the 'Calamities of Authors, ' which has all theentertaining and lively features of the 'Amenities of Literature. ' I amjust packing them up with a few other books for my hermitage atAbbotsford, where my present parlour is only 12 feet square, and mybook-press in Lilliputian proportion. Poor Andrew Macdonald I knew indays of yore, and could have supplied some curious anecdotes respectinghim. He died of a poet's consumption, viz. Want of food. "The present volume of 'Somers' [Footnote: Lord Somers' "Tracts, " a newedition in 12 volumes. ] will be out immediately; with whom am I tocorrespond on this subject since the secession of Will. Miller? I shallbe happy to hear you have succeeded to him in this department, as wellas in Albemarle Street. What has moved Miller to retire? He is surelytoo young to have made a fortune, and it is uncommon to quit a thrivingtrade. I have had a packet half finished for Gifford this many a day. " Southey expressed himself as greatly interested in the "Calamities ofAuthors, " and proposed to make it the subject of an article for the_Quarterly_. _Mr. Southey to John Murray_. _August_ 14, 1812. "I should like to enlarge a little upon the subject of literaryproperty, on which he has touched, in my opinion, with proper feeling. Certainly I am a party concerned. I should like to say something uponthe absurd purposes of the Literary Fund, with its despicableostentation of patronage, and to build a sort of National Academy in theair, in the hope that Canning might one day lay its foundation in a moresolid manner. [Footnote: Canning had his own opinion on the subject. When the Royal Society of Literature was about to be established, anapplication was made to him to join the committee. He refused, forreasons "partly general, partly personal. " He added, "I am really ofopinion, with Dr. Johnson, that the multitudinous personage, called ThePublic, is after all, the best patron of literature and learned men. "]And I could say something on the other side of the picture, showing thatalthough literature in almost all cases is the worst trade to which aman can possibly betake himself, it is the best and wisest of allpursuits for those whose provision is already made, and of allamusements for those who have leisure to amuse themselves. It has longbeen my intention to leave behind me my own Memoirs, as a post-obit formy family--a wise intention no doubt, and one which it is not veryprudent to procrastinate. Should this ever be completed, it wouldexhibit a case directly in contrast to D'Israeli's view of the subject. I chose literature for my own profession, with every advantage ofeducation it is true, but under more disadvantages perhaps of any otherkind than any of the persons in his catalogue. I have never repented thechoice. The usual censure, ridicule, and even calumnies, which it hasdrawn on me never gave me a moment's pain; but on the other hand, literature has given me friends; among the best and wisest and mostcelebrated of my contemporaries it has given me distinction. If I livetwenty years longer, I do not doubt that it will give me fortune, and ifit pleases God to take me before my family are provided for, I doubt aslittle that in my name and in my works they will find a provision. Iwant to give you a 'Life of Wesley. ' The history of the Dissenters mustbe finished by that time, and it will afford me opportunity. " During the year 1813 the recklessness of the younger Ballantyne, combined with the formation of the incipient estate at Abbotsford, wereweighing heavily on Walter Scott. This led to a fresh alliance withConstable, "in which, " wrote Scott, "I am sensible he has gained a greatadvantage"; but in accordance with the agreement Constable, in returnfor a share in Scott's new works, was to relieve the Ballantynes of someof their heavy stock, and in May Scott was enabled "for the first timethese many weeks to lay my head on a quiet pillow. " But nothing couldcheck John Ballantyne. "I sometimes fear, " wrote Scott to him, "thatbetween the long dates of your bills and the tardy settlements of theEdinburgh trade, some difficulties will occur even in June; and July Ialways regard with deep anxiety. " How true this forecast proved to be isshown by the following letter: _Mr. Scott to John Murray_, EDINBURGH, _July 5_, 1813. I delayed answering your favour, thinking I could have overtaken the"Daemonology" for the _Review_, but I had no books in the country whereit found me, and since that Swift, who is now nearly finished, has keptme incessantly labouring. When that is off my hand I will have plenty ofleisure for reviewing, though you really have no need of my assistance. The volume of "Somers" being now out of my hands I take the liberty todraw at this date as usual for £105. Now I have a favour to ask which Ido with the more confidence because, if it is convenient and agreeableto you to oblige me in the matter, it will be the means of putting ourconnection as author and publisher upon its former footing, which Itrust will not be disagreeable to you. I am making up a large sum ofmoney to pay for a late purchase, and as part of my funds is secured onan heritable bond which cannot be exacted till Martinmas, I find myselfsome hundreds short, which the circumstances of the money market hererenders it not so easy to supply as formerly. Now if you will oblige meby giving me a lift with your credit and accepting the enclosed bills, [Footnote: Three bills for £300 each at three, four, and six monthsrespectively. ] it will accommodate me particularly at this moment, andas I shall have ample means of putting you in cash to replace them asthey fall due, will not, I should hope, occasion you any inconvenience. Longmans' house on a former occasion obliged me in this way, and I hopefound their account in it. But I entreat you will not stand on theleast ceremony should you think you could not oblige me withoutinconveniencing yourself. The property I have purchased cost about£6, 000, so it is no wonder I am a little out for the moment. Will youhave the goodness to return an answer in course of post, as, failingyour benevolent aid, I must look about elsewhere? You will understand distinctly that I do not propose that you shouldadvance any part of the money by way of loan or otherwise, but only theassistance of your credit, the bills being to be retired by cashremitted by me before they fall due. Believe me, very truly, Your obedient Servant, WALTER SCOTT. Mr. Murray at once replied: _John Murray to Mr. Scott_. _July_ 8, 1813. DEAR SIR, I have the pleasure of returning accepted the bills which I receivedfrom you this morning. In thus availing myself of your confidentialapplication, I trust that you will do me the justice to believe that itis done for kindness already received, and not with the remotest viewtowards prospective advantages. I shall at all times feel proud of beingone of your publishers, but this must be allowed to arise solely out ofyour own feelings and convenience when the occasions shall presentthemselves. I am sufficiently content in the belief that even negativeobstacles to our perfect confidence have now subsided. When weightier concerns permit we hope that you will again appear in our_Review_. In confidence I may tell you that your long silence led us toavail ourselves of your friend Mr. Rose's offer to review Ferriar, [Footnote: Dr. Ferriar on "Apparitions. "] and his article is alreadyprinting. I will send you a new edition of the "Giaour, " in which there are one ortwo stanzas added of peculiar beauty. I trust that your family are well, and remain, dear Sir, Your obliged and faithful Servant, JOHN MURRAY. Within a few months of this correspondence, Scott was looking into anold writing-desk in search of some fishing-tackle, when his eye chancedto light upon the Ashestiel fragment of "Waverley, " begun several yearsbefore. He read over the introductory chapters, and then determined tofinish the story. It is said that he first offered it anonymously to SirR. Phillips, London, who refused to publish it. "Waverley" wasafterwards accepted by Constable & Co. , and published on half profits, on July 7, 1814. When it came out, Murray got an early copy of thenovel; he read it, and sent it to Mr. Canning, and wrote upon thetitle-page, "By Walter Scott. " The reason why he fixed upon Scott as theauthor was as follows. When he met Ballantyne at Boroughbridge, in 1809, to settle some arrangements as to the works which Walter Scott proposedto place in his hands for publication, he remembered that among thoseworks were three--1st, an edition of "Beaumont and Fletcher"; 2nd, apoem; and 3rd, a novel. Now, both the edition of "Beaumont and Fletcher"(though edited by Weber) and the poem, the "Lady of the Lake, " had beenpublished; and now, at last, appeared _the novel_. [Footnote: Indeed, inBallantyne & Co. 's printed list of "New Works and Publications for1809-10, " issued August 1810 (now before us), we find the followingentry: "Waverley; or, 'Tis Sixty Years Since; a novel in 3 vols. 12mo. "The work was not, however, published until July 1814. ] He was confirmedin his idea that Walter Scott was the author after carefully reading thebook. Canning called on Murray next day; said he had begun it, found itvery dull, and concluded: "You are quite mistaken; it cannot be byWalter Scott. " But a few days later he wrote to Murray: "Yes, it is so;you are right: Walter Scott, and no one else. " In the autumn of 1814 Mrs. Murray went to Leith by sailing-ship from theThames, to visit her mother and friends in Edinburgh. She wasaccompanied by her son John and her two daughters. During her absence, Mr. Murray wrote to her two or three times a week, and kept her _aucourant_ with the news of the day. In his letter of August 9 heintimated that he had been dining with D'Israeli, and that he afterwardswent with him to Sadler's Wells Theatre to see the "Corsair, " at whichhe was "woefully disappointed and enraged.... They have actually omittedhis wife altogether, and made him a mere ruffian, ultimately overcome bythe Sultan, and drowned in the New River!" Mr. Blackwood, of Edinburgh, was then in London, spending several dayswith Mr. Murray over their accounts and future arrangements. The latterwas thinking of making a visit to Paris, in the company of his friendD'Israeli, during the peace which followed the exile of Napoleon toElba. D'Israeli had taken a house at Brighton, from which place thevoyagers intended to set sail, and make the passage to Dieppe in aboutfourteen hours. On August 13 Mr. Murray informs his wife that "LordByron was here yesterday, and I introduced him to Blackwood, to whom hewas very civil. They say, " he added, "that Madame de Staël has beenordered to quit Paris, for writing lightly respecting the Bourbons. " Twodays later he wrote to Mrs. Murray: _August_ 15, 1814. "I dined yesterday with D'Israeli, and in the afternoon we partly walkedand partly rode to Islington, to drink tea with Mrs. Lindo, who, withMr. L. And her family, were well pleased to see me. Mr. Cervetto wasinduced to accompany the ladies at the piano with his violoncello, whichhe did delightfully. We walked home at 10 o'clock. On Saturday we passeda very pleasant day at Petersham with Turner and his family.... "I have got at last Mr. Eagle's 'Journal of Penrose, the Seaman, ' forwhich, as you may remember, I am to pay £200 in twelve months for 1, 000copies: too dear perhaps; but Lord Byron sent me word this morning byletter (for he borrowed the MS. Last night): 'Penrose is most amusing. Inever read so much of a book at one sitting in my life. He kept me uphalf the night, and made me dream of him the other half. It has all theair of truth, and is most entertaining and interesting in every point ofview. '" Writing again on August 24, 1814, he says: "Lord Byron set out for Newstead on Sunday. It is finally settled to behis again, the proposed purchaser forfeiting £25, 000. 'Lara' and'Jacqueline' are nearly sold off, to the extent of 6, 000, which leavesme £130, and the certain sale of 10, 000 more in the 8vo form. Mr. Canning called upon Gifford yesterday, and from their conversation Iinfer very favourably for my _Review_. We shall now take a decided tonein Politics, and we are all in one boat. Croker has gone down to thePrince Regent, at Brighton, where I ought to have been last night, tohave witnessed the rejoicings and splendour of the Duke of Clarence'sbirthday. But I am ever out of luck. 'O, indolence and indecision ofmind! if not in yourselves vices, to how much exquisite misery do youfrequently prepare the way!' Have you come to this passage in 'Waverley'yet? Pray read 'Waverley'; it is excellent. " On September 5, 1814, Mr. Murray communicated with Mrs. Murray as tothe education of his son John, then six-and-a-half years old: _John Murray to Mrs. Murray_. "I am glad that you venture to say something about the children, for itis only by such minutiae that I can judge of the manner in which theyamuse or behave themselves. I really do not see the least propriety inleaving John, at an age when the first impressions are so deep andlasting, to receive the rudiments and foundation of his education inScotland. If learning English, his native language, mean anything, it isnot merely to read it correctly and understand it grammatically, but tospeak and pronounce it like the most polished native. But how can youexpect this to be effected, even with the aid of the best teachers, wheneverybody around him, with whom he can practise his instructions, speaksin a totally different manner? No! I rather think it better that heshould go to Edinburgh after he has passed through the schools here, andwhen he is sixteen or seventeen. He should certainly go to some schoolnext spring, and I most confidingly trust that you are unremitting inyour duty to give him daily lessons of preparation, or he may be so farbehind children of his age when he does go to school, that the derisionhe may meet there may destroy emulation. All this, however, is matterfor serious consideration and for future consultation, in which yourvoice shall have its rightful influence.... " Mr. Murray was under the necessity of postponing his visit to France. Hewent to Brighton instead, and spent a few pleasant days with Mr. D'Israeli and his friends. On September 24 Mr. Murray, having returned to London, informed hiswife, still at Edinburgh, of an extraordinary piece of news. _John Murray to Mrs. Murray_. "I was much surprised to learn from Dallas, whom I accidentally metyesterday, that Lord Byron was expected in town every hour. Iaccordingly left my card at his house, with a notice that I would attendhim as soon as he pleased; and it pleased him to summon my attendanceabout seven in the evening. He had come to town on business, andregretted that he would not be at Newstead until a fortnight, as hewished to have seen me there on my way to Scotland. Says he, 'Can youkeep a secret?' 'Certainly--positively--my wife's out of town!' 'Then--Iam going to be MARRIED!' 'The devil! I shall have no poem this winterthen?' 'No. ' 'Who is the lady who is to do me this injury?' 'MissMilbanke--do you know her?' 'No, my lord. ' "So here is news for you! I fancy the lady is rich, noble, andbeautiful; but this shall be my day's business to enquire about. Oh!how he did curse poor Lady C---- as the fiend who had interrupted allhis projects, and who would do so now if possible. I think he hintedthat she had managed to interrupt this connexion two years ago. Hethought she was abroad, and, to his torment and astonishment, he findsher not only in England, but in London. He says he has written somesmall poems which his friends think beautiful, particularly one of eightlines, his very best--all of which, I believe, I am to have; and, moreover, he gives me permission to publish the octavo edition of 'Lara'with his name, which secures, I think, £700 to you and me. So Scott'spoem is announced ['Lord of the Isles'], and I am cut out. I wish I hadbeen in Scotland six weeks ago, and I might have come in for a share. Should I apply for one to him, it would oblige me to be a partner withConstable, who is desperately in want of money. He has applied to Cadell& Davies (the latter told me in confidence) and they refused. " At the beginning of October Mr. Murray set out for Edinburgh, journeyingby Nottingham for the purpose of visiting Newstead Abbey. The following is Mr. Murray's account of his visit to Newstead. Hisletter is dated Matlock, October 5, 1814: "I got to Newstead about 11 o'clock yesterday and found the steward, mynamesake, and the butler waiting for me. The first, who is good-lookingand a respectable old man of about sixty-five years, showed me over thehouse and grounds, which occupied two hours, for I was anxious toexamine everything. But never was I more disappointed, for my notions, Isuppose, had been raised to the romantic. I had surmised the possiblyeasy restoration of this once famous abbey, the mere skeleton of whichis now fast crumbling to ruin. Lord Byron's immediate predecessorstripped the whole place of all that was splendid and interesting; andyou may judge of what he must have done to the mansion when inform youthat he converted the ground, which used to be covered with the finesttrees, like a forest, into an absolute desert. Not a tree is leftstanding, and the wood thus shamefully cut down was sold in one day for£60, 000. The hall of entrance has about eighteen large niches, which hadbeen filled with statues, and the side walls covered with familyportraits and armour. All these have been mercilessly torn down, as wellas the magnificent fireplace, and sold. All the beautiful paintingswhich filled the galleries--valued at that day at £80, 000--havedisappeared, and the whole place is crumbling into dust. No sum short of£100, 000 would make the place habitable. Lord Byron's few apartmentscontain some modern upholstery, but serve only to show what ought tohave been there. They are now digging round the cloisters for atraditionary cannon, and in their progress, about five days ago, theydiscovered a corpse in too decayed a state to admit of removal. I sawthe drinking-skull [Footnote: When the father of the present Mr. Murraywas a student in Edinburgh, he wrote to his father (April 10, 1827): "Isaw yesterday at a jeweller's shop in Edinburgh a great curiosity, noless than Lord Byron's skull cup, upon which he wrote the poem. It isfor sale; the owner, whose name I could not learn (it appears he doesnot wish it known), wants £200 for it. "] and the marble mausoleum erectedover Lord Byron's dog. I came away with my heart aching and full ofmelancholy reflections--producing a lowness of spirits which I did notget the better of until this morning, when the most enchanting scenery Ihave ever beheld has at length restored me. I am far more surprised thatLord Byron should ever have lived at Newstead, than that he should beinclined to part with it; for, as there is no possibility of his beingable, by any reasonable amount of expense, to reinstate it, the placecan present nothing but a perpetual memorial of the wickedness of hisancestors. There are three, or at most four, domestics at board wages. All that I was asked to taste was a piece of bread-and-butter. As myfoot was on the step of the chaise, when about to enter it, I wasinformed that his lordship had ordered that I should take as much gameas I liked. What makes the steward, Joe Murray, an interesting object tome, is that the old man has seen the abbey in all its vicissitudes ofgreatness and degradation. Once it was full of unbounded hospitality andsplendour, and now it is simply miserable. If this man has feelings--ofwhich, by the way, he betrays no symptom--he would possibly be miserablehimself. He has seen three hundred of the first people in the countyfilling the gallery, and seen five hundred deer disporting themselves inthe beautiful park, now covered with stunted offshoots of felled trees. Again I say it gave me the heartache to witness all this ruin, and Iregret that my romantic picture has been destroyed by the reality. " Among the friends that welcomed Mr. Murray to Edinburgh was Mr. WilliamBlackwood, who then, and for a long time after, was closely connectedwith him in his business transactions. Blackwood was a native ofEdinburgh; having served his apprenticeship with Messrs. Bell &Bradfute, booksellers, he was selected by Mundell & Company to takecharge of a branch of their extensive publishing business in Glasgow. Hereturned to Edinburgh, and again entered the service of Bell etBradfute; but after a time went to London to master the secrets of theold book trade under the well-known Mr. Cuthill. Returning to Edinburgh, he set up for himself in 1804, at the age of twenty-eight, at a shop inSouth Bridge Street--confining himself, for the most part, to old books. He was a man of great energy and decision of character, and his earlyeducation enabled him to conduct his correspondence with a remarkabledegree of precision and accuracy. Mr. Murray seems to have done businesswith him as far back as June 1807, and was in the habit of calling uponBlackwood, who was about his own age, whenever he visited Edinburgh. Thetwo became intimate, and corresponded frequently; and at last, whenMurray withdrew from the Ballantynes, in August 1810 he transferred thewhole of his Scottish agency to the house of William Blackwood. Inreturn for the publishing business sent to him from London, Blackwoodmade Murray his agent for any new works published by him in Edinburgh. In this way Murray became the London publisher for Hogg's new poems, and"The Queen's Wake, " which had reached its fourth edition. Mr. Murray paid at this time another visit to Abbotsford. Towards theend of 1814 Scott had surrounded the original farmhouse with a number ofbuildings--kitchen, laundry, and spare bedrooms--and was able toentertain company. He received Murray with great cordiality, and mademany enquiries as to Lord Byron, to whom Murray wrote on his return toLondon: _John Murray to Lord Byron_. "Walter Scott commissioned me to be the bearer of his warmest greetingsto you. His house was full the day I passed with him; and yet, both incorners and at the surrounded table, he talked incessantly of you. Unwilling that I should part without bearing some mark of his love (apoet's love) for you, he gave me a superb Turkish dagger to present toyou, as the only remembrance which, at the moment, he could think of tooffer you. He was greatly pleased with the engraving of your portrait, which I recollected to carry with me; and during the whole dinner--whenall were admiring the taste with which Scott had fitted up a sort ofGothic cottage--he expressed his anxious wishes that you might honourhim with a visit, which I ventured to assure him you would feel no lesshappy than certain in effecting when you should go to Scotland; and I amsure he would hail your lordship as 'a very brother. '" After all his visits had been paid, and he had made his arrangementswith his printers and publishers, Mr. Murray returned to London with hiswife and family. Shortly after his arrival he received a letter from Mr. Blackwood. _Mr. Wm. Blackwood to John Murray_. _November 8_, 1814. "I was much gratified by your letter informing me of your safe arrival. How much you must be overwhelmed just now, and your mind distracted byso many calls upon your attention at once. I hope that you are now inone of your best frames of mind, by which you are enabled, as you havetold me, to go through, with more satisfaction to yourself, ten timesthe business you can do at other times. While you are so occupied withyour great concerns, I feel doubly obliged to you for your remembranceof my small matters. " After referring to his illness, he proceeds: "Do not reflect upon your visit to the bard (Walter Scott). You wouldhave blamed yourself much more if you had not gone. The advance was madeby him through Ballantyne, and you only did what was open and candid. Weshall be at the bottom of these peoples' views by-and-bye; at present Iconfess I only see very darkly--but let us have patience; a little timewill develop all these mysteries. I have not seen Ballantyne since, andwhen I do see him I shall say very little indeed. If there really is adisappointment in not being connected with Scott's new poem, you shouldfeel it much less than any man living--having such a poet as LordByron. " Although Murray failed to obtain an interest in "The Lady of the Lake, "he was offered and accepted, at Scott's desire, a share in a new editionof "Don Roderick. " CHAPTER XI MURRAY'S DRAWING-ROOM--BYRON AND SCOTT--WORKS PUBLISHED IN 1815 During Mrs. Murray's absence in Edinburgh, the dwelling-house at 50, Albemarle Street was made over to the carpenters, painters, and housedecorators. "I hope, " said Mr. Murray to his wife, "to leave thedrawing-room entirely at your ladyship's exclusive command. " But thedrawing-room was used for other purposes than the reception of ordinaryvisitors. It became for some time the centre of literary friendship andintercommunication at the West End. In those days there was no AthenaeumClub for the association of gentlemen known for their literary, artistic, or scientific attainments. That institution was onlyestablished in 1823, through the instrumentality of Croker, Lawrence, Chantrey, Sir Humphry Davy, and their friends. Until then, Murray'sdrawing-room was the main centre of literary intercourse in that quarterof London. Men of distinction, from the Continent and America, presentedtheir letters of introduction to Mr. Murray, and were cordially andhospitably entertained by him; meeting, in the course of their visits, many distinguished and notable personages. In these rooms, early in 1815, young George Ticknor, from Boston, inAmerica, then only twenty-three, met Moore, Campbell, D'Israeli, Gifford, Humphry Davy, and others. He thus records his impressions ofGifford: "Among other persons, I brought letters to Gifford, the satirist, butnever saw him till yesterday. Never was I so mistaken in myanticipations. Instead of a tall and handsome man, as I had supposed himfrom his picture--a man of severe and bitter remarks in conversation, such as I had good reason to believe him from his books, I found him ashort, deformed, and ugly little man, with a large head sunk betweenhis shoulders, and one of his eyes turned outward, but withal, one ofthe best-natured, most open and well-bred gentlemen I have ever met. Heis editor of the _Quarterly Review_, and was not a little surprised andpleased to hear that it was reprinted with us, which I told him, with anindirect allusion to the review of 'Inchiquen's United States. '.... Hecarried me to a handsome room over Murray's book-store, which he hasfitted up as a sort of literary lounge, where authors resort to readnewspapers, and talk literary gossip. I found there Elmsley, Hallam, Lord Byron's 'Classic Hallam, much renowned for Greek, ' now as famous asbeing one of his lordship's friends, Boswell, a son of Johnson'sbiographer, etc. , so that I finished a long forenoon very pleasantly. "[Footnote: "Life, Letters, and Journal of George Ticknor, " i. 48. ] The following letter and Ticknor's reference to Gifford only confirm thetestimony of all who knew him that in private life the redoubtableeditor and severe critic was an amiable and affectionate man. _Mr. Gifford to John Murray_, JAMES STREET, _October_ 20, 1814. My DEAR SIR, What can I say in return for your interesting and amusing letter? I livehere quite alone, and see nobody, so that I have not a word of news foryou. I delight in your visit to Scotland, which I am sure would turn togood, and which I hope you will, as you say, periodically repeat. Itmakes me quite happy to find you beating up for recruits, and mostardently do I wish you success. Mention me kindly to Scott, and tell himhow much I long to renew our wonted acquaintance. Southey's article is, I think, excellent. I have softened matters a little. Barrow is hard atwork on Flinders [_Q. R_. 23]. I have still a most melancholy house. Mypoor housekeeper is going fast. Nothing can save her, and I lend all mycare to soften her declining days. She has a physician every second day, and takes a world of medicines, more for their profit than her own, poorthing. She lives on fruit, grapes principally, and a little game, whichis the only food she can digest. Guess at my expenses; but I owe in somemeasure the extension of my feeble life to her care through a longsuccession of years, and I would cheerfully divide my last farthing withher. I will not trouble you again on this subject, which is a mereconcern of my own; but you have been very kind to her, and she issensible of it. " With respect to this worthy woman, it may be added that she died onFebruary 6, 1815, carefully waited on to the last by her affectionatemaster. She was buried in South Audley Churchyard, where Gifford erecteda tomb over her, and placed on it a very touching epitaph, concludingwith these words: "Her deeply-affected master erected this stone to hermemory, as a faithful testimony of her uncommon worth, and of hisgratitude, respect, and affection for her long and meritoriousservices. " [Footnote: It will serve to connect the narrative with one ofthe famous literary quarrels of the day, if we remind the reader thatHazlitt published a cruel and libellous pamphlet in 1819, entitled "ALetter to William Gifford, " in which he hinted that some improperconnection had subsisted between himself and his "frail memorial. "Hazlitt wrote this pamphlet because of a criticism on the "Round Table"in the _Quarterly_, which Gifford did not write, and of a criticism ofHunt's "Rimini, " published by Mr. Murray, which was also the work ofanother writer. But Gifford never took any notice of these libellousattacks upon him. He held that secrecy between himself and thecontributors to the _Quarterly_ was absolutely necessary. Hazlitt, inthe above pamphlet, also attacks Murray, Croker, Canning, Southey, andothers whom he supposed to be connected with the _Review_. ] Murray's own description of his famous drawing-room may also be given, from a letter to a relative: "I have lately ventured on the bold step of quitting the oldestablishment to which I have been so long attached, and have moved toone of the best, in every respect, that is known in my business, where Ihave succeeded in a manner the most complete and flattering. My house isexcellent; and I transact all the departments of my business in anelegant library, which my drawing-room becomes during the morning; andthere I am in the habit of seeing persons of the highest rank inliterature and talent, such as Canning, Frere, Mackintosh, Southey, Campbell, Walter Scott, Madame de Staël, Gifford, Croker, Barrow, LordByron, and others; thus leading the most delightful life, with means ofprosecuting my business with the highest honour and emolument. " It was in Murray's drawing-room that Walter Scott and Lord Byron firstmet. They had already had some friendly intercourse by letter and hadexchanged gifts, but in the early part of 1815 Scott was summoned toLondon on matters connected with his works. Mr. Murray wrote to LordByron on April 7: "Walter Scott has this moment arrived, and will call to-day betweenthree and four, for the chance of having the pleasure of seeing youbefore he sets out for Scotland. I will show you a beautiful caricatureof Buonaparte. " Lord Byron called at the hour appointed, and was at once introduced toMr. Scott, who was in waiting. They greeted each other in the mostaffectionate manner, and entered into a cordial conversation. Howgreatly Mr. Murray was gratified by a meeting which he had taken suchpains to bring about, is shown by the following memorandum carefullypreserved by him: "1815. _Friday, April_ 7. --This day Lord Byron and Walter Scott met forthe first time and were introduced by me to each other. They conversedtogether for nearly two hours. There were present, at different times, Mr. William Gifford, James Boswell (son of the biographer of Johnson), William Sotheby, Robert Wilmot, Richard Heber, and Mr. Dusgate. " Mr. Murray's son--then John Murray, Junior--gives his recollections asfollows: "I can recollect seeing Lord Byron in Albemarle Street. So far as I canremember, he appeared to me rather a short man, with a handsomecountenance, remarkable for the fine blue veins which ran over his pale, marble temples. He wore many rings on his fingers, and a brooch in hisshirt-front, which was embroidered. When he called, he used to bedressed in a black dress-coat (as we should now call it), with grey, andsometimes nankeen trousers, his shirt open at the neck. Lord Byron'sdeformity in his foot was very evident, especially as he walkeddownstairs. He carried a stick. After Scott and he had ended theirconversation in the drawing-room, it was a curious sight to see the twogreatest poets of the age--both lame--stumping downstairs side by side. They continued to meet in Albemarle Street nearly every day, andremained together for two or three hours at a time. Lord Byron dinedseveral times at Albemarle Street, On one of these occasions, he met SirJohn Malcolm--a most agreeable and accomplished man--who was all themore interesting to Lord Byron, because of his intimate knowledge ofPersia and India. After dinner, Sir John observed to Lord Byron, howmuch gratified he had been to meet him, and how surprised he was to findhim so full of gaiety and entertaining conversation. Byron replied, 'Perhaps you see me now at my best. ' Sometimes, though not often, LordByron read passages from his poems to my father. His voice and mannerwere very impressive. His voice, in the deeper tones, bore someresemblance to that of Mrs. Siddons. " Shortly before this first interview between Scott and Byron the news hadarrived that Bonaparte had escaped from Elba, and landed at Cannes onMarch 1, 1815. A few days before--indeed on the day the battle was fought--Blackwoodgave great praise to the new number of the _Quarterly_, containing thecontrast of Bonaparte and Wellington. It happened that Southey wrote thearticle in No. 25, on the "Life and Achievements of Lord Wellington, " inorder to influence public opinion as much as possible, and to encouragethe hearts of men throughout the country for the great contest about totake place in the Low Countries. About the same time Sir JamesMackintosh had written an able and elaborate article for the_Edinburgh_, to show that the war ought to have been avoided, and thatthe consequences to England could only be unfortunate and inglorious. The number was actually printed, stitched, and ready for distribution inJune; but it was thought better to wait a little, for fear of accidents, and especially for the purpose of using it instantly after the firstreverse should occur, and thus to give it the force of prophecy. TheBattle of Waterloo came like a thunderclap. The article was suppressed, and one on "Gall and his Craniology" substituted. "I think, " saysTicknor, "Southey said he had seen the repudiated article. " [Footnote:"Life, Letters, and Journals of George Ticknor "(2nd ed. ), i. P. 41. ] Lord Byron did not write another "Ode on Napoleon. " He was altogetherdisappointed in his expectations. Nevertheless, he still, like Hazlitt, admired Napoleon, and hated Wellington. When he heard of the result ofthe Battle of Waterloo, and that Bonaparte was in full retreat uponParis, he said, "I'm d----d sorry for it!" Mr. Murray, about this time, began to adorn his dining-room withportraits of the distinguished men who met at his table. His portraitsinclude those of Gifford, [Footnote: This portrait was not painted forMr. Murray, but was purchased by him. ] by Hoppner, R. A. ; Byron andSouthey, by Phillips; Scott and Washington Irving, by Stewart Newton;Croker, by Eddis, after Lawrence; Coleridge, Crabbe, Mrs. Somerville, Hallam, T. Moore, Lockhart, and others. In April 1815 we find ThomasPhillips, afterwards R. A. , in communication with Mr. Murray, offering topaint for him a series of Kit-cat size at eighty guineas each, and incourse of time his pictures, together with those of John Jackson, R. A. , formed a most interesting gallery of the great literary men of thetime, men and women of science, essayists, critics, Arctic voyagers, anddiscoverers in the regions of Central Africa. Byron and Southey were asked to sit for their portraits to Phillips. Though Byron was willing, and even thought it an honour, Southeypretended to grumble. To Miss Barker he wrote (November 9, 1815): "Here, in London, I can find time for nothing; and, to make thingsworse, the Devil, who owes me an old grudge, has made me sit to Phillipsfor a picture for Murray. I have in my time been tormented in thismanner so often, and to such little purpose, that I am half tempted tosuppose the Devil was the inventor of portrait painting. " Meanwhile Mr. Murray was again in treaty for a share in a further workby Walter Scott. No sooner was the campaign of 1815 over, than a host oftourists visited France and the Low Countries, and amongst them Murraysucceeded in making his long-intended trip to Paris, and Scott set outto visit the battlefields in Belgium. Before departing, Scott made anarrangement with John Ballantyne to publish the results of his travels, and he authorized him to offer the work to Murray, Constable, and theLongmans, in equal shares. In 1815 a very remarkable collection of documents was offered to Mr. Murray for purchase and publication. They were in the possession of oneof Napoleon's generals, a friend of Miss Waldie. [Footnote: AfterwardsMrs. Eaton, author of "Letters from Italy. "] The collection consisted ofthe personal correspondence of Bonaparte, when in the height of hispower, with all the crowned heads and leading personages of Europe, uponsubjects so strictly confidential that they had not even beencommunicated to their own ministers or private secretaries. They wereconsequently all written by their own hands. As regards the contents of these letters, Mr. Murray had to depend uponhis memory, after making a hurried perusal of them. He was not allowedto copy any of them, but merely took a rough list. No record was kept ofthe dates. Among them was a letter from the King of Bavaria, urging hisclaims as a true and faithful ally, and claiming for his reward thedominion of Wurtemberg. There were several letters from the Prussian Royal family, includingone from the King, insinuating that by the cession of Hanover to him histerritorial frontier would be rendered more secure. The Emperor Paul, ina letter written on a small scrap of paper, proposed to transfer hiswhole army to Napoleon, to be employed in turning the English out ofIndia, provided he would prevent them passing the Gut and enclosing theBaltic. The Empress of Austria wrote an apology for the uncultivated state ofmind of her daughter, Marie Louise, about to become Napoleon's bride;but added that her imperfect education presented the advantage ofallowing Napoleon to mould her opinions and principles in accordancewith his own views and wishes. This correspondence would probably have met with an immense sale, butMr. Murray entertained doubts as to the propriety of publishingdocuments so confidential, and declined to purchase them for the sumproposed. The next day, after his refusal, he ascertained that PrinceLieven had given, on behalf of his government, not less than £10, 000 forthe letters emanating from the Court of Russia alone. Thus the publicmissed the perusal of an important series of international scandals. In December 1815 Mr. Murray published "Emma" for Miss Jane Austen, andso connected his name with another English classic. Miss Austen's firstnovel had been "Northanger Abbey. " It remained long in manuscript, andeventually she had succeeded in selling it to a bookseller at Bath for£10. He had not the courage to publish it, and after it had remained inhis possession for some years, Miss Austen bought it back for the samemoney he had paid for it. She next wrote "Sense and Sensibility, " and"Pride and Prejudice. " The latter book was summarily rejected by Mr. Cadell. At length these two books were published anonymously by Mr. Egerton, and though they did not make a sensation, they graduallyattracted attention and obtained admirers. No one could be moresurprised than the authoress, when she received no less than £150 fromthe profits of her first published work--"Sense and Sensibility. " When Miss Austen had finished "Emma, " she put herself in communicationwith Mr. Murray, who read her "Pride and Prejudice, " and sent it toGifford. Gifford replied as follows: _Mr. Gifford to John Murray_. "I have for the first time looked into 'Pride and Prejudice'; and it isreally a very pretty thing. No dark passages; no secret chambers; nowind-howlings in long galleries; no drops of blood upon a rustydagger--things that should now be left to ladies' maids and sentimentalwasherwomen. " In a later letter he said: _September_ 29, 1815. "I have read 'Pride and Prejudice' _again_--'tis very good--wretchedlyprinted, and so pointed as to be almost unintelligible. Make no apologyfor sending me anything to read or revise. I am always happy to doeither, in the thought that it may be useful to you. * * * * * "Of 'Emma, ' I have nothing but good to say. I was sure of the writerbefore you mentioned her. The MS. , though plainly written, has yet some, indeed many little omissions; and an expression may now and then beamended in passing through the press. I will readily undertake therevision. " Miss Austen's two other novels, "Northanger Abbey" and "Persuasion, "were also published by Murray, but did not appear until after her deathin 1818. The profits of the four novels which had been published beforeher death did not amount to more than seven hundred pounds. Mr. Murray also published the works of Mr. Malthus on "Rent, " the "CornLaws, " and the "Essay on Population. " His pamphlet on Rent appeared inMarch 1815. Murray's correspondence with Scott continued. On December 25, 1815, hewrote: "I was about to tell you that Croker was so pleased with the idea of aCaledonian article from you, that he could not refrain from mentioningit to the Prince Regent, who is very fond of the subject, and he said hewould be delighted, and is really anxious about it. Now, it occurs tome, as our _Edinburgh_ friends choose on many occasions to bring in thePrince's name to abuse it, this might offer an equally fair opportunityof giving him that praise which is so justly due to his knowledge of thehistory of his country.... "I was with Lord Byron yesterday. He enquired after you, and bid me sayhow much he was indebted to your introduction of your poor Irish friendMaturin, who had sent him a tragedy, which Lord Byron received late inthe evening, and read through, without being able to stop. He was sodelighted with it that he sent it immediately to his fellow-manager, theHon. George Lamb, who, late as it came to him, could not go to bedwithout finishing it. The result is that they have laid it before therest of the Committee; they, or rather Lord Byron, feels it his duty tothe author to offer it himself to the managers of Covent Garden. Thepoor fellow says in his letter that his hope of subsistence for hisfamily for the next year rests upon what he can get for this play. Iexpressed a desire of doing something, and Lord Byron then confessedthat he had sent him fifty guineas. I shall write to him tomorrow, and Ithink if you could draw some case for him and exhibit his merits, particularly if his play succeeds, I could induce Croker and Peel tointerest themselves in his behalf, and get him a living. ".... Have you any fancy to dash off an article on 'Emma'? It wantsincident and romance, does it not? None of the author's other novelshave been noticed, and surely 'Pride and Prejudice' merits highcommendation. " Scott immediately complied with Murray's request. He did "dash off anarticle on 'Emma, '" which appeared in No. 27 of the _Quarterly_. Inenclosing his article to Murray, Scott wrote as follows: _Mr. Scott to John Murray_. _January_ 19, 1816. Dear Sir, Enclosed is the article upon "Emma. " I have been spending my holidays inthe country, where, besides constant labour in the fields during all thehours of daylight, the want of books has prevented my completing theHighland article. (The "Culloden Papers, " which appeared in nextnumber. ) It will be off, however, by Tuesday's post, as I must takeSunday and Monday into the account of finishing it. It will be quiteunnecessary to send proofs of "Emma, " as Mr. Gifford will correct allobvious errors, and abridge it where necessary. _January_, 25, 1816. "My article is so long that I fancy you will think yourself in thecondition of the conjuror, who after having a great deal of trouble inraising the devil, could not get rid of him after he had once made hisappearance. But the Highlands is an immense field, and it would havebeen much more easy for me to have made a sketch twice as long than tomake it shorter. There still wants eight or nine pages, which you willreceive by tomorrow's or next day's post; but I fancy you will be gladto get on. " The article on the "Culloden Papers, " which occupied fifty pages of the_Review_ (No. 28), described the clans of the Highlands, their number, manners, and habits; and gave a summary history of the Rebellion of '45. It was graphically and vigorously written, and is considered one ofScott's best essays. CHAPTER XII VARIOUS PUBLICATIONS--CHARLES MATURIN--S. T. COLERIDGE--LEIGH HUNT Scott's "poor Irish friend Maturin, " referred to in the previouschapter, was a young Irish clergyman, who was under the necessity ofdepending upon his brains and pen for the maintenance of his family. Charles Maturin, after completing his course of education at TrinityCollege, married Miss Harriet Kinsburg. His family grew, but not hisincome. He took orders, and obtained the curacy of St. Peter's Church, Dublin, but owing to his father's affairs having become embarrassed, hewas compelled to open a boarding-school, with the view of assisting thefamily. Unfortunately, he became bound for a friend, who deceived him, and eventually he was obliged to sacrifice his interest in the school. Being thus driven to extremities, he tried to live by literature, andproduced "The Fatal Revenge; or, the Family of Montorio, " the first of aseries of romances, in which he outdid Mrs. Radcliffe and Monk Lewis. "The Fatal Revenge" was followed by "The Wild Irish Boy, " for whichColburn gave him £80, and "The Milesian Chief, " all full of horrors andmisty grandeur. These works did not bring him in much money; but, in1815, he determined to win the height of dramatic fame in his "Bertram;or, the Castle of St. Aldebrand, " a tragedy. He submitted the drama toWalter Scott, as from an "obscure Irishman, " telling him of hissufferings as an author and the father of a family, and imploring hiskind opinion. Scott replied in the most friendly manner, gave him muchgood advice, spoke of the work as "grand and powerful, the charactersbeing sketched with masterly enthusiasm"; and, what was practicallybetter, sent him £50 as a token of his esteem and sympathy, and as atemporary stop-gap until better times came round. He moreover called theattention of Lord Byron, then on the Committee of Management of DruryLane Theatre, to the play, and his Lordship strongly recommended aperformance of it. Thanks to the splendid acting of Kean, it succeeded, and Maturin realized about £1, 000. "Bertram" was published by Murray, a circumstance which brought him intofrequent communication with the unfortunate Maturin. The latter offeredmore plays, more novels, and many articles for the _Quarterly_. Withreference to one of his articles--a review of Sheil's "Apostate"--Gifford said, "A more potatoe-headed arrangement, or ratherderangement, I have never seen. I have endeavoured to bring some orderout of the chaos. There is a sort of wild eloquence in it that makes itworth preserving. " Maturin continued to press his literary work on Murray, who however, though he relieved him by the gift of several large sums of money, declined all further offers of publication save the tragedy of "Manuel. " _John Murray to Lord Byron_. _March_ 15, 1817. "Maturin's new tragedy, 'Manuel, ' appeared on Saturday last, and I amsorry to say that the opinion of Mr. Gifford was established by theimpression made on the audience. The first act very fine, the restexhibiting a want of judgment not to be endured. It was brought out withuncommon splendour, and was well acted. Kean's character as an oldman--a warrior--was new and well sustained, for he had, of course, selected it, and professed to be--and he acted as if he were--reallypleased with it.... I have undertaken to print the tragedy at my ownexpense, and to give the poor Author the whole of the profit. " In 1824 Maturin died, in Dublin, in extreme poverty. The following correspondence introduces another great name in Englishliterature. It is not improbable that it was Southey who suggested toMurray the employment of his brother-in-law, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, from his thorough knowledge of German, as the translator of Goethe's"Faust. " The following is Mr. Coleridge's first letter to Murray: _Mr. Coleridge to John Murray_. JOSIAH WADE'S, Esq. , 2, QUEEN'S SQUARE, BRISTOL. _[August_ 23, 1814. ] Dear Sir, I have heard, from my friend Mr. Charles Lamb, writing by desire of Mr. Robinson, that you wish to have the justly-celebrated "Faust" of Goethetranslated, and that some one or other of my partial friends haveinduced you to consider me as the man most likely to execute the workadequately, those excepted, of course, whose higher power (establishedby the solid and satisfactory ordeal of the wide and rapid sale of theirworks) it might seem profanation to employ in any other manner than inthe development of their own intellectual organization. I return mythanks to the recommender, whoever he be, and no less to you for yourflattering faith in the recommendation; and thinking, as I do, thatamong many volumes of praiseworthy German poems, the "Louisa" of Voss, and the "Faust" of Goethe, are the two, if not the only ones, that areemphatically _original_ in their conception, and characteristic of a newand peculiar sort of thinking and imagining, I should not be averse fromexerting my best efforts in an attempt to import whatever is importableof either or of both into our own language. But let me not be suspected of a presumption of which I am notconsciously guilty, if I say that I feel two difficulties; one arisingfrom long disuse of versification, added to what I know, better than themost hostile critic could inform me, of my comparative weakness; and theother, that _any_ work in Poetry strikes me with more than common awe, as proposed for realization by myself, because from long habits ofmeditation on language, as the symbolic medium of the connection ofThought with Thought, and of Thoughts as affected and modified byPassion and Emotion, I should spend days in avoiding what I deemedfaults, though with the full preknowledge that their admission would nothave offended perhaps three of all my readers, and might be deemedBeauties by 300--if so many there were; and this not out of any respectfor the Public (_i. E. _ the persons who might happen to purchase and lookover the Book), but from a hobby-horsical, superstitious regard to myown feelings and sense of Duty. Language is the sacred Fire in thisTemple of Humanity, and the Muses are its especial and vestalPriestesses. Though I cannot prevent the vile drugs and counterfeitFrankincense, which render its flame at once pitchy, glowing, andunsteady, I would yet be no voluntary accomplice in the Sacrilege. Withthe commencement of a PUBLIC, commences the degradation of the GOOD andthe BEAUTIFUL--both fade and retire before the accidentally AGREEABLE. "Othello" becomes a hollow lip-worship; and the "CASTLE SPECTRE, " or anymore recent thing of Froth, Noise, and Impermanence, that may haveoverbillowed it on the restless sea of curiosity, is the _true_ Prayerof Praise and Admiration. I thought it right to state to you these opinions of mine, that youmight know that I think the Translation of the "Faust" a task demanding(from _me_, I mean), no ordinary efforts--and why? This--that it ispainful, very painful, and even odious to me, to attempt anything of aliterary nature, with any motive of _pecuniary_ advantage; but that Ibow to the all-wise Providence, which has made me a _poor_ man, andtherefore compelled me by other duties inspiring feelings, to bring_even my Intellect to the Market_. And the finale is this. I should liketo attempt the Translation. If you will mention your terms, at once andirrevocably (for I am an idiot at bargaining, and shrink from the verythought), I will return an answer by the next Post, whether in mypresent circumstances, I can or cannot undertake it. If I do, I will doit immediately; but I must have all Goethe's works, which I cannotprocure in Bristol; for to give the "Faust" without a preliminarycritical Essay would be worse than nothing, as far as regards thePUBLIC. If you were to ask me as a Friend, whether I think it would suit_the General Taste_, I should reply that I cannot calculate on capriceand accident (for instance, some fashionable man or review happening totake it up favourably), but that otherwise my fears would be strongerthan my hopes. Men of genius will admire it, of necessity. Those most, who think deepest and most imaginatively. The "Louisa" would delight_all_ of good hearts. I remain, dear Sir, With due respect, S. T. COLERIDGE. To this letter Mr. Murray replied as follows: _John Murray to Mr. Coleridge_. _August_ 29, 1814. Dear Sir, I feel greatly obliged by the favour of your attention to the requestwhich I had solicited our friend Mr. Robinson to make to you for thetranslation of Goethe's extraordinary drama of "Faust, " which I suspectthat no one could do justice to besides yourself. It will be the firstattempt to render into classical English a German work of peculiar butcertainly of unquestionable Genius; and you must allow that its effectsupon the public must be doubtful. I am desirous however of making theexperiment, and this I would not do under a less skilful agent than theone to whom I have applied. I am no less anxious that you shouldreceive, as far as I think the thing can admit, a fair remuneration; andtrusting that you will not undertake it unless you feel disposed toexecute the labour perfectly _con amore_, and in a style ofversification equal to "Remorse, " I venture to propose to you the sum ofOne Hundred Pounds for the Translation and the preliminary Analysis, with such passages translated as you may judge proper of the works ofGoethe, with a copy of which I will have the pleasure of supplying youas soon as I have your final determination. The sum which I mentionshall be paid to you in two months from the day on which you place thecomplete Translation and Analysis in my hands; this will allow areasonable time for your previous correction of the sheets through thepress. I shall be glad to hear from you by return of Post, ifconvenient, as I propose to set out this week for the Continent. If thiswork succeeds, I am in hopes that it will lead to many similarundertakings. With sincere esteem, I am, dear Sir, Your faithful Servant, J. Murray I should hope that it might not prove inconvenient to you to completethe whole for Press in the course of November next. Mr. Coleridge replied as follows, from the same address: _Mr. Coleridge to John Murray_. _August_ 31, 1814. Dear Sir, I have received your letter. Considering the necessary labour, and (fromthe questionable nature of the original work, both as to its fair claimsto Fame--the diction of the good and wise according to unchangingprinciples--and as to its chance for Reputation, as an accidental resultof local and temporary taste), the risk of character on the part of theTranslator, who will assuredly have to answer for any disappointment ofthe reader, the terms proposed are humiliatingly low; yet such as, undermodifications, I accede to. I have received testimonials from men notmerely of genius according to my belief, but of the highest accreditedreputation, that my translation of "Wallenstein" was in language and inmetre superior to the original, and the parts most admired weresubstitutions of my own, on a principle of compensation. Yet the wholework went for waste-paper. I was abused--nay, my own remarks in thePreface were transferred to a Review, as the Reviewer's sentiments_against_ me, without even a hint that he had copied them from my ownPreface. Such was the fate of "Wallenstein"! And yet I dare appeal toany number of men of Genius--say, for instance, Mr. W. Scott, Mr. Southey, Mr. Wordsworth, Mr. Wilson, Mr. Sotheby, Sir G. Beaumont, etc. , whether the "Wallenstein" with all its defects (and it has grievousdefects), is not worth all Schiller's other plays put together. But Iwonder not. It was _too_ good, and not good enough; and the advice ofthe younger Pliny: "Aim at pleasing either _all_, or _the few, "_ is asprudentially good as it is philosophically accurate. I wrote to Mr. Longman before the work was published, and foretold its fate, even to adetailed accuracy, and advised him to put up with the loss from thepurchase of the MSS and of the Translation, as a much less evil than thepublication. I went so far as to declare that its success was, in thestate of public Taste, impossible; that the enthusiastic admirers of"The Robbers, " "Cabal and Love, " etc. , would lay the blame on me; andthat he himself would suspect that if he had only lit on _another_Translator then, etc. Everything took place as I had foretold, even hisown feelings--so little do Prophets gain from the fulfilment of theirProphecies! On the other hand, though I know that executed as alone I can or dare doit--that is, to the utmost of my power (for which the intolerable Pain, nay the far greater Toil and Effort of doing otherwise, is a far saferPledge than any solicitude on my part concerning the approbation of thePUBLIC), the translation of so very difficult a work as the "Faustus, "will be most inadequately remunerated by the terms you propose; yet theyvery probably are the highest it may be worth your while to offer to_me_. I say this as a philosopher; for, though I have now been muchtalked of, and written of, for evil and not for good, but for suspectedcapability, yet none of my works have ever sold. The "Wallenstein" wentto the waste. The "Remorse, " though acted twenty times, rests quietly onthe shelves in the second edition, with copies enough for seven years'consumption, or seven times seven. I lost £200 by the non-payment, fromforgetfulness, and under various pretences, by "The Friend"; [Footnote:Twenty-seven numbers of _The Friend_ were published by Coleridge atPenrith in Cumberland in 1809-10, but the periodical proved a failure, principally from the irregularity of its appearance. It was about thistime that he was addicted to opium-eating. ] and for my poems I _did_ getfrom £10 to £15. And yet, forsooth, the _Quarterly Review_ attacks mefor neglecting and misusing my powers! I do not quarrel with thePublic--all is as it must be--but surely the Public (if there be such aPerson) has no right to quarrel with _me_ for not getting into jail bypublishing what they will not read! The "Faust, " you perhaps know, is only a _Fragment_. Whether Goethe everwill finish it, or whether it is ever his object to do so, is quiteunknown. A large proportion of the work cannot be rendered in blankverse, but must be given in wild _lyrical_ metres; and Mr. Lamb informsme that the Baroness de Staël has given a very unfavourable account ofthe work. Still, however, I will undertake it, and that instantly, so asto let you have the last sheet by the middle of November, on thefollowing terms: 1. That on the delivery of the last MS. Sheet you remit 100 guineas toMrs. Coleridge, or Mr. Robert Southey, at a bill of five weeks. 2. ThatI, or my widow or family, may, any time after two years from the firstpublication, have the privilege of reprinting it in any collection ofall my poetical writings, or of my works in general, which set off witha Life of me, might perhaps be made profitable to my widow. And 3rd, that if (as I long ago meditated) I should re-model the whole, give it afinale, and be able to bring it, thus re-written and re-cast, on thestage, it shall not be considered as a breach of the engagement betweenus, I on my part promising that you shall, for an equitableconsideration, have the copy of this new work, either as a separatework, or forming a part of the same volume or both, as circumstances maydictate to you. When I say that I am confident that in this _possible_and not probable case, I should not repeat or retain one fifth of theoriginal, you will perceive that I consult only my dread of appearingto act amiss, as it would be even more easy to compose the whole anew. If these terms suit you I will commence the Task as soon as I receiveGoethe's works from you. If you could procure Goethe's late Life ofhimself, which extends but a short way, or any German biographical workof the Germans living, it would enable me to render the preliminaryEssay more entertaining. Respectfully, dear Sir, S. T. COLERIDGE. Mr. Murray's reply to this letter has not been preserved. At all events, nothing further was done by Coleridge with respect to the translation of"Faust, " which is to be deplored, as his exquisite and original melodyof versification might have produced a translation almost as great asthe original. Shortly after Coleridge took up his residence with the Gillmans atHighgate, and his intercourse with Murray recommenced. Lord Byron, whileon the managing committee of Drury Lane Theatre, had been instrumentalin getting Coleridge's "Remorse" played upon the stage, as heentertained a great respect for its author. He was now encouraging Mr. Murray to publish other works by Coleridge--among others, "Zapolya" and"Christabel. " On April 12, 1816, Coleridge gave the following lines to Mr. Murray, written in his own hand: [Footnote: The "Song, by Glycine" was firstpublished in "Zapolya: A Christmas Tale, " 1817, Part II. , Act ii. , SceneI. It was set to music by W. Patten in 1836; and again, with the title"May Song, " in 1879, by B. H. Loehr. ] GLYCINE: Song. "A sunny shaft did I behold, From sky to earth it slanted, And pois'd therein a Bird so bold-- Sweet bird! thou wert enchanted!He sank, he rose, he twinkled, he troll'd, Within that shaft of sunny mist:His Eyes of Fire, his Beak of Gold, All else of Amethyst!And thus he sang: Adieu! Adieu! Love's dreams prove seldom true. Sweet month of May! we must away! Far, far away! Today! today!" In the following month (May 8, 1816) Mr. Coleridge offered Mr. Murrayhis "Remorse" for publication, with a Preface. He also offered his poemof "Christabel, " still unfinished. For the latter Mr. Murray agreed togive him seventy guineas, "until the other poems shall be completed, when the copyright shall revert to the author, " and also £20 forpermission to publish the poem entitled "Kubla Khan. " Next month (June 6) Murray allowed Coleridge £50 for an edition of"Zapolya: A Christmas Tale, " which was then in MS. ; and he alsoadvanced him another £50 for a play which was still to be written. "Zapolya" was afterwards entrusted to another publisher (Rest Fenner), and Coleridge repaid Murray £50. Apparently (see _letter_ of March 29, 1817) Murray very kindly forewent repayment of the second advance of£50. There was, of course, no obligation to excuse a just debt, but thethree issues of "Christabel" had resulted in a net profit of a littleover £100 to the publisher. _Mr. Coleridge to John Murray_. HIGHGATE, _July_ 4, 1816. I have often thought that there might be set on foot a review of oldbooks, _i. E. , _ of all works important or remarkable, the authors ofwhich are deceased, with a probability of a tolerable sale, if only theoriginal _plan_ were a good one, and if no articles were admitted butfrom men who understood and recognized the Principles and Rules ofCriticism, which should form the first number. I would not take theworks chronologically, but according to the likeness or contrast of the_kind_ of genius--_ex. Gr_. Jeremy Taylor, Milton (his prose works), andBurke--Dante and Milton--Scaliger and Dr. Johnson. Secondly, ifespecial attention were paid to all men who had produced, or aided inproducing, any great revolution in the Taste or opinions of an age, asPetrarch, Ulrich von Hutten, etc. (here I will dare risk the charge ofself-conceit by referring to my own parallel of Voltaire and Erasmus, ofLuther and Rousseau in the seventh number of "The Friend "). Lastly, ifproper care was taken that in every number of the _Review_ there shouldbe a fair proportion of positively _amusing_ matter, such as a review ofParacelsus, Cardan, Old Fuller; a review of Jest Books, tracing thevarious metempsychosis of the same joke through all ages and countries;a History of Court Fools, for which a laborious German has furnishedample and highly interesting materials; foreign writers, though alive, not to be excluded, if only their works are of established character intheir own country, and scarcely heard of, much less translated, inEnglish literature. Jean Paul Richter would supply two or threedelightful articles. Any works which should fall in your way respecting the Jews since thedestruction of the Temple, I should of course be glad to look through. Above all, Mezeray's (no! that is not the name, I think) "History of theJews, " that I _must_ have. I shall be impatient for the rest of Mr. Frere's sheets. Mostunfeignedly can I declare that I am unable to decide whether the_admiration_ which the _excellence_ inspires, or the wonder which theknowledge of the countless _difficulties_ so happily overcome, neverceases to excite in my mind during the re-perusal and collation of themwith the original Greek, be the greater. I have not a moment'shesitation in fixing on Mr. Frere as the man of the correctest and mostgenial taste among all our contemporaries whom I have ever met with, personally or in their works. Should choice or chance lead you to sunand air yourself on Highgate Hill during any of your holiday excursions, my worthy friend and his amiable and accomplished wife will be happy tosee you. We dine at four, and drink tea at six. Yours, dear Sir, respectfully, S. T. COLERIDGE. Mr. Murray did not accept Mr. Coleridge's proposal to publish his worksin a collected form or his articles for the _Quarterly_, as appears fromthe following letter: _Mr. Coleridge to John Murray_. HIGHGATE, _March_ 26, 1817. DEAR SIR, I cannot be offended by your opinion that my talents are not adequate tothe requisites of matter and manner for the _Quarterly Review, _ norshould I consider it as a disgrace to fall short of Robert Southey inany department of literature. I owe, however, an honest gratification tothe conversation between you and Mr. Gillman, for I read Southey'sarticle, on which Mr. Gillman and I have, it appears, formed verydifferent opinions. It is, in my judgment, a very masterly article. [Footnote: This must have been Southey's article on Parliamentary Reformin No. 31, which, though due in October 1816, was not, published untilFebruary 1817. ] I would to heaven, my dear sir, that the opinions ofSouthey, Walter Scott, Lord Byron, Mr. Frere, and of men like these inlearning and genius, concerning my comparative claims to be a man ofletters, were to be received as the criterion, instead of the wretched, and in deed and in truth mystical jargon of the _Examiner_ and_Edinburgh Review_. Mr. Randall will be so good as to repay you the £50, and I understandfrom Mr. Gillman that you are willing to receive this as a settlementrespecting the "Zapolya. " The corrections and additions to the two firstbooks of the "Christabel" may become of more value to you when the workis finished, as I trust it will be in the course of the spring, thanthey are at present. And let it not be forgotten, that while I had theutmost malignity of personal enmity to cry down the work, with theexception of Lord Byron, there was not one of the many who had so manyyears together spoken so warmly in its praise who gave it the leastpositive furtherance after its publication. It was openly asserted thatthe _Quarterly Review_ did not wish to attack it, but was ashamed to saya word in its favor. Thank God! these things pass from me like dropsfrom a duck's back, except as far as they take the bread out of mymouth; and this I can avoid by consenting to publish only for the_present_ times whatever I may write. You will be so kind as toacknowledge the receipt of the £50 in such manner as to make all mattersas clear between us as possible; for, though you, I am sure, could nothave intended to injure my character, yet the misconceptions, andperhaps misrepresentations, of your words have had that tendency. By aletter from R. Southey I find that he will be in town on the 17th. Thearticle in Tuesday's _Courier_ was by me, and two other articles onApostacy and Renegadoism, which will appear this week. Believe me, with respect, your obliged, S. T. COLERIDGE. The following letter completes Coleridge's correspondence with Murray onthis subject: _Mr. Coleridge to John Murray_. [Highgate], _March_ 29, 1817. Dear Sir, From not referring to the paper dictated by yourself, and signed by mein your presence, you have wronged yourself in the receipt you have beenso good as to send me, and on which I have therefore written asfollows--"A mistake; I am still indebted to Mr. Murray £20 _legally_(which I shall pay the moment it is in my power), and £30 from whateversum I may receive from the 'Christabel' when it is finished. Should Mr. Murray decline its publication, I conceive myself bound _in honor_ torepay. " I strive in vain to discover any single act or expression of myown, or for which I could be directly or indirectly responsible as amoral being, that would account for the change in your mode of thinkingrespecting me. But with every due acknowledgment of the kindness andcourtesy that I received from you on my first coming to town, I remain, dear Sir, your obliged, S. T. COLERIDGE. Leigh Hunt was another of Murray's correspondents. When the _Quarterly_was started, Hunt, in his Autography, says that "he had been invited, nay pressed by the publisher, to write in the new Review, whichsurprised me, considering its politics and the great difference of myown. " Hunt adds that he had no doubt that the invitation had been madeat the instance of Gifford himself. Murray had a high opinion of Hunt asa critic, but not as a politician. Writing to Walter Scott in 1810 hesaid: _John Murray to Mr. Scott_, "Have you got or seen Hunt's critical essays, prefixed to a few novelsthat he edited. Lest you should not, I send them. Hunt is most vilelywrongheaded in politics, and has thereby been turned away from the pathof elegant criticism, which might have led him to eminence andrespectability. " Hunt was then, with his brother, joint editor of the _Examiner_, andpreferred writing for the newspaper to contributing articles to the_Quarterly_. On Leigh Hunt's release from Horsemonger Lane Gaol, where he had beenimprisoned for his libel on the Prince Regent, he proceeded, on thestrength of his reputation, to compose the "Story of Rimini, " thepublication of which gave the author a place among the poets of the day. He sent a portion of the manuscript to Mr. Murray before the poem wasfinished, saying that it would amount to about 1, 400 lines. Hunt thenproceeded (December 18, 1815) to mention the terms which he proposed tobe paid for his work when finished. "Booksellers, " he said, "tell methat I ought not to ask less than £450 (which is a sum I happen to wantjust now); and my friends, not in the trade, say I ought not to ask lessthan £500, with such a trifling acknowledgment upon the various editionsafter the second and third, as shall enable me to say that I am stillprofiting by it. " Mr. Murray sent his reply to Hunt through their common friend, LordByron: _John Murray to Lord Byron_. _December_ 27, 1815. "I wish your lordship to do me the favour to look at and to considerwith your usual kindness the accompanying note to Mr. Leigh Huntrespecting his poem, for which he requests £450. This would presuppose asale of, at least, 10, 000 copies. Now, if I may trust to my ownexperience in these matters, I am by no means certain that the salewould do more than repay the expenses of paper and print. But the poemis peculiar, and may be more successful than I imagine, in which eventthe proposition which I have made to the author will secure to him allthe advantages of such a result, I trust that you will see in this ananxious desire to serve Mr. Hunt, although as a mere matter of businessI cannot avail myself of his offer. I would have preferred calling uponyou today were I not confined by a temporary indisposition; but I thinkyou will not be displeased at a determination founded upon the bestjudgment I can form of my own business. I am really uneasy at yourfeelings in this affair, but I think I may venture to assume that youknow me sufficiently well to allow me to trust my decision entirely toyour usual kindness. " _John Murray to Mr. Leigh Hunt_. _December_ 27, 1815. "I have now read the MS. Poem, which you confided to me, with particularattention, and find that it differs so much from any that I havepublished that I am fearful of venturing upon the extensive speculationto which your estimate would carry it. I therefore wish that you wouldpropose its publication and purchase to such houses as Cadell, Longman, Baldwin, Mawman, etc. , who are capable of becoming and likely to becomepurchasers, and then, should you not have found any arrangement to yourmind, I would undertake to print an edition of 500 or 750 copies as atrial at my own risk, and give you one half of the profits. After thisedition the copyright shall be entirely your own property. By thisarrangement, in case the work turn out a prize, as it may do, I meanthat you should have every advantage of its success, for its popularityonce ascertained, I am sure you will find no difficulty in procuringpurchasers, even if you should be suspicious of my liberality from thisspecimen of fearfulness in the first instance. I shall be most happy toassist you with any advice which my experience in these matters mayrender serviceable to you. " Leigh Hunt at once accepted the offer. After the poem was printed and published, being pressed for money, hewished to sell the copyright. After a recitation of his pecuniarytroubles, Hunt concluded a lengthy letter as follows: "What I wanted to ask you then is simply this--whether, in the firstinstance, you think well enough of the "Story of Rimini" to make youbargain with me for the copyright at once; or, in the second instance, whether, if you would rather wait a little, as I myself would do, Iconfess, if it were convenient, you have still enough hopes of the work, and enough reliance on myself personally, to advance me £450 onsecurity, to be repaid in case you do not conclude the bargain, ormerged in the payment of the poem in case you do. " Mr. Murray's reply was not satisfactory, as will be observed from thefollowing letter of Leigh Hunt: _Mr. Leigh Hunt to John Murray_, _April_ 12, 1816. Dear Sir, I just write to say something which I had omitted in my last, and to adda word or two on the subject of an expression in your answer to it. Imean the phrase "plan of assistance. " I do not suppose that you had theslightest intention of mortifying me by that phrase; but I should wishto impress upon you, that I did not consider my application to you ascoming in the shape of what is ordinarily termed an application forassistance. Circumstances have certainly compelled me latterly to makerequests, and resort to expedients, which, however proper in themselves, I would not willingly have been acquainted with; but I have very goodprospects before me, and you are mistaken (I beg you to read this in thebest and most friendly tone you can present to yourself) if you have atall apprehended that I should be in the habit of applying to you forassistance, or for anything whatsoever, for which I did not conceive thework in question to be more than a security. I can only say, with regard to yourself, that I am quite contented andought to be so, as long as you are sincere with me, and treat me in thesame gentlemanly tone. Very sincerely yours, LEIGH HUNT. This negotiation was ultimately brought to a conclusion by Mr. Hunt, atMr. Murray's suggestion, disposing of the copyright of "Rimini" toanother publisher. CHAPTER XIII THOMAS CAMPBELL--JOHN CAM HOBHOUSE--J. W. CROKER-JAMES HOGG, ETC. Thomas Campbell appeared like a meteor as early as 1799, when, in histwenty-second year, he published his "Pleasures of Hope. " The world wastaken by surprise at the vigour of thought and richness of fancydisplayed in the poem. Shortly after its publication, Campbell went toGermany, and saw, from the Benedictine monastery of Scottish monks atRatisbon, a battle which was not, as has often been said, the Battle ofHohenlinden. What he saw, however, made a deep impression on his mind, and on his return to Scotland he published the beautiful linesbeginning, "On Linden when the sun was low. " In 1801 he composed "TheExile of Erin" and "Ye Mariners of England. " The "Battle of the Baltic"and "Lochiel's Warning" followed; and in 1803 he published an edition ofhis poems. To have composed such noble lyrics was almost unprecedentedin so young a man; for he was only twenty-six years of age when hiscollected edition appeared. He was treated as a lion, and becameacquainted with Walter Scott and the leading men in Edinburgh. InDecember 1805 we find Constable writing to Murray, that Longman & Co. Had offered the young poet £700 for a new volume of his poems. One of the earliest results of the association of Campbell with Murraywas a proposal to start a new magazine, which Murray had longcontemplated. This, it will be observed, was some years before thecommunications took place between Walter Scott and Murray with respectto the starting of the _Quarterly_. The projected magazine, however, dropped out of sight, and Campbellreverted to his proposed "Lives of the British Poets, with Selectionsfrom their Writings. " Toward the close of the year he addressed thefollowing letter to Mr. Scott: _Mr. T. Campbell to Mr. Scott_. _November 5_, 1806. My Dear Scott, A very excellent and gentlemanlike man--albeit a bookseller--Murray, ofFleet Street, is willing to give for our joint "Lives of the Poets, " onthe plan we proposed to the trade a twelvemonth ago, a thousand pounds. For my part, I think the engagement very desirable, and have nouneasiness on the subject, except my fear that you may be too muchengaged to have to do with it, as five hundred pounds may not be to youthe temptation that it appears to a poor devil like myself. Murray isthe only gentleman, except Constable, in the trade;--I may also, perhaps, except Hood. I have seldom seen a pleasanter man to deal with..... Our names are what Murray principally wants--_yours_ inparticular.... I will not wish, even in confidence, to say anything illof the London booksellers _beyond their deserts_; but I assure you that, to compare this offer of Murray's with their usual offers, it ismagnanimous indeed.... The fallen prices of literature-which is gettingworse by the horrible complexion of the times-make me often rathergloomy at the life I am likely to lead. Scott entered into Campbell's agreement with kindness and promptitude, and it was arranged, under certain stipulations, that the plan shouldhave his zealous cooperation; but as the number and importance of hisliterary engagements increased, he declined to take an active parteither in the magazine or the other undertaking. "I saw Campbell twodays ago, " writes Murray to Constable, "and he told me that Mr. Scotthad declined, and modestly asked if it would do by _himself_ alone; butthis I declined in a way that did not leave us the less friends. " At length, after many communications and much personal intercourse, Murray agreed with Campbell to bring out his work, without thecommanding name of Walter Scott, and with the name of Thomas Campbellalone as Editor of the "Selections from the British Poets. " Thearrangement seems to have been made towards the end of 1808. In January1809 Campbell writes of his intention "to devote a year exclusively tothe work, " but the labour it involved was perhaps greater than he hadanticipated. It was his first important prose work; and prose requirescontinuous labour. It cannot, like a piece of poetry, be thrown off at aheat while the fit is on. Campbell stopped occasionally in the midst ofhis work to write poems, among others, his "Gertrude of Wyoming, " whichconfirmed his poetical reputation. Murray sent a copy of the volume toWalter Scott, and requested a review for the _Quarterly_, which was thenin its first year. What Campbell thought of the review will appear fromthe following letter: _Mr. T. Campbell to John Murray_. _June 2_, 1809. My Dear Murray, I received the review, for which I thank you, and beg leave through youto express my best acknowledgments to the unknown reviewer. I do not bythis mean to say that I think every one of his censures just. On thecontrary, if I had an opportunity of personal conference with so candidand sensible a man, I think I could in some degree acquit myself of apart of the faults he has found. But altogether I am pleased with hismanner, and very proud of his approbation. He reviews like a gentleman, a Christian, and a scholar. Although the "Lives of the Poets" had been promised within a year fromJanuary 1809, four years passed, and the work was still far fromcompletion. In the meantime Campbell undertook to give a course of eleven Lectureson Poetry at the Royal Institution, for which he received a hundredguineas. He enriched his Lectures with the Remarks and Selectionscollected for the "Specimens, " for which the publisher had agreed to paya handsome sum. The result was a momentary hesitation on the part of Mr. Murray to risk the publication of the work. On this, says Campbell'sbiographer, a correspondence ensued between the poet and the publisher, which ended to the satisfaction of both. Mr. Murray only requested thatMr. Campbell should proceed with greater alacrity in finishing the longprojected work. At length, about the beginning of 1819, fourteen years after the projecthad been mentioned to Walter Scott, and about ten years after the bookshould have appeared, according to Campbell's original promise, the"Essays and Selections of English Poetry" were published by Mr. Murray. The work was well received. The poet was duly paid for it, and Dr. Beattie, Campbell's biographer, says he "found himself in the novelposition of a man who has money to lay out at interest. " This statementmust be received with considerable deduction, for, as the correspondenceshows, Campbell's pecuniary difficulties were by no means at an end. It appears that besides the £1, 000, which was double the sum originallyproposed to be paid to Campbell for the "Selections, " Mr. Murray, inOctober 1819, paid him £200 "for books, " doubtless for those he hadpurchased for the "Collections, " and which he desired to retain. We cannot conclude this account of Campbell's dealing with Murraywithout referring to an often-quoted story which has for many yearssailed under false colours. It was Thomas Campbell who wrote "NowBarabbas was a publisher, " whether in a Bible or otherwise is notauthentically recorded, and forwarded it to a friend; but Mr. Murray wasnot the publisher to whom it referred, nor was Lord Byron, as has beenso frequently stated, the author of the joke. The great burden of the correspondence entailed by the _QuarterlyReview_ now fell on Mr. Murray, for Gifford had become physicallyincapable of bearing it. Like the creaking gate that hangs long on itshinges, Gifford continued to live, though painfully. He became graduallybetter, and in October 1816 Mr. Murray presented him with a chariot, bymeans of which he might drive about and take exercise in the open air. Gifford answered: "I have a thousand thanks to give you for the pains you have taken aboutthe carriage, without which I should only have talked about it, and diedof a cold. It came home yesterday, and I went to Fulham in it. It iseverything that I could wish, neat, easy, and exceedingly comfortable. " Among the other works published by Mr. Murray in 1816 may be mentioned, "The Last Reign of Napoleon, " by Mr. John Cam Hobhouse, afterwards LordBroughton. Of this work the author wrote to Mr. Murray: _January_, 1816. "I must have the liberty of cancelling what sheets I please, for areason that I now tell you in the strictest confidence: the letters areto go to Paris previously to publication, and are to be read carefullythrough by a most intimate friend of mine, who was entirely in thesecrets of the late Imperial Ministry, and who will point out anystatements as to facts, in which he could from his _knowledge_ make anynecessary change. " The first edition, published without the author's name, was rapidlyexhausted, and Hobhouse offered a second to Murray, proposing at thesame time to insert his name as author on the title-page. "If I do, " he said, "I shall present the book to Lord Byron in due form, not for his talents as a poet, but for his qualities as a companion anda friend. I should not write 'My dear Byron, ' _à la Hunt_. " [Footnote:Leigh Hunt had dedicated his "Rimini" to the noble poet, addressing himas "My dear Byron. "] Mr. D'Israeli also was busy with his "Inquiry into the Literary andPolitical Character of James the First. " He wrote to his publisher asfollows: "I am sorry to say every one, to whom I have mentioned thesubject, revolts from it as a thing quite untenable, and cares nothingabout 'James. ' This does not stop me from finishing. " Mr. Croker, in the midst of his work at the Admiralty, his articles forthe _Quarterly_, and his other literary labours, found time to write his"Stories for Children from the History of England. " In sending the laterstories Mr. Croker wrote to Mr. Murray: _The Rt. Hon. J. W. Croker to John Murray_. "I send you seven stories, which, with eleven you had before, brings usdown to Richard III. , and as I do not intend to come down beyond theRevolution, there remain nine stories still. I think you told me thatyou gave the first stories to your little boy to read. Perhaps you orMrs. Murray would be so kind as to make a mark over against such wordsas he may not have understood, and to favour me with any criticism thechild may have made, for on this occasion I should prefer a critic of 6years old to one of 60. " Thus John Murray's son, John Murray the Third, was early initiated intothe career of reading for the press. When the book came out it achieveda great success, and set the model for Walter Scott in his charming"Tales of a Grandfather. " It may be mentioned that "Croker's Stories for Children" were publishedon the system of division of profits. Long after, when Mr. Murray was incorrespondence with an author who wished him to pay a sum of money downbefore he had even seen the manuscript, the publisher recommended theauthor to publish his book on a division of profits, in like manner asHallam, Milman, Mahon, Croker, and others had done. "Under this system, "he said, "I have been very successful. For Mr. Croker's 'Stories fromthe History of England, ' selling for 2_s_. _6d_. , if I had offered thesmall sum of twenty guineas, he would have thought it liberal. However, I printed it to divide profits, and he has already received from me themoiety of £1, 400. You will perhaps be startled at my assertion; forwoeful experience convinces me that not more than one publication infifty has a sale sufficient to defray its expenses. " The success of Scott's, and still more of Byron's Poems, called intoexistence about this time a vast array of would-be poets, male andfemale, and from all ranks and professions. Some wrote for fame, somefor money; but all were agreed on one point--namely, that if Mr. Murraywould undertake the publication of the poems, the authors' fame wassecured. When in doubt about any manuscript, he usually conferred with Croker, Campbell, or Gifford, who always displayed the utmost kindness inhelping him with their opinions. Croker was usually short and pithy. Ofone poem he said: "Trash--the dullest stuff I ever read. " This wasenough to ensure the condemnation of the manuscript. Campbell was moreguarded, as when reporting on a poem entitled "Woman, " he wrote, "In myopinion, though there are many excellent lines in it, the poem is notsuch as will warrant a great sum being speculated upon it. But, as it isshort, I think the public, not the author or publisher, will be in faultif it does not sell one edition. " Of a poem sent for his opinion, Gifford wrote: "Honestly, the MS. Is totally unfit for the press. Do not deceiveyourself: this MS. Is not the production of a male. A man may write asgreat nonsense as a woman, and even greater; but a girl may pass throughthose execrable abodes of ignorance, called boarding schools, withoutlearning whether the sun sets in the East or in the West, whereas a boycan hardly do this, even at Parson's Green. " James Hogg, the Ettrick Shepherd, was another of Murray'scorrespondents. The publication of "The Queen's Wake" in 1813 immediately brought Hogginto connection with the leading authors and publishers of the day, Hoggsent a copy of the volume to Lord Byron, his "brother poet, " whoseinfluence he desired to enlist on behalf of a work which Hogg wishedMurray to publish. The poem which the Ettrick Shepherd referred to was "The Pilgrims of theSun, " and the result of Lord Byron's conversation with Mr. Murray was, that the latter undertook to publish Hogg's works. The first letter fromhim to Murray, December 26, 1814, begins: "What the deuce have you made of my excellent poem that you are neverpublishing it, while I am starving for want of money, and cannot evenafford a Christmas goose to my friends?" To this and many similar enquiries Mr. Murray replied on April 10, 1815: My Dear Friend, I entreat you not to ascribe to inattention the delay which has occurredin my answer to your kind and interesting letter. Much more, I beg younot for a moment to entertain a doubt about the interest which I take inyour writings, or the exertions which I shall ever make to promote theirsale and popularity.... They are selling every day. I have forgotten to tell you that Gifford tells me that he wouldreceive, with every disposition to favour it, any critique which youlike to send of new Scottish works. If I had been aware of it in time Icertainly would have invited your remarks on "Mannering. " Our article isnot good and our praise is by no means adequate, I allow, but I suspectyou very greatly overrate the novel. "Meg Merrilies" is worthy ofShakespeare, but all the rest of the novel might have been written byScott's brother or any other body. The next letter from the Shepherd thanks Murray for some "timeous" aid, and asks a novel favour. _May_ 7, 1815. I leave Edinburgh on Thursday for my little farm on Yarrow. I will havea confused summer, for I have as yet no home that I can dwell in; but Ihope by-and-by to have some fine fun there with you, fishing in SaintMary's Loch and the Yarrow, eating bull-trout, singing songs, anddrinking whisky. This little possession is what I stood much in needof--a habitation among my native hills was what of all the world Idesired; and if I had a little more money at command, I would just be ashappy a man as I know of; but that is an article of which I am ever inwant. I wish you or Mrs. Murray would speer me out a good wife with afew thousands. I dare say there is many a romantic girl about London whowould think it a fine ploy to become a Yarrow Shepherdess! Believe me, dear Murray, Very sincerely yours, JAMES HOGG. Here, for the present, we come to an end of the Shepherd's letters; butwe shall find him turning up again, and Mr. Murray still continuing hisdevoted friend and adviser. CHAPTER XIV LORD BYRON'S DEALINGS WITH MR. MURRAY--continued_ On January 2, 1815, Lord Byron was married to Miss Milbanke, and duringthe honeymoon, while he was residing at Seaham, the residence of hisfather-in-law Sir Ralph Milbanke, he wrote to Murray desiring him tomake occasional enquiry at his chambers in the Albany to see if theywere kept in proper order. _John Murray to Lord Byron_. _February_ 17, 1815. MY LORD, I have paid frequent attention to your wish that I should ascertain ifall things appeared to be safe in your chambers, and I am happy in beingable to report that the whole establishment carries an appearance ofsecurity, which is confirmed by the unceasing vigilance of your faithfuland frigid Duenna [Mrs. Mule]. Every day I have been in expectation of receiving a copy of "GuyMannering, " of which the reports of a friend of mine, who has read thefirst two volumes, is such as to create the most extravagantexpectations of an extraordinary combination of wit, humour and pathos. I am certain of one of the first copies, and this you may rely uponreceiving with the utmost expedition. I hear many interesting letters read to me from the Continent, and onein particular from Mr. Fazakerly, describing his interview of four hourswith Bonaparte, was particularly good. He acknowledged at once to thepoisoning of the sick prisoners in Egypt; they had the plague, and wouldhave communicated it to the rest of his army if he had carried them onwith him, and he had only to determine if he should leave them to acruel death by the Turks, or to an easy one by poison. When asked hismotive for becoming a Mahomedan, he replied that there were greatpolitical reasons for this, and gave several; but he added, the Turkswould not admit me at first unless I submitted to two indispensableceremonies.... They agreed at length to remit the first and to commutethe other for a solemn vow, for every offence to give expiation by theperformance of some good action. "Oh, gentlemen, " says he, "for goodactions, you know you may command me, " and his first good action was toput to instant death an hundred of their priests, whom he suspected ofintrigues against him. Not aware of his summary justice, they sent adeputation to beg the lives of these people on the score of hisengagement. He answered that nothing would have made him so happy asthis opportunity of showing his zeal for their religion; but that theyhad arrived too late; their friends had been dead nearly an hour. He asked Lord Ebrington of which party he was, in Politics. "TheOpposition. " "The Opposition? Then can your Lordship tell me the reasonwhy the Opposition are so unpopular in England?" With something likepresence of mind on so delicate a question, Lord Ebrington instantlyreplied: "Because, sir, we always insisted upon it, that you would besuccessful in Spain. " During the spring and summer of 1815 Byron was a frequent visitor atAlbemarle Street, and in April, as has been already recorded, he firstmet Walter Scott in Murray's drawing-room. In March, Lord and Lady Byron took up their residence at 13, PiccadillyTerrace. The following letter is undated, but was probably written inthe autumn of 1815. _John Murray to Lord Byron_. My Lord, I picked up, the other day, some of Napoleon's own writing paper, allthe remainder of which has been burnt; it has his portrait and eagle, asyou will perceive by holding a sheet to the light either of sun orcandle: so I thought I would take a little for you, hoping that you willjust write me a poem upon any twenty-four quires of it in return. By the autumn of 1815 Lord Byron found himself involved in pecuniaryembarrassments, which had, indeed, existed before his marriage, but werenow considerably increased and demanded immediate settlement. His firstthought was to part with his books, though they did not form a veryvaluable collection. He mentioned the matter to a book collector, whoconferred with other dealers on the subject. The circumstances coming tothe ears of Mr. Murray, he at once communicated with Lord Byron, andforwarded him a cheque for £1, 500, with the assurance that an equal sumshould be at his service in the course of a few weeks, offering, at thesame time, to dispose of all the copyrights of his poems for hisLordship's use. Lord Byron could not fail to be affected by this generous offer, andwhilst returning the cheque, he wrote: _November_ 14, 1815. "Your present offer is a favour which I would accept from you, if Iaccepted such from any man ... The circumstances which induce me to partwith my books, though sufficiently, are not _immediately_, pressing. Ihave made up my mind to this, and there's an end. Had I been disposed totrespass upon your kindness in this way, it would have been before now;but I am not sorry to have an opportunity of declining it, as it sets myopinion of you, and indeed of human nature, in a different light fromthat in which I have been accustomed to consider it. " Meanwhile Lord Byron had completed his "Siege of Corinth" and"Parisina, " and sent the packet containing them to Mr. Murray. They hadbeen copied in the legible hand of Lady Byron. On receiving the poemsMr. Murray wrote to Lord Byron as follows: _John Murray to Lord Byron_. _December_, 1815. My Lord, I tore open the packet you sent me, and have found in it a Pearl. It isvery interesting, pathetic, beautiful--do you know, I would almost saymoral. I am really writing to you before the billows of the passions youexcited have subsided. I have been most agreeably disappointed (a word Icannot associate with the poem) at the story, which--what you hinted tome and wrote--had alarmed me; and I should not have read it aloud to mywife if my eye had not traced the delicate hand that transcribed it. Mr. Murray enclosed to Lord Byron two notes, amounting to a thousandguineas, for the copyright of the poems, but Lord Byron refused thenotes, declaring that the sum was too great. "Your offer, " he answered (January 3, 1816), "is _liberal_ in theextreme, and much more than the poems can possibly be worth; but Icannot accept it, and will not. You are most welcome to them asadditions to the collected volumes, without any demand or expectation onmy part whatever.... I am very glad that the handwriting was afavourable omen of the _morale_ of the piece; but you must not trust tothat, as my copyist would write out anything I desired in all theignorance of innocence--I hope, however, in this instance, with no greatperil to either. " The money, therefore, which Murray thought the copyright of the "Siegeof Corinth" and "Parisina" was worth, remained untouched in thepublisher's hands. It was afterwards suggested, by Mr. Rogers and SirJames Mackintosh, to Lord Byron, that a portion of it (£600) might beapplied to the relief of Mr. Godwin, the author of "An Enquiry intoPolitical Justice, " who was then in difficulties; and Lord Byron himselfproposed that the remainder should be divided between Mr. Maturin andMr. Coleridge. This proposal caused the deepest vexation to Mr. Murray, who made the following remonstrance against such a proceeding. _John Murray to Lord Byron_. ALBEMARLE STREET, _Monday_, 4 o'clock. My Lord, I did not like to detain you this morning, but I confess to you that Icame away impressed with a belief that you had already reconsidered thismatter, as it refers to me--Your Lordship will pardon me if I cannotavoid looking upon it as a species of cruelty, after what has passed, totake from me so large a sum--offered with no reference to the marketablevalue of the poems, but out of personal friendship and gratitudealone, --to cast it away on the wanton and ungenerous interference ofthose who cannot enter into your Lordship's feelings for me, upon, persons who have so little claim upon you, and whom those who sointerested themselves might more decently and honestly enrich from theirown funds, than by endeavouring to be liberal at the cost of another, and by forcibly resuming from me a sum which you had generously andnobly resigned. I am sure you will do me the justice to believe that I would strainevery nerve in your service, but it is actually heartbreaking to throwaway my earnings on others. I am no rich man, abounding, like Mr. Rogers, in superfluous thousands, but working hard for independence, andwhat would be the most grateful pleasure to me if likely to be useful toyou personally, becomes merely painful if it causes me to work forothers for whom I can have no such feelings. This is a most painful subject for me to address you upon, and I am illable to express my feelings about it. I commit them entirely to yourliberal construction with a reference to your knowledge of my character. I have the honour to be, etc. , JOHN MURRAY. This letter was submitted to Gifford before it was despatched, and hewrote: _Mr. Gifford to John Murray_. "I have made a scratch or two, and the letter now expresses my genuinesentiments on the matter. But should you not see Rogers? It is evidentthat Lord Byron is a little awkward about this matter, and his officiousfriends have got him into a most _unlordly_ scrape, from which they canonly relieve him by treading back their steps. The more I consider theirconduct, the more I am astonished at their impudence. A downrightrobbery is honourable to it. If you see Rogers, do not be shy to speak:he trembles at report, and here is an evil one for him. " In the end Lord Byron was compelled by the increasing pressure of hisdebts to accept the sum offered by Murray and use it for his ownpurposes. It is not necessary here to touch upon the circumstances of Lord Byron'sseparation from his wife; suffice it to say that early in 1816 hedetermined to leave England, and resolved, as he had before contemplateddoing, to sell off his books and furniture. He committed thearrangements to Mr. Murray, through Mr. Hanson, his solicitor, inBloomsbury Square. A few months before, when Lord Byron was in straitsfor money, Mr. Hanson communicated with Mr. Murray as follows: _Mr. Hanson to John Murray_. _November_ 23, 1815. "Mr. Hanson's compliments to Mr. Murray. He has seen Lord Byron, and hisLordship has no objection to his Library being taken at a valuation. Mr. Hanson submits to Mr. Murray whether it would not be best to name onerespectable bookseller to set a value on them. In the meantime, Mr. Hanson has written to Messrs. Crook & Armstrong, in whose hands thebooks now are, not to proceed further in the sale. " On December 28, 1815, Mr. Murray received the following valuation: "Mr. Cochrane presents respectful compliments to Mr. Murray, and begs toinform him that upon carefully inspecting the books in Skinner Street, he judges the fair value of them to be £450. " Mr. Murray sent Lord Byron a bill of £500 for the books as a temporaryaccommodation. But the books were traced and attached by the sheriff. OnMarch 6, 1816, Lord Byron wrote to Murray: "I send to you to-day for this reason: the books you purchased are againseized, and, as matters stand, had much better be sold at once by publicauction. I wish to see you to-morrow to return your bill for them, which, thank Heaven, is neither due nor paid. _That_ part, so far as_you_ are concerned, being settled (which it can be, and shall be, whenI see you tomorrow), I have no further delicacy about the matter. Thisis about the tenth execution in as many months; so I am pretty wellhardened; but it is fit I should pay the forfeit of my forefathers'extravagance as well as my own; and whatever my faults may be, I supposethey will be pretty well expiated in time--or eternity. " A letter was next received by Mr. Murray's solicitor, Mr. Turner, fromMr. Gunn, to the following effect: _Mr. Gunn to Mr. Turner_. _March_ 16, 1816. Sir, Mr. Constable, the plaintiff's attorney, has written to say he willindemnify the sheriff to sell the books under the execution; as such, wemust decline taking your indemnity. The result was, that Lord Byron, on March 22, paid to Crook & Armstrong£231 15_s_. , "being the amount of three levies, poundage, and expenses, "and also £25 13_s_. 6_d_. , the amount of Crook & Armstrong's account. Crook & Armstrong settled with Levy, the Jew, who had lent Byron money;and also with the officer, who had been in possession twenty-three days, at 5_s_. A day. The books were afterwards sold by Mr. Evans at hishouse, 26, Pall Mall, on April 5, 1816, and the following day. Thecatalogue describes them as "A collection of books, late the property ofa nobleman, about to leave England on a tour. " Mr. Murray was present at the sale, and bought a selection of books forMrs. Leigh, for Mr. Rogers, and for Mr. J. C. Hobhouse, as well as forhimself. He bought the large screen, with the portraits of actors andpugilists, which is still at Albemarle Street. There was also a silvercup and cover, nearly thirty ounces in weight, elegantly chased. Thesearticles realised £723 12_s_. 6_d_. , and after charging the costs, commission, and Excise duty, against the sale of the books, the balancewas handed over to Lord Byron. The "Sketch from Private Life" was one of the most bitter and satiricalthings Byron had ever written. In sending it to Mr. Murray (March 30, 1816), he wrote: "I send you my last night's dream, and request to havefifty copies struck off for private distribution. I wish Mr. Gifford tolook at it; it is from life. " Afterwards, when Lord Byron called uponMr. Murray, he said: "I could not get to sleep last night, but layrolling and tossing about until this morning, when I got up and wrotethat; and it is very odd, Murray, after doing that, I went to bed again, and never slept sounder in my life. " The lines were printed and sent to Lord Byron. But before publishingthem, Mr. Murray took advice of his special literary adviser andsolicitor, Mr. Sharon Turner. His reply was as follows: _Mr. Turner to John Murray_. _April_ 3, 1816. There are some expressions in the Poem that I think are libellous, andthe severe tenor of the whole would induce a jury to find them to be so. The question only remains, to whom it is applicable. It certainly doesnot itself name the person. But the legal pleadings charge that innuendomust mean such a person. How far evidence extrinsic to the work might bebrought or received to show that the author meant a particular person, Iwill not pretend to affirm. Some cases have gone so far on this pointthat I should not think it safe to risk. And if a libel, it is a libelnot only by the author, but by the printer, the publisher, and everycirculator. I am, dear Murray, yours most faithfully, SHN. TURNER. Mr. Murray did not publish the poems, but after their appearance in thenewspapers, they were announced by many booksellers as "Poems by LordByron on his Domestic Circumstances. " Among others, Constable printedand published them, whereupon Blackwood, as Murray's agent in Edinburgh, wrote to him, requesting the suppression of the verses, and threateningproceedings. Constable, in reply, said he had no wish to invade literaryproperty, but the verses had come to him without either author's name, publisher's name, or printer's name, and that there was no literaryproperty in publications to which neither author's, publisher's, norprinter's name was attached. Blackwood could proceed no farther. In hisletter to Murray (April 17, 1816), he wrote: "I have distributed copies of 'Fare Thee Well' and 'A Sketch' to Dr. Thomas Brown, Walter Scott, and Professor Playfair. One cannot read'Fare Thee Well' without crying. The other is 'vigorous hate, ' as yousay. Its power is really terrible; one's blood absolutely creeps whilereading it. " Byron left England in April 1816, and during his travels he correspondedfrequently with Mr. Murray. The MSS. Of the third canto of "Childe Harold" and "The Prisoner ofChillon" duly reached the publisher. Mr. Murray acknowledged the MSS. : _Mr. Murray to Lord Byron_. _September_ 12, 1816. My Lord, I have rarely addressed you with more pleasure than upon the presentoccasion. I was thrilled with delight yesterday by the announcement ofMr. Shelley with the MS. Of "Childe Harold. " I had no sooner got thequiet possession of it than, trembling with auspicious hope about it, Icarried it direct to Mr. Gifford. He has been exceedingly ill withjaundice, and unable to write or do anything. He was much pleased by myattention. I called upon him today. He said he was unable to leave offlast night, and that he had sat up until he had finished every line ofthe canto. It had actually agitated him into a fever, and he was muchworse when I called. He had persisted this morning in finishing thevolume, and he pronounced himself infinitely more delighted than when hefirst wrote to me. He says that what you have heretofore published isnothing to this effort. He says also, besides its being the mostoriginal and interesting, it is the most finished of your writings; andhe has undertaken to correct the press for you. Never, since my intimacy with Mr. Gifford, did I see him so heartilypleased, or give one-fiftieth part of the praise, with one-thousandthpart of the warmth. He speaks in ecstasy of the Dream--the whole volumebeams with genius. I am sure he loves you in his heart; and when hecalled upon me some time ago, and I told him that you were gone, heinstantly exclaimed in a full room, "Well! he has not left his equalbehind him--that I will say!" Perhaps you will enclose a line forhim.... Respecting the "Monody, " I extract from a letter which I received thismorning from Sir James Mackintosh: "I presume that I have to thank youfor a copy of the 'Monody' on Sheridan received this morning. I wish ithad been accompanied by the additional favour of mentioning the name ofthe writer, at which I only guess: it is difficult to read the poemwithout desiring to know. " Generally speaking it is not, I think, popular, and spoken of rather forfine passages than as a whole. How could you give so trite an image asin the last two lines? Gifford does not like it; Frere does. _A-propos_of Mr. Frere: he came to me while at breakfast this morning, and betweensome stanzas which he was repeating to me of a truly original poem ofhis own, he said carelessly, "By the way, about _half-an-hour ago_ I was so silly (taking an immensepinch of snuff and priming his nostrils with it) as to get _married I_"Perfectly true. He set out for Hastings about an hour after he left me, and upon my conscience I verily believe that, if I had had your MS. Tohave put into his hands, as sure as fate he would have sat with mereading it [Footnote: He had left his wife at the church so as to bringhis poem to Murray. ] all the morning and totally forgotten his littleengagement. I saw Lord Holland today looking very well. I wish I could send youGifford's "Ben Jonson"; it is full of fun and interest, and allowed onall hands to be most ably done; would, I am sure, amuse you. I have verymany new important and interesting works of all kinds in the press, which I should be happy to know any means of sending. My Review isimproving in sale beyond my most sanguine expectations. I now sellnearly 9, 000. Even Perry says the _Edinburgh, Review_ is going to thedevil. I was with Mrs. Leigh today, who is very well; she leaves town onSaturday. Her eldest daughter, I fancy, is a most engaging girl; butyours, my Lord, is unspeakably interesting and promising, and I am happyto add that Lady B. Is looking well. God bless you! my best wishes andfeelings are always with you, and I sincerely wish that your happinessmay be as unbounded as your genius, which has rendered me so much, My Lord, your obliged Servant, J. M. The negotiations for the purchase of the third canto were left in thehands of Mr. Kinnaird, who demurred to Mr. Murray's first offer of 1, 500guineas, and eventually £2, 000 was fixed as the purchase price. Mr. Murray wrote to Lord Byron on December 13, 1816, informing him that, at a dinner at the Albion Tavern, he had sold to the assembledbooksellers 7, 000 of his third canto of "Childe Harold" and 7, 000 of his"Prisoner of Chillon. " He then proceeds: _John Murray to Lord Byron_. "In literary affairs I have taken the field in great force--opening withthe Third Canto and "Chillon, " and, following up my blow, I have sincepublished 'Tales of my Landlord, ' another novel, I believe (but I reallydon't know) by the author of 'Waverley'; but much superior to what hasalready appeared, excepting the character of Meg Merrilies. Every one isin ecstasy about it, and I would give a finger if I could send it you, but this I will contrive. Conversations with your friend Buonaparte atSt. Helena, amusing, but scarce worth sending. Lord Holland has just putforth a very improved edition of the Life of Lope de Vega and Inez deCastro. ' Gifford's 'Ben Jonson' has put to death all former editions, and is very much liked. " At Mr. Murray's earnest request, Scott had consented to review the thirdcanto of "Childe Harold" in the _Quarterly_. In forwarding the MS. Hewrote as follows: _Mr. Scott to John Murray_. EDINBURGH, _January_ 10, 1817. My Dear Sir, I have this day sent under Croker's cover a review of Lord Byron's lastpoems. You know how high I hold his poetical reputation, but besides, one is naturally forced upon so many points of delicate consideration, that really I have begun and left off several times, and after all sendthe article to you with full power to cancel it if you think any part ofit has the least chance of hurting his feelings. You know him betterthan I do, and you also know the public, and are aware that to make anysuccessful impression on them the critic must appear to speak withperfect freedom. I trust I have not abused this discretion. I am sure Ihave not meant to do so, and yet during Lord Byron's absence, and underthe present circumstances, I should feel more grieved than at anythingthat ever befell me if there should have slipped from my pen anythingcapable of giving him pain. There are some things in the critique which are necessarily andunavoidably personal, and sure I am if he attends to it, which isunlikely, he will find advantage from doing so. I wish Mr. Gifford andyou would consider every word carefully. If you think the general tenoris likely to make any impression on him, if you think it likely to hurthim either in his feelings or with the public, in God's name fling thesheets in the fire and let them be as _not written_. But if it appears, I should wish him to get an early copy, and that you would at the sametime say I am the author, at your opportunity. No one can honour LordByron a genius more than I do, and no one had so great a wish to lovehim personally, though personally we had not the means of becoming veryintimate. In his family distress (deeply to be deprecated, and in whichprobably he can yet be excused) I still looked to some moment ofreflection when bad advisers (and, except you were one, I have heard offew whom I should call good) were distant from the side of one who is somuch the child of feeling and emotion. An opportunity was once affordedme of interfering, but things appeared to me to have gone too far; yet, even after all, I wish I had tried it, for Lord Byron always seemed togive me credit for wishing him sincerely well, and knew me to besuperior to what Commodore Trunnion would call "the trash of literaryenvy and petty rivalry. " Lord Byron's opinion of the article forms so necessary a complement toWalter Scott's sympathetic criticism of the man and the poet, that wemake no excuse for reproducing it, as conveyed in a letter to Mr. Murray(March 3, 1817). "In acknowledging the arrival of the article from the _Quarterly_, whichI received two days ago, I cannot express myself better than in thewords of my sister Augusta, who (speaking of it) says, that it iswritten in a spirit 'of the most feeling and kind nature. ' "It is, however, something more. It seems to me (as far as the subjectof it may be permitted to judge) to be very well written as acomposition, and I think will do the journal no discredit, because eventhose who condemn its partiality, must praise its generosity. Thetemptations to take another and a less favourable view of the questionhave been so great and numerous, that, what with public opinion, politics, etc. , he must be a gallant as well as a good man who hasventured in that place, and at this time, to write such an article, evenanonymously. Such things, however, are their own reward; and I evenflatter myself that the writer, whoever he may be (and I have no guess), will not regret that the perusal of this has given me as muchgratification as any composition of that nature could give, and morethan any has given--and I have had a good many in my time of one kind orthe other. It is not the mere praise, but there is a _tact_ and a_delicacy_ throughout, not only with regard to me but to _others_, which, as it had not been observed _elsewhere_, I had till now doubtedwhether it could be observed _anywhere_. " "When I tell you, " Lord Byron wrote to Moore a week later, "that WalterScott is the author of the article in the _Quarterly_, you will agreewith me that such an article is still more honourable to him than tomyself. " We conclude this episode with the following passage from a letter fromScott to Murray: "I am truly happy Lord Byron's article meets your ideas of what may makesome impression on his mind. In genius, poetry has seldom had his equal, and if he has acted very wrong in some respects, he has been no worsethan half the men of his rank in London who have done the same, and arenot spoken of because not worth being railed against. " Lady Byron also wrote to Mr. Murray: I am inclined to ask a question, which I hope you will not declineanswering, if not contrary to your engagements. Who is the author of thereview of "Childe Harold" in the _Quarterly_? Your faithful Servant, A. I. BYRON. Among other ladies who wrote on the subject of Lord Byron's works wasLady Caroline Lamb, who had caricatured him (as he supposed) in her"Glenarvon. " Her letter is dated Welwyn, franked by William Lamb: _Lady Caroline Lamb to John Murray_. _November_ 5, 1816. "You cannot need my assuring you that if you will entrust me with thenew poems, none of the things you fear shall occur, in proof of which Iask you to enquire with yourself, whether, if a person in constantcorrespondence and friendship with another, yet keeps a perfect silenceon one subject, she cannot do so when at enmity and at a distance. " This letter, to which no reply seems to have been sent, is followed byanother, in which her Ladyship says: I wish to ask you one question: are you offended with me or my letter?If so, I am sorry, but depend upon it if after seven years' acquaintanceyou choose to cut off what you ever termed your left hand, I have toomuch gratitude towards you to allow of it. Accept therefore everyapology for every supposed fault. I always write eagerly and in haste, Inever read over what I have written. If therefore I said anything Iought not, pardon it--it was not intended; and let me entreat you toremember a maxim I have found very useful to me, that there is nothingin this life worth quarrelling about, and that half the people we areoffended with never intended to give us cause. Thank you for Holcroft's "Life, " which is extremely curious andinteresting. I think you will relent and send me "Childe Harold" beforeany one has it--this is the first time you have not done so--and the_Quarterly Review_; and pray also any other book that is curious.... Iquite pine to see the _Quarterly Review_ and "Childe Harold. " Have mercyand send them, or I shall gallop to town to see you. Is 450 guineas toodear for a new barouche? If you know this let me know, as we of thecountry know nothing. Yours sincerely, C. L. In sending home the MS. Of the first act of "Manfred, " Lord Byron wrote, giving but unsatisfactory accounts of his own health. Mr. Murrayreplied: _John Murray to Lord Byron_. _March_ 20, 1817. My Lord, I have to acknowledge your kind letter, dated the 3rd, received thishour; but I am sorry to say that it has occasioned, me great anxietyabout your health. You are not wont to cry before you are hurt; and I amapprehensive that you are worse even than you allow. Pray keep quiet andtake care of yourself. My _Review_ shows you that you are worthpreserving and that the world yet loves you. If you become seriouslyworse, I entreat you to let me know it, and I will fly to you with aphysician; an Italian one is only a preparation for the anatomist. Iwill not tell your sister of this, if you will tell me true. I had hopesthat this letter would have confirmed my expectations of your speedyreturn, which has been stated by Mr. Kinnaird, and repeated to me by Mr. Davies, whom I saw yesterday, and who promises to write. We oftenindulge our recollections of you, and he allows me to believe that I amone of the few who really know you. Gifford gave me yesterday the first act of "Manfred" with a delightedcountenance, telling me it was wonderfully poetical, and desiring me toassure you that it well merits publication. I shall send proofs to youwith his remarks, if he have any; it is a wild and delightful thing, andI like it myself hugely.... I have just received, in a way perfectly unaccountable, a MS. From St. Helena--with not a word. I suppose it to be originally written byBuonaparte or his agents. --It is very curious--his life, in which eachevent is given in almost a word--a battle described in a short sentence. I call it therefore simply _Manuscrit venu de Ste. Helene d'une maniereinconnue_. [Footnote: This work attracted a considerable amount ofattention in London, but still more in Paris, as purporting to be achapter of autobiography by Napoleon, then a prisoner in St. Helena. Itwas in all probability the work of some of the deposed Emperor's friendsand adherents in Paris, issued for the purpose of keeping his nameprominently before the world. M. De Meneval, author of several books onNapoleon's career, has left it on record that the "M. S. Venu de SainteHelene" was written by M. Frederic Lullin de Chateauvieux, "genevoisdeja connu dans le monde savant. Cet ecrivain a avoue, apres vingt cinqans de silence, qu'il avait compose l'ouvrage en 1816, qu'il avait portelui-meme a Londres, et l'avait mis a la poste, a l'adresse du LibraireMurray. "] Lord Holland has a motion on our treatment of Buonaparte atSt. Helena for Wednesday next; and on Monday I shall publish. You willhave seen Buonaparte's Memorial on this subject, complaining bitterly ofall; pungent but very injudicious, as it must offend all the otherallied powers to be reminded of their former prostration. _April_ 12, 1817. Our friend Southey has got into a confounded scrape. Some twenty yearsago, when he knew no better and was a Republican, he wrote a certaindrama, entitled, "Wat Tyler, " in order to disseminate wholesome doctrineamongst the _lower_ orders. This he presented to a friend, with afraternal embrace, who was at that time enjoying the cool reflectiongenerated by his residence in Newgate. This friend, however, eitherthinking its publication might prolong his durance, or fancying that itwould not become profitable as a speculation, quietly put it into hispocket; and now that the author has most manfully laid about him, slaying Whigs and Republicans by the million, this cursed friendpublishes; but what is yet worse, the author, upon sueing for aninjunction, to proceed in which he is obliged to swear that he is theauthor, is informed by the Chancellor that it is seditious--and that forsedition there is no copyright. I will inclose either now or in my nexta second copy, for as there is no copyright, everyone has printed it, which will amuse you. On July 15th and 20th Lord Byron wrote to Mr. Murray that the fourthcanto of "Childe Harold" was completed, and only required to be "copiedand polished, " but at the same time he began to "barter" for the priceof the canto, so completely had his old scruples on this scoredisappeared. Mr. Murray replied, offering 1, 500 guineas for thecopyright. Mr. Hobhouse spent a considerable part of the year 1817 travelling aboutin Italy, whither he had gone principally to see Lord Byron. He wrote toMr. Murray on the subject of Thorwaldsen's bust of the poet: "I shall conclude with telling you about Lord B. 's bust. It is amasterpiece by Thorwaldsen [Footnote: The bust was made for Mr. Hobhouse, at his expense. Lord Byron said, "I would not pay the price ofa Thorwaldsen bust for any head and shoulders, except Napoleon's or mychildren's, or some 'absurd womankind's, ' as Monkbarns calls them, or mysister's. "] who is thought by most judges to surpass Canova in thisbranch of sculpture. The likeness is perfect: the artist worked _conamore_, and told me it was the finest head he had ever under his hand. Iwould have had a wreath round the brows, but the poet was afraid ofbeing mistaken for a king or a conqueror, and his pride or modesty madehim forbid the band. However, when the marble comes to England I shallplace a golden laurel round it in the ancient style, and, if it isthought good enough, suffix the following inscription, which may serveat least to tell the name of the portrait and allude to the excellenceof the artist, which very few lapidary inscriptions do; 'In vain would flattery steal a wreath from fame, And Rome's best sculptor only half succeed, If England owned no share in Byron's name Nor hailed the laurel she before decreed. ' Of course you are very welcome to a copy--I don't mean of the verses, but of the bust. But, with the exception of Mr. Kinnaird, who hasapplied, and Mr. Davies, who may apply, no other will be granted. Farewell, dear Sir. " The fourth canto duly reached London in Mr. Hobhouse's portmanteau, andwas published in the spring of 1818. CHAPTER XV LORD BYRON'S DEALINGS WITH MR. MURRAY--_continued_--THE DEATH OFALLEGRA, ETC. Lord Byron informed Mr. Murray, on October 12, 1817, that he had written"a poem in or after the excellent manner of Mr. Whistlecraft (whom Itake to be Frere)"; and in a subsequent letter he said, "Mr. Whistlecraft has no greater admirer than myself. I have written a storyin eighty-nine stanzas in imitation of him, called 'Beppo, ' the shortname for Giuseppe, that is the Joe of the Italian Joseph. " Lord Byronrequired that it should be printed anonymously, and in any form that Mr. Murray pleased. The manuscript of the poem was not, however, sent offuntil the beginning of 1818; and it reached the publisher about a monthlater. Meanwhile the friendly correspondence between the poet and his publishercontinued: _John Murray to Lord Byron_. _September_ 22, 1818. "I was much pleased to find, on my arrival from Edinburgh on Saturdaynight, your letter of August 26. The former one of the 21st I receivedwhilst in Scotland. The Saturday and Sunday previous I passed mostdelightfully with Walter Scott, who was incessant in his inquiries afteryour welfare. He entertains the noblest sentiments of regard towardsyou, and speaks of you with the best feelings. I walked about ten mileswith him round a very beautiful estate, which he has purchased bydegrees, within two miles of his favourite Melrose. He has nearlycompleted the centre and one wing of a castle on the banks of the Tweed, where he is the happiness as well as pride of the whole neighbourhood. He is one of the most hospitable, merry, and entertaining of mortals. Hewould, I am confident, do anything to serve you; and as the Paper[Footnote: The review of the fourth canto of "Childe Harold, " _Q. R. , _No. 37. ] which I now enclose is a second substantial proof of theinterest he takes in your literary character, perhaps it may naturallyenough afford occasion for a letter from you to him. I sent you by Mr. Hanson four volumes of a second series of 'Tales of my Landlord, ' andfour others are actually in the press. Scott does not yet avow them, butno one doubts his being their author.... I sent also by Mr. Hanson anumber or two of _Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine, _ and I have in arecent parcel sent the whole. I think that you will find in it a verygreat share of talent, and some most incomparable fun.... John Wilson, who wrote the article on Canto IV. Of 'Childe Harold' (of which, by theway, I am anxious to know your opinion), has very much interestedhimself in the journal, and has communicated some most admirable papers. Indeed, he possesses very great talents and a variety of knowledge. Isend you a very well-constructed kaleidoscope, a newly-invented toywhich, if not yet seen in Venice, will I trust amuse some of your femalefriends. " The following letter is inserted here, as it does not appear in Moore's"Biography": _Lord Byron to John Murray_. VENICE, _November_ 24, 1818, DEAR. MR. MURRAY, Mr. Hanson has been here a week, and went five days ago. He broughtnothing but his papers, some corn-rubbers, and a kaleidoscope. "For whatwe have received the Lord make us thankful"! for without His aid I shallnot be so. He--Hanson-left everything else in _Chancery Lane_ whatever, except your copy-papers for the last Canto, [Footnote: Of "ChildeHarold. "] etc. , which having a degree of parchment he brought with him. You may imagine his reception; he swore the books were a "waggon-load";if they were, he should have come in a waggon; he would in that casehave come quicker than he did. Lord Lauderdale set off from hence twelve days ago accompanied by acargo of Poesy directed to Mr. Hobhouse, all spick and span, and in MS. ;you will see what it is like. I have given it to Master Southey, and heshall have more before I have done with him. You may make what I say here as public as you please, more particularlyto Southey, whom I look upon--and will say so publicly-to be a dirty, lying rascal, and will prove it in ink--or in his blood, if I did notbelieve him to be too much of a poet to risk it! If he has forty reviewsat his back, as he has the _Quarterly_, I would have at him in hisscribbling capacity now that he has begun with me; but I will do nothingunderhand; tell him what I say from _me_ and every one else you please. You will see what I have said, if the parcel arrives safe. I understandColeridge went about repeating Southey's lie with pleasure. I canbelieve it, for I had done him what is called a favour.... I canunderstand Coleridge's abusing me--but how or why _Southey_, whom I hadnever obliged in any sort of way, or done him the remotest service, should go about fibbing and calumniating is more than I readilycomprehend. Does he think to put me down with his _Canting_, not beingable to do it with his poetry? We will try the question. I have read hisreview of Hunt, where he has attacked Shelley in an oblique and shabbymanner. Does he know what that review has done? I will tell you; it has_sold_ an edition of the "Revolt of Islam" which otherwise nobody wouldhave thought of reading, and few who read can understand, I for one. Southey would have attacked me too there, if he durst, further than byhints about Hunt's friends in general, and some outcry about an"Epicurean System" carried on by men of the most opposite habits andtastes and opinions in life and poetry (I believe) that ever had theirnames in the same volume--Moore, Byron, Shelley, Hazlitt, Haydon, LeighHunt, Lamb. What resemblance do ye find among all or any of these men?And how could any sort of system or plan be carried on or attemptedamongst them? However, let Mr. Southey look to himself; since the wineis tapped, he shall drink it. I got some books a few weeks ago--many thanks. Amongst them is Israeli'snew edition; it was not fair in you to show him my copy of his formerone, with all the marginal notes and nonsense made in Greece when I wasnot two-and-twenty, and which certainly were not meant for his perusal, nor for that of his readers. I have a great respect for Israeli and his talents, and have read hisworks over and over and over repeatedly, and been amused by themgreatly, and instructed often. Besides, I hate giving pain, unlessprovoked; and he is an author, and must feel like his brethren; andalthough his Liberality repaid my marginal flippancies with acompliment--the highest compliment--that don't reconcile me tomyself--nor to _you_. It was a breach of confidence to do this withoutmy leave; I don't know a living man's book I take up so often or laydown more reluctantly than Israeli's, and I never will forgive you--thatis, for many weeks. If he had got out of humour I should have been lesssorry; but even then I should have been sorry; but really he has heapedhis "coals of fire" so handsomely upon my head that they burnunquenchably. You ask me of the two reviews [Footnote: Of "Childe Harold" in the_Quarterly_ and _Blackwood. _]--I will tell you. Scott's is the reviewof one poet on another--his friend; Wilson's, the review of a poet too, on another--his _Idol_; for he likes me better than he chooses to avowto the public with all his eulogy. I speak judging only from thearticle, for I don't know him personally. Here is a long letter--can you read it? Yours ever, B. In the course of September 1818 Lord Byron communicated to Mr. Moorethat he had finished the first canto of a poem in the style and mannerof "Beppo. " "It is called, " he said, "'Don Juan, ' and is meant to be alittle quietly facetious upon everything; but, " he added, "I doubtwhether it is not--at least so far as it has yet gone--too free forthese very modest days. " In January 1819 Lord Byron requested Mr. Murrayto print for private distribution fifty copies of "Don Juan. " Mr. Murrayurged him to occupy himself with some great work worthy of hisreputation. "This you have promised to Gifford long ago, and to Hobhouseand Kinnaird since. " Lord Byron, however, continued to write out his"Don Juan, " and sent the second canto in April 1819, together with the"Letter of Julia, " to be inserted in the first canto. Mr. Murray, in acknowledging the receipt of the first and second cantos, was not so congratulatory as he had formerly been. The verses contained, no doubt, some of the author's finest poetry, but he had some objectionsto suggest. "I think, " he said, "you may modify or substitute otherwords for the lines on Romilly, whose death should save him. " But Byronentertained an extreme detestation for Romilly, because, he said, he hadbeen "one of my assassins, " and had sacrificed him on "his legal altar";and the verse [Footnote: St. 16, First Canto. ] was allowed to standover. "Your history, " wrote Murray, "of the plan of the progress of 'DonJuan' is very entertaining, but I am clear for sending him to hell, because he may favour us with a description of some of the characterswhom he finds there. " Mr. Murray suggested the removal of some offensivewords in Canto II. "These, " he said, "ladies may not read; the Shipwreckis a little too particular, and out of proportion to the rest of thepicture. But if you do anything it must be done with extreme caution;think of the effects of such seductive poetry! It probably surpasses intalent anything that you ever wrote. Tell me if you think seriously ofcompleting this work, or if you have sketched the story. I am very sorryto have occasioned you the trouble of writing again the "Letter ofJulia"; but you are always very forgiving in such cases. " The lines inwhich the objectionable words appeared were obliterated by Lord Byron. From the following letter we see that Mr. Murray continued hisremonstrances: _John Murray to Lord Byron_. _May 3_, 1819. "I find that 'Julia's Letter' has been safely received, and is with theprinter. The whole remainder of the second canto will be sent byFriday's post. The inquiries after its appearance are not a few. Prayuse your most tasteful discretion so as to wrap up or leave out certainapproximations to indelicacy. " Mr. Douglas Kinnaird, who was entrusted with the business portion ofthis transaction, wrote to Mr. Murray: _Mr. Douglas Kinnaird to John Murray_. _June 7_, 1819. My Dear Sir, Since I had the pleasure of seeing you, I have received from Lord Byrona letter in which he expresses himself as having left to Mr. Hobhouseand myself the sole and whole discretion and duty of settling with thepublisher of the MSS. Which are now in your hands the consideration tobe given for them. Observing that you have advertised "Mazeppa, " I feelthat it is my duty to request you will name an early day--of courseprevious to your publishing that or any other part of the MSS. --when wemay meet and receive your offer of such terms as you may deem proper forthe purchase of the copyright of them. The very liberal footing on whichLord Byron's intercourse with you in your character of publisher of hisLordship's works has hitherto been placed, leaves no doubt in my mindthat our interview need be but very short, and that the terms you willpropose will be met by our assent. The parties met, and Mr. Murray agreed to give £525 for "Mazeppa, " and£1, 575 for the first and second cantos of "Don Juan, " with "The Ode toVenice" thrown in. In accordance with Lord Byron's directions to his publisher to "keep theanonymous, " Cantos I. And II. Of "Don Juan" appeared in London, inquarto, in July 1819, without the name of either author, publisher, orbookseller. The book was immediately pounced upon by the critics; but itis unnecessary to quote their reviews, as they are impartially given inthe latest accredited editions of Lord Byron's poems. A few criticismsfrom Mr. Murray's private correspondence may be given. _Mr. Gifford to John Murray_. RYDE, _July_ 1, 1819. "Lord B. 's letter is shockingly amusing. [Footnote: Probably thatwritten in May; printed in the "Life. "] He must be mad; but then there'smethod in his madness. I dread, however, the end. He is, or rather mightbe, the most extraordinary character of his age. I have lived to seethree great men--men to whom none come near in their respectiveprovinces--Pitt, Nelson, Wellington. Morality and religion would haveplaced our friend among them as the fourth boast of the time; even adecent respect for the good opinion of mankind might have done much now;but all is tending to displace him. " Mr. Murray, who was still in communication with Mr. Blackwood, foundthat he refused to sell "Don Juan" because it contained personalitieswhich he regarded as even more objectionable than those of which Murrayhad complained in the _Magazine_. When the copyright of "Don Juan" was infringed by other publishers, itbecame necessary to take steps to protect it at law, and Mr. SharonTurner was consulted on the subject. An injunction was applied for inChancery, and the course of the negotiation will be best ascertainedfrom the following letters: _Mr. Sharon Turner to John Murray_. _October_ 21, 1819. DEAR MURRAY, ... On "Don Juan" I have much apprehension. I had from the beginning, and therefore advised the separate assignment. The counsel who issettling the bill also doubts if the Chancellor will sustain theinjunction. I think, when Mr. Bell comes to town, it will be best tohave a consultation with him on the subject. The counsel, Mr. Loraine, shall state to him his view on the subject, and you shall hear what Mr. Bell feels upon it. Shall I appoint the consultation? The evil, if notstopped, will be great. It will circulate in a cheap form veryextensively, injuring society wherever it spreads. Yet one considerationstrikes me. You could wish Lord Byron to write less objectionably. Youmay also wish him to return you part of the £1, 625. If the Chancellorshould dissolve the injunction on this ground, that will show Lord B. That he must expect no more copyright money for such things, and thatthey are too bad for law to uphold. Will not this affect his mind andpurify his pen? It is true that to get this good result you mustencounter the risk and expense of the injunction and of the argumentupon it. Will you do this? If I laid the case separately before three ofour ablest counsel, and they concurred in as many opinions that itcould not be supported, would this equally affect his Lordship's mind, and also induce him to return you an adequate proportion of the purchasemoney? Perhaps nothing but the Court treating him as it treated Southey[Footnote: In the case of "Wat Tyler, " see Murray's letter to Byron inpreceding chapter, April 12, 1817. ] may sufficiently impress Lord B. After the consultation with Bell you will better judge. Shall I get itappointed as soon as he comes to town? Ever yours faithfully, SHARON TURNER. Mr. Bell gave his opinion that the Court would not afford protection tothe book. He admitted, however, that he had not had time to study it. The next letter relates to the opinion of Mr. Shadwell, afterwardsVice-Chancellor: _Mr. Sharon Turner to John Murray_. _November_ 12, 1819. Dear Murray, I saw Mr. Shadwell to-day on "Don Juan. " He has gone through the bookwith more attention than Mr. Bell had time to do. He desires me to saythat he does not think the Chancellor would refuse an injunction, orwould overturn it if obtained.... Yours most faithfully, SHARON TURNER. In the event the injunction to restrain the publication of "Don Juan" bypiratical publishers was granted. Towards the end of 1819 Byron thought of returning to England. OnNovember 8 he wrote to Mr. Murray: "If she [the Countess Guiccioli] and her husband make it up, you willperhaps see me in England sooner than you expect. If not, I will retirewith her to France or America, change my name, and lead a quietprovincial life. If she gets over this, and I get over my Tertian ague, I will perhaps look in at Albemarle Street _en passant_ to Bolivar. " When Mr. Hobhouse, then living at Ramsbury, heard of Byron's intentionto go to South America, he wrote to Mr. Murray as follows: " ... To be sure it is impossible that Lord B. Should seriouslycontemplate, or, if he does, he must not expect us to encourage, thismad scheme. I do not know what in the world to say, but presume some onehas been talking nonsense to him. Let Jim Perry go to Venezuela if hewill--he may edit his 'Independent Gazette' amongst the Independentsthemselves, and reproduce his stale puns and politics without let orhindrance. But our poet is too good for a planter--too good to sit downbefore a fire made of mare's legs, to a dinner of beef without salt andbread. It is the wildest of all his meditations--pray tell him. Theplague and Yellow Jack, and famine and free quarter, besides a thousandother ills, will stare him in the face. No tooth-brushes, nocorn-rubbers, no _Quarterly Reviews_. In short, plenty of all heabominates and nothing of all he loves. I shall write, but you can tellfacts, which will be better than my arguments. " Byron's half-formed intention was soon abandoned, and the CountessGuiccioli's serious illness recalled him to Ravenna, where he remainedfor the next year and a half. Hobhouse's next letter to Murray (January 1820), in which he reported"Bad news from Ravenna--a great pity indeed, " is dated _Newgate_, wherehe had been lodged in consequence of his pamphlet entitled "A TriflingMistake in Thomas Lord Erskine's Recent Pamphlet, " containing severalvery strong reflections on the House of Commons as then constituted. During his imprisonment, Mr. Hobhouse was visited by Mr. Murray and UgoFoscolo, as well as by many of his political friends. Lady Caroline Lamb also wrote to Mr. Murray from Brockett Hall, askingfor information about Byron and Hobhouse. _Lady Caroline Lamb to John Murray_. You have never written to tell me about him. Now, did you know the painand agony this has given me, you had not been so remiss. If you couldcome here on Wednesday for one night, I have a few people and a supper. You could come by the Mail in two hours, much swifter than even in yourswift carriage; and I have one million of things to say and ask also. Dotell me how that dear Radical Hob is, and pray remember me to him. Ireally hope you will be here at dinner or supper on Wednesday. Yourbedroom shall be ready, and you can be back in Town before most peopleare up, though I rise here at seven. Yours quite disturbed my mind, for want of your telling me how he[Byron] looks, what he says, if he is grown fat, if he is no uglier thanhe used to be, if he is good-humoured or cross-grained, putting hisbrows down--if his hair curls or is straight as somebody said, if he hasseen Hobhouse, if he is going to stay long, if you went to Dover as youintended, and a great deal more, which, if you had the smallest tact oraught else, you would have written long ago; for as to me, I shallcertainly not see him, neither do I care he should know that I everasked after him. It is from mere curiosity I should like to hear all youcan tell me about him. Pray come here immediately. Yours, C. L. Notwithstanding the remarkable sale of "Don Juan, " Murray hesitatedabout publishing any more of the cantos. After the fifth canto waspublished, Lord Byron informed Murray that it was "hardly the beginningof the work, " that he intended to take Don Juan through the tour ofEurope, put him through the Divorce Court, and make him finish asAnacharsis Clootz in the French Revolution. Besides being influenced byhis own feelings, it is possible that the following letter of Mr. Crokermay have induced Mr. Murray to have nothing further to do with the work: _Mr. Croker to John Murray_. MUNSTER HOUSE, _March_ 26, 1820. _A rainy Sunday_. DEAR MURRAY, I have to thank you for letting me see your two new cantos [the 3rd and4th], which I return. What sublimity! what levity! what boldness! whattenderness! what majesty! what trifling! what variety! what_tediousness_!--for tedious to a strange degree, it must be confessedthat whole passages are, particularly the earlier stanzas of the fourthcanto. I know no man of such general powers of intellect as Brougham, yet I think _him_ insufferably tedious; and I fancy the reason to bethat he has such _facility_ of expression that he is never recalled to a_selection_ of his thoughts. A more costive orator would be obliged tochoose, and a man of his talents could not fail to choose the best; butthe power of uttering all and everything which passes across his mind, tempts him to say all. He goes on without thought--I should rather say, without pause. His speeches are poor from their richness, and dull fromtheir infinite variety. An impediment in his speech would make him aperfect Demosthenes. Something of the same kind, and with something ofthe same effect, is Lord Byron's wonderful fertility of thought andfacility of expression; and the Protean style of "Don Juan, " instead ofchecking (as the fetters of rhythm generally do) his natural activity, not only gives him wider limits to range in, but even generates a moreroving disposition. I dare swear, if the truth were known, that hisdigressions and repetitions generate one another, and that the happyjingle of some of his comical rhymes has led him on to episodes of whichhe never originally thought; and thus it is that, with the mostextraordinary merit, _merit of all kinds_, these two cantos have beento _me_, in several points, tedious and even obscure. As to the PRINCIPLES, all the world, and you, Mr. Murray, _first ofall_, have done this poem great injustice. There are levities here andthere, more than good taste approves, but nothing to make such aterrible rout about--nothing so bad as "Tom Jones, " nor within a hundreddegrees of "Count Fathom. " The writer goes on to remark that the personalities in the poem are moreto be deprecated than "its imputed looseness of principle": I mean some expressions of political and personal feelings which, Ibelieve, he, in fact, never felt, and threw in wantonly and _de gaietéde coeur_, and which he would have omitted, advisedly and _de bonté decoeur_, if he had not been goaded by indiscreet, contradictory, andurgent _criticisms_, which, in some cases, were dark enough to be called_calumnies_. But these are blowing over, if not blown over; and I cannotbut think that if Mr. Gifford, or some friend in whose taste anddisinterestedness Lord Byron could rely, were to point out to him thecruelty to individuals, the injury to the national character, theoffence to public taste, and the injury to his own reputation, of suchpassages as those about Southey and Waterloo and the British Governmentand the head of that Government, I cannot but hope and believe thatthese blemishes in the first cantos would be wiped away in the nextedition; and that some that occur in the two cantos (which you sent me)would never see the light. What interest can Lord Byron have in beingthe poet of a party in politics?... In politics, he cannot be what heappears, or rather what Messrs. Hobhouse and Leigh Hunt wish to make himappear. A man of his birth, a man of his taste, a man of his talents, aman of his habits, can have nothing in common with such miserablecreatures as we now call _Radicals_, of whom I know not that I canbetter express the illiterate and blind ignorance and vulgarity than bysaying that the best informed of them have probably never heard of LordByron. No, no, Lord Byron may be indulgent to these jackal followers ofhis; he may connive at their use of his name--nay, it is not to bedenied that he has given them too, too much countenance--but he nevercan, I should think, now that he sees not only the road but the ratethey are going, continue to take a part so contrary to all his owninterests and feelings, and to the feelings and interests of all therespectable part of his country.... But what is to be the end of allthis rigmarole of mine? To conclude, this--to advise you, for your ownsake as a tradesman, for Lord Byron's sake as a poet, for the sake ofgood literature and good principles, which ought to be united, to takesuch measures as you may be able to venture upon to get Lord Byron torevise these two cantos, and not to make another step in the odious pathwhich Hobhouse beckons him to pursue.... Yours ever, J. W. CROKER. But Byron would alter nothing more in his "Don Juan. " He accepted thecorrections of Gifford in his "Tragedies, " but "Don Juan" was neversubmitted to him. Hobhouse was occasionally applied to, because he knewLord Byron's handwriting; but even his suggestions of alterations orcorrections of "Don Juan" were in most cases declined, and moreoverabout this time a slight coolness had sprung up between him and Byron. When Hobhouse was standing for Westminster with Sir Francis Burdett, Lord Byron sent a song about him in a letter to Mr. Murray. It ran tothe tune of "My Boy Tammy? O!" "Who are now the People's men? My boy Hobby O!Yourself and Burdett, Gentlemen, And Blackguard Hunt and Cobby O! "When to the mob you make a speech, My boy Hobby O!How do you keep without their reach The watch without your fobby O?"[Footnote: The rest of the song is printed in _Murray's Magazine_, No. 3. ] Lord Byron asked Murray to show the song not only to some of hisfriends--who got it by heart and had it printed in the newspapers--butalso to Hobhouse himself. "I know, " said his Lordship, "that he willnever forgive me, but I really have no patience with him for lettinghimself be put in quod by such a set of ragamuffins. " Mr. Hobhouse, however, was angry with Byron for his lampoon and with Murray forshowing it to his friends. He accordingly wrote the following letter, which contains some interesting particulars of the Whig Club atCambridge in Byron's University days: _Mr. Hobhouse to John Murray_. 2, HANOVER SQUARE, _November_, 1820. I have received your letter, and return to you Lord Byron's. I shalltell you very frankly, because I think it much better to speak a littleof a man to his face than to say a great deal about him behind his back, that I think you have not treated me as I deserved, nor as might havebeen expected from that friendly intercourse which has subsisted betweenus for so many years. Had Lord Byron transmitted to me a lampoon on you, I should, if I know myself at all, either have put it into the firewithout delivery, or should have sent it at once to you. I should nothave given it a circulation for the gratification of all the small witsat the great and little houses, where no treat is so agreeable as tofind a man laughing at his friend. In this case, the whole coterie ofthe very shabbiest party that ever disgraced and divided a nation--Imean the Whigs--are, I know, chuckling over that silly charge made byMr. Lamb on the hustings, and now confirmed by Lord Byron, of my havingbelonged to a Whig club at Cambridge. Such a Whig as I then was, I amnow. I had no notion that the name implied selfishness and subserviency, and desertion of the most important principles for the sake of the leastimportant interest. I had no notion that it implied anything more thanan attachment to the principles the ascendency of which expelled theStuarts from the Throne. Lord Byron belonged to this Cambridge club, anddesired me to scratch out his name, on account of the criticism in the_Edinburgh Review_ on his early poems; but, exercising my discretion onthe subject, I did not erase his name, but reconciled him to the saidWhigs. The members of the club were but few, and with those whohave any marked politics amongst them, I continue to agree atthis day. They were but ten, and you must know most of them--Mr. W. Ponsonby, Mr. George O'Callaghan, the Duke of Devonshire, Mr. Dominick Browne, Mr. Henry Pearce, Mr. Kinnaird, LordTavistock, Lord Ellenborough, Lord Byron, and myself. I wasnot, as Lord Byron says in the song, the founder of this Club;[Footnote: "But when we at Cambridge wereMy boy Hobbie O!If my memory do not err, You founded a Whig Clubbie O!" ]on the contrary, thinking myself of mighty importancein those days, I recollect very well that some difficulty attended myconsenting to belong to the club, and I have by me a letter fromLord Tavistock, in which the distinction between being a Whig_party_ man and a Revolution Whig is strongly insisted upon. I have troubled you with this detail in consequence of Lord Byron'scharge, which he, who despises and defies, and has lampooned the Whigsall round, only invented out of wantonness, and for the sake of annoyingme--and he has certainly succeeded, thanks to your circulating thisfilthy ballad. As for his Lordship's vulgar notions about the _mob_, they are very fit for the Poet of the _Morning Post_, and for nobodyelse. Nothing in the ballad annoyed me but the charge about theCambridge club, because nothing else had the semblance of truth; and Iown it has hurt me very much to find Lord Byron playing into the handsof the Holland House sycophants, for whom he has himself the mostsovereign contempt, and whom in other days I myself have tried to inducehim to tolerate. I shall say no more on this unpleasant subject except that, by a letterwhich I have just received from Lord Byron, I think he is ashamed of hissong. I shall certainly speak as plainly to him as I have taken theliberty to do to you on this matter. He was very wanton and you veryindiscreet; but I trust neither one nor the other meant mischief, andthere's an end of it. Do not aggravate matters by telling how much Ihave been annoyed. Lord Byron has sent me a list of his new poems andsome prose, all of which he requests me to prepare for the press forhim. The monied arrangement is to be made by Mr. Kinnaird. When you areready for me, the materials may be sent to me at this place, where Ihave taken up my abode for the season. I remain, very truly yours, JOHN CAM HOBHOUSE. Towards the end of 1820 Lord Byron wrote a long letter to Mr. Murray onMr. Bowles's strictures on the "Life and Writings of Pope. " It was asubject perhaps unworthy of his pen, but being an ardent admirer ofPope, he thought it his duty to "bowl him [Bowles] down. " "I mean to layabout me, " said Byron, "like a dragon, till I make manure of Bowles forthe top of Parnassus. " After some revision, the first and second letters to Bowles werepublished, and were well received. The tragedy of "Sardanapalus, " the last three acts of which had beenwritten in a fortnight, was despatched to Murray on May 30, 1821, andwas within a few weeks followed by "The Two Foscari: an HistoricalTragedy"--which had been composed within a month--and on September 10by "Cain, a Mystery. " The three dramas, "Sardanapalus, " "The TwoFoscari, " and "Cain, a Mystery, " were published together in December1821, and Mr. Murray paid Lord Byron for them the sum of £2, 710. "Cain" was dedicated, by his consent, to Sir Walter Scott, who, inwriting to Mr. Murray, described it as "a very grand and tremendousdrama. " On its first appearance it was reprinted in a cheap form by twobooksellers, under the impression that the Court of Chancery would notprotect it, and it therefore became necessary to take out an injunctionto restrain these piratical publishers. The case came before Lord Chancellor Eldon on February 9. Mr. Shadwell, Mr. Spence, and Sergeant Copley were retained by Mr. Murray, and afterconsiderable discussion the injunction was refused, the Lord Chancellorintimating that the publisher must establish his right to thepublication at law, and obtain the decision of a jury, on which he wouldgrant the injunction required. This was done accordingly, and thecopyright in "Cain" was thus secured. On the death of Allegra, his natural daughter, Lord Byron entrusted toMr. Murray the painful duty of making arrangements for the burial of theremains in Harrow Church. Mr. Cunningham, the clergyman of Harrow, wrotein answer to Mr. Murray: _Rev. J. W. Cunningham to John Murray_. _August_ 20, 1822. Sir, Mr. Henry Drury was so good as to communicate to me a request conveyedto you by Lord Byron respecting the burial of a child in this church. Mr. H. Drury will probably have also stated to you my willingness tocomply with the wish of Lord Byron. Will you forgive me, however, for sofar trespassing upon you (though a stranger) as to suggest an inquirywhether it might not be practicable and desirable to fulfil for the_present_ only a _part_ of his Lordship's wish--by burying the child, and putting up a tablet with simply its name upon the tablet; and thusleaving Lord B. More leisure to reflect upon the character of theinscription he may wish to be added. It does seem to me that whatever hemay wish in the moment of his distress about the loss of this child, hewill afterwards regret that he should have taken pains to proclaim tothe world what he will not, I am sure, consider as honourable to hisname. And if this be probable, then it appears to me the office of atrue friend not to suffer him to commit himself but to allow his mind anopportunity of calm deliberation. I feel constrained to say that theinscription he proposed will be felt by every man of refined taste, tosay nothing of sound morals, to be an offence against taste andpropriety. My correspondence with his Lordship has been so small that Ican scarcely venture myself to urge these objections. You perhaps willfeel no such scruple. I have seen no person who did not concur in thepropriety of stating them. I would entreat, however, that should youthink it right to introduce my name into any statement made to LordByron, you will not do it without assuring him of my unwillingness tooppose the smallest obstacle to his wishes, or give the slightest painto his mind. The injury which, in my judgment, he is from day to dayinflicting upon society is no justification for measures of retaliationand unkindness. Your obedient and faithful Servant, J. W. CUNNINGHAM. No communication having been received by the Rector, he placed theapplication from Lord Byron before the churchwardens. _Rev. J. W. Cunningham to John Murray_. "The churchwardens have been urged to issue their prohibition by severalleading and influential persons, laymen, in the parish. You are awarethat as to _ex-parishioners_ the consent of the churchwardens is no lessnecessary than my own; and that therefore the enclosed prohibition isdecisive as to the putting up of the monument. You will oblige me bymaking known to Lord Byron the precise circumstances of the case. I am, your obedient Servant, J. W. CUNNINGHAM. The prohibition was as follows: HARROW, _September_ 17, 1822. Honored Sir, I object on behalf of the parish to admit the tablet of Lord Byron'schild into the church. JAMES WINKLEY, _Churchwarden_. The remains of Allegra, after long delay, were at length buried in thechurch, just under the present door mat, over which the congregationenter the church; but no memorial tablet or other record of her appearson the walls of Harrow Church. CHAPTER XVI BYRON'S DEATH AND THE DESTRUCTION OF HIS MEMOIRS No attempt has here been made to present a strictly chronological recordof Mr. Murray's life; we have sought only so to group his correspondenceas to lay before our readers the various episodes which go to form thebusiness life of a publisher. In pursuance of this plan we now proceedto narrate the closing incidents of his friendship with Lord Byron, reserving to subsequent chapters the various other transactions in whichhe was engaged. During the later months of Byron's residence in Italy this friendshiphad suffered some interruption, due in part perhaps to questions whichhad arisen out of the publication of "Don Juan, " and in part to theinterference of the Hunts. With the activity aroused by his expeditionto Greece, Byron's better nature reasserted itself, and his last letterto his publisher, though already printed in Moore's Life, cannot beomitted from these pages: _Lord Byron to John Murray_. MISSOLONGHI, _February_ 25, 1824. I have heard from Mr. Douglas Kinnaird that you state "a report of asatire on Mr. Gifford having arrived from Italy, _said_ to be written by_me_! but that _you_ do not believe it. " I dare say you do not, nor anybody else, I should think. Whoever asserts that I am the author orabettor of anything of the kind on Gifford lies in his throat. I alwaysregarded him as my literary father, and myself as his prodigal son; ifany such composition exists, it is none of mine. _You_ know as well asanybody upon _whom_ I have or have not written; and _you_ also knowwhether they do or did not deserve that same. And so much for suchmatters. You will perhaps be anxious to hear some news from this partof Greece (which is the most liable to invasion); but you will hearenough through public and private channels. I will, however, give youthe events of a week, mingling my own private peculiar with the public;for we are here jumbled a little together at present. On Sunday (the 15th, I believe) I had a strong and sudden convulsiveattack, which left me speechless, though not motionless-for some strongmen could not hold me; but whether it was epilepsy, catalepsy, cachexy, or apoplexy, or what other _exy_ or _epsy_ the doctors have not decided;or whether it was spasmodic or nervous, etc. ; but it was veryunpleasant, and nearly carried me off, and all that. On Monday, they putleeches to my temples, no difficult matter, but the blood could not bestopped till eleven at night (they had gone too near the temporal arteryfor my temporal safety), and neither styptic nor caustic would cauterisethe orifice till after a hundred attempts. On Tuesday a Turkish brig of war ran on shore. On Wednesday, greatpreparations being made to attack her, though protected by her consorts, the Turks burned her and retired to Patras. On Thursday a quarrel ensuedbetween the Suliotes and the Frank guard at the arsenal: a Swedishofficer was killed, and a Suliote severely wounded, and a general fightexpected, and with some difficulty prevented. On Friday, the officer wasburied; and Captain Parry's English artificers mutinied, under pretencethat their lives were in danger, and are for quitting the country:--theymay. On Saturday we had the smartest shock of an earthquake which I remember(and I have felt thirty, slight or smart, at different periods; they arecommon in the Mediterranean), and the whole army discharged their arms, upon the same principle that savages beat drums, or howl, during aneclipse of the moon:--it was a rare scene altogether--if you had butseen the English Johnnies, who had never been out of a cockney workshopbefore!--or will again, if they can help it--and on Sunday, we heardthat the Vizier is come down to Larissa, with one hundred and oddthousand men. In coming here, I had two escapes; one from the Turks _(one_ of myvessels was taken but afterwards released), and the other fromshipwreck. We drove twice on the rocks near the Scrofes (islands nearthe coast). I have obtained from the Greeks the release of eight-and-twenty Turkishprisoners, men, women, and children, and sent them to Patras and Prevesaat my own charges. One little girl of nine years old, who prefersremaining with me, I shall (if I live) send, with her mother, probably, to Italy, or to England, and adopt her. Her name is Hato, or Hatagée. She is a very pretty lively child. All her brothers were killed by theGreeks, and she herself and her mother merely spared by special favourand owing to her extreme youth, she being then but five or six yearsold. My health is now better, and I ride about again. My office here is nosinecure, so many parties and difficulties of every kind; but I will dowhat I can. Prince Mavrocordato is an excellent person, and does all inhis power; but his situation is perplexing in the extreme. Still we havegreat hopes of the success of the contest. You will hear, however, moreof public news from plenty of quarters: for I have little time to write. Believe me, yours, etc. , etc. , N. BN. The fierce lawlessness of the Suliotes had now risen to such a heightthat it became necessary, for the safety of the European population, toget rid of them altogether; and, by some sacrifices on the part of LordByron, this object was at length effected. The advance of a month's payby him, and the discharge of their arrears by the Government (thelatter, too, with money lent for that purpose by the same universalpaymaster), at length induced these rude warriors to depart from thetown, and with them vanished all hopes of the expedition againstLepanto. Byron died at Missolonghi on April 19, 1824, and when the body arrivedin London, Murray, on behalf of Mr. Hobhouse, who was not personallyacquainted with Dr. Ireland, the Dean of Westminster, wrote to him, conveying "the request of the executors and nearest relatives of thedeceased for permission that his Lordship's remains may be deposited inWestminster Abbey, in the most private manner, at an early hour in themorning. " Dr. _Ireland to John Murray_. ISLIP, OXFORD, _July_ 8, 1824. Dear Sir, No doubt the family vault is the most proper place for the remains ofLord Byron. It is to be wished, however, that nothing had been said_publicly_ about Westminster Abbey before it was known whether theremains could be received there. In the newspapers, unfortunately, ithas been proclaimed by somebody that the Abbey was to be the spot, and, on the appearance of this article, I have been questioned as to thetruth of it from Oxford. My answer has been that the proposal has beenmade, but civilly declined. I had also informed the members of thechurch at Westminster (after your first letter) that I could not grantthe favour asked. I cannot, therefore, answer now that the case will notbe mentioned (as it has happened) by some person or other who knows it. The best thing to be done, however, by the executors and relatives, isto carry away the body, and say as little about it as possible. Unlessthe subject is provoked by some injudicious parade about the remains, perhaps the matter will draw little or no notice. Yours very truly, J. IRELAND, The death of Byron brought into immediate prominence the question ofhis autobiographical memoirs, the MS. Of which he had given to Moore, who was at that time his guest at La Mira, near Venice, in 1819. "A short time before dinner, " wrote Moore, "he left the room, and in aminute or two returned carrying in his hand a white-leather bag. 'Lookhere, ' he said, holding it up, 'this would be worth something to Murray, though _you_, I daresay, would not give sixpence for it. ' 'What is it?'I asked. 'My Life and Adventures, ' he answered. On hearing this I raisedmy hands in a gesture of wonder. 'It is not a thing, ' he continued, 'that can be published during my lifetime, but you may have it if youlike: there, do whatever you please with it. '" Moore was greatly gratified by the gift, and said the Memoirs would makea fine legacy for his little boy. Lord Byron informed Mr. Murray byletter what he had done. "They are not, " he said, "for publicationduring my life, but when I am cold you may do what you please. " In asubsequent letter to Mr. Murray, Lord Byron said: "As you say my _prose_is good, why don't you treat with Moore for the reversion of myMemoirs?--conditionally recollect; not to be published before decease. He has the permission to dispose of them, and I advised him to do so. "Moore thus mentions the subject in his Memoirs: "_May_ 28, 1820. --Received a letter at last from Lord Byron, throughMurray, telling me he had informed Lady B. Of his having given me hisMemoirs for the purpose of their being published after his death, andoffering her the perusal of them in case she might wish to confute anyof his statements. Her note in answer to this offer (the original ofwhich he enclosed me) is as follows": KIRKBY MALLORY, _March_ 10, 1820. I received your letter of January 1st, offering for my perusal a Memoirof part of my life. I decline to inspect it. I consider the publicationor circulation of such a composition at any time is prejudicial to Ada'sfuture happiness. For my own sake I have no reason to shrink frompublication; but notwithstanding the injuries which I have suffered, Ishould lament more of the _consequences. _ A. BYRON. To LORD BYRON. [Footnote: For Byron's reply to this letter, see Moore'sMemoirs, iii. 115. ] Moore received the continuation of Lord Byron's Memoirs on December 26, 1820, the postage amounting to forty-six francs and a half. "He advisesme, " said Moore in his Diary, "to dispose of the reversion of the MS. Now. " Accordingly, Moore, being then involved in pecuniaryresponsibilities by the defalcations of his deputy in Bermuda, endeavoured to dispose of the "Memoirs of Lord Byron. " He first wrote tothe Messrs. Longman, who did not offer him enough; and then to Mr. Murray, who offered him the sum of 2, 000 guineas, on condition that heshould be the editor of the Memoirs, and write the Life of Lord Byron. _John Murray to Lord Byron_. _July_ 24, 1821. Dear Lord Byron, I have just received a letter from Mr. Moore--the subject of it is everyway worthy of your usual liberality--and I had not a moment's hesitationin acceding to a proposal which enabled me in any way to join inassisting so excellent a fellow. I have told him--which I suppose youwill think fair--that he should give me all additions that you may fromtime to time make--and in case of survivorship edit the whole--and Iwill leave it as an heirloom to my son. I have written to accede to Mr. Moore's proposal. I remain, dear LordByron, Your grateful and faithful Servant, JOHN MURRAY. Mr. Moore accepted the proposal, and then proceeded to draw upon Mr. Murray for part of the money. It may be added that the agreement betweenMurray and Moore gave the former the right of publishing the Memoirsthree months after his Lordship's death. When that event wasauthenticated, the manuscript remained at Mr. Murray's absolute disposalif Moore had not previously redeemed it by the repayment of the 2, 000guineas. During the period that Mr. Moore had been in negotiation with theLongmans and Murray respecting the purchase of the Memoirs, he had given"Lady Holland the MS. To read. " Lord John Russell also states, in his"Memoirs of Moore, " that he had read "the greater part, if not thewhole, " and that he should say that some of it was too gross forpublication. When the Memoirs came into the hands of Mr. Murray, heentrusted the manuscript to Mr. Gifford, whose opinion coincided withthat of Lord John Russell. A few others saw the Memoirs, amongst themWashington Irving and Mr. Luttrell. Irving says, in his "Memoirs, " thatMoore showed him the Byron recollections and that they were quiteunpublishable. Mr. Moore himself seems to have been thrown into some doubt as to thesale of the manuscript by the opinion of his friends. "Lord Holland, " hesaid, "expressed some scruples as to the sale of Lord Byron's Memoirs, and he wished that I could have got the 2, 000 guineas in any other way;he seemed to think it was in cold blood, depositing a sort of quiver ofpoisoned arrows for a future warfare upon private character. " [Footnote:Lord John Russell's "Memoirs, Journals, and Correspondence of ThomasMoore, " iii. P. 298. ] Mr. Moore had a long conversation on the subjectwith Mr. J. C. Hobhouse, "who, " he says in his Journal, "is an uprightand honest man. " When speaking of Lord Byron, Hobhouse said, "I knowmore about Lord Byron than any one else, and much more than I shouldwish any one else to know. " Lady Byron offered, through Mr. Kinnaird, to advance 2, 000 guineas forthe redemption of the Memoirs from Mr. Murray, but the negotiation wasnot brought to a definite issue. Moore, when informed of the offer, objected to Lady Byron being consulted about the matter, "for this wouldbe treachery to Lord Byron's intentions and wishes, " but he agreed toplace the Memoirs at the disposal of Lord Byron's sister, Mrs. Leigh, "to be done with exactly as she thought proper. " Moore was of opinionthat those parts of the manuscript should be destroyed which were foundobjectionable; but that those parts should be retained which were not, for his benefit and that of the public. At the same time it must be remembered that Moore's interest in theMemoirs had now entirely ceased, for in consequence of the death of LordByron they had become Mr. Murray's absolute property, in accordance withthe terms of his purchase. But although Mr. Murray had paid so large asum for the manuscript, and would probably have made a considerableprofit by its publication, he was nevertheless willing to have itdestroyed, if it should be the deliberate opinion of his Lordship'sfriends and relatives that such a step was desirable. Mr. Murray therefore put himself into communication with Lord Byron'snearest friends and relations with respect to the disposal of theMemoirs. His suggestion was at first strongly opposed by some of them;but he urged his objections to publication with increased zeal, evenrenouncing every claim to indemnification for what he had paid to Mr. Moore. A meeting of those who were entitled to act in the matter was atlength agreed upon, and took place in Murray's drawing-room, on May 17, 1824. There were present Mr. Murray, Mr. Moore, Mr. J. C. Hobhouse, Colonel Doyle representing Lady Byron, Mr. Wilmot Horton representingMrs. Leigh, and Mr. Luttrell, a friend of Moore's. Young Mr. Murray--then sixteen; the only person of those assembled now living[1891]--was also in the room. The discussion was long and stormy beforethe meeting broke up, and nearly led to a challenge between Moore andHobhouse. A reference to the agreement between Moore and Murray becamenecessary, but for a long time that document could not be found; it wasat length discovered, but only after the decision to commit themanuscript to the flames had been made and carried out, and the partyremained until the last sheet of Lord Byron's Memoirs had vanished insmoke up the Albemarle Street chimney. Immediately after the burning, Mrs. Leigh wrote the following account toher friend, the Rev. Mr. Hodgson, an old friend of Byron's: _The Hon. Mrs. Leigh to the Rev. F. Hodgson_. "The parties, Messrs. Moore, Murray, Hobhouse, Col. Doyle for Lady B. , and Mr. Wilmot for me, and Mr. Luttrell, a friend of Mr. Moore's, met atMr. Murray's; and after a long dispute and nearly quarrelling, upon Mr. Wilmot stating what was my wish and opinion, the MS. Was burnt, andMoore paid Murray the 2, 000 guineas. Immediately almost _after_ this wasdone, the legal agreement between Moore and Murray (which had beenmislaid), was found, and, strange to say, it appeared from it (what bothhad forgotten), that the property of the MS. Was Murray's _bond fide_. Consequently _he_ had the right to dispose of it as he pleased; and ashe had behaved most handsomely upon the occasion ... It was desired byour family that he should receive the 2, 000 guineas back. " [Footnote:"Memoir of the Rev. F. Hodgson, " ii. 139-40. ] But the Byrons did not repay the money. Mr. Moore would not permit it. He had borrowed the 2, 000 guineas from the Messrs. Longman, and beforehe left the room, he repaid to Mr. Murray the sum he had received forthe Memoirs, together with the interest during the time that thepurchase-money had remained in his possession. The statements made in the press, as to Lord Byron's Memoirs having beenburnt, occasioned much public excitement, and many applications weremade to Mr. Murray for information on the subject. Amongst those whomade particular inquiry was Mr. Jerdan, of the _Literary Gazette, _ whoinclosed to Mr. Murray the paragraph which he proposed to insert in hisjournal. Mr. Murray informed him that the account was so very erroneous, that he desired him either to condense it down to the smallest compass, or to omit it altogether. Mr. Jerdan, however, replied that the subjectwas of so much public interest, that he could not refuse to state theparticulars, and the following was sent to him, prepared by Mr. Murray: "A general interest having been excited, touching the fate of LordByron's Memoirs, written by himself, and reports, confused andincorrect, having got into circulation upon the subject, it has beendeemed requisite to signify the real particulars. The manuscript ofthese Memoirs was purchased by Mr. Murray in the year 1821 for the sumof two thousand guineas, under certain stipulations which gave him theright of publishing them three months after his Lordship's demise. Whenthat event was authenticated, the Manuscript consequently remained atMr. Murray's absolute disposal; and a day or two after the melancholyintelligence reached London, Mr. Murray submitted to the nearconnections of the family that the MSS. Should be destroyed. Inconsequence of this, five persons variously concerned in the matter wereconvened for discussion upon it. As these Memoirs were not calculated toaugment the fame of the writer, and as some passages were penned in aspirit which his better feelings since had virtually retracted, Mr. Murray proposed that they should be destroyed, considering it a duty tosacrifice every view of profit to the noble author, by whose confidenceand friendship he had been so long honoured. The result has been, thatnotwithstanding some opposition, he obtained the desired decision, andthe Manuscript was forthwith committed to the flames. Mr. Murray wasimmediately reimbursed in the purchase-money by Mr. Moore, although Mr. Murray had previously renounced every claim to repayment. " The particulars of the transaction are more fully expressed in thefollowing letter written by Mr. Murray to Mr. (afterwards Sir) RobertWilmot Horton, two days after the destruction of the manuscript. Itseems that Mr. Moore had already made a representation to Mr. Hortonwhich was not quite correct. [Footnote: Lord J. Russell's " Memoirs, etc. , of Thomas Moore, " iv. P. 188. ] _John Murray to Mr. R. Wilmot Horton_. ALBEMARLE STREET, _May_ 19, 1824. Dear Sir, On my return home last night I found your letter, dated the 17th, calling on me for a specific answer whether I acknowledged the accuracyof the statement of Mr. Moore, communicated in it. However unpleasant itis to me, your requisition of a specific answer obliges me to say that Icannot, by any means, admit the accuracy of that statement; and in orderto explain to you how Mr. Moore's misapprehension may have arisen, andthe ground upon which my assertion rests, I feel it necessary to troubleyou with a statement of all the circumstances of the case, which willenable you to judge for yourself. Lord Byron having made Mr. Moore a present of his Memoirs, Mr. Mooreoffered them for sale to Messrs. Longman & Co. , who however declined topurchase them; Mr. Moore then made me a similar offer, which I accepted;and in November 1821, a joint assignment of the Memoirs was made to meby Lord Byron and Mr. Moore, with all legal technicalities, inconsideration of a sum of 2, 000 guineas, which, on the execution of theagreement by Mr. Moore, I paid to him. Mr. Moore also covenanted, inconsideration of the said sum, to act as Editor of the Memoirs, and tosupply an account of the subsequent events of Lord Byron's life, etc. Some months after the execution of this assignment, Mr. Moore requestedme, as a great personal favour to himself and to Lord Byron, to enterinto a second agreement, by which I should resign the absolute propertywhich I had in the Memoirs, and give Mr. Moore and Lord Byron, or any oftheir friends, a power of redemption _during the life of Lord Byron_. Asthe reason pressed upon me for this change was that their friendsthought there were some things in the Memoirs that might be injurious toboth, I did not hesitate to make this alteration at Mr. Moore's request;and, accordingly, on the 6th day of May, 1822, a second deed wasexecuted, stating that, "Whereas Lord Byron and Mr. Moore are nowinclined to wish the said work not to be published, it is agreed that, if either of them shall, _during the life of the said Lord Byron_, repaythe 2, 000 guineas to Mr. Murray, the latter shall redeliver the Memoirs;but that, if the sum be not repaid _during the lifetime of Lord Byron_, Mr. Murray shall be at full liberty to print and publish the saidMemoirs within Three Months [Footnote: The words "within Three Months "were substituted for "immediately, " at Mr. Moore's request--and theyappear in pencil, in his own handwriting, upon the original draft of thedeed, which is still in existence. ] after the death of the said LordByron. " I need hardly call your particular attention to the words, carefully inserted twice over in this agreement, which limited itsexistence to the _lifetime of Lord Byron_; the reason of such limitationwas obvious and natural--namely that, although I consented to restorethe work, _while Lord Byron should be alive_ to direct the ulteriordisposal of it, I would by no means consent to place it _after hisdeath_ at the disposal of any other person. I must now observe that I had never been able to obtain possession ofthe original assignment, which was my sole lien on this property, although I had made repeated applications to Mr. Moore to put me intopossession of the deed, which was stated to be in the hands of LordByron's banker. Feeling, I confess, in some degree alarmed at thewithholding the deed, and dissatisfied at Mr. Moore's inattention to myinterests in this particular, I wrote urgently to him in March 1823, toprocure me the deed, and at the same time expressed my wish that thesecond agreement should either be cancelled or _at once executed_. Finding this application unavailing, and becoming, by the greater lapseof time, still more doubtful as to what the intentions of the partiesmight be, I, in March 1824, repeated my demand to Mr. Moore in a moreperemptory manner, and was in consequence at length put into possessionof the original deed. But, not being at all satisfied with the coursethat had been pursued towards me, I repeated to Mr. Moore my uneasinessat the terms on which I stood under the second agreement, and renewed myrequest to him that he would either cancel it, or execute its provisionsby the immediate redemption of the work, in order that I might exactlyknow what my rights in the property were. He requested time to considerthis proposition. In a day or two he called, and told me that he wouldadopt the latter alternative--namely, the redemption of the Memoirs--ashe had found persons who were ready to advance the money on _hisinjuring his life_; and he promised to conclude the business on thefirst day of his return to town, by paying the money and giving up theagreement. Mr. Moore did return to town, but did not, that I have heardof, take any proceedings for insuring his life; he positively neitherwrote nor called upon me as he had promised to do (though he wasgenerally accustomed to make mine one of his first houses of call);--nordid he take any other step, that I am aware of, to show that he had anyrecollection of the conversation which had passed between us previous tohis leaving town, until _the death of Lord Byron_ had, _ipso facto_, cancelled the agreement in question, and completely restored my absoluterights over the property of the Memoirs. You will therefore perceive that there was no verbal agreement inexistence between Mr. Moore and me, at the time I made a verbalagreement with you to deliver the Memoirs to be destroyed. Mr. Mooremight undoubtedly, _during Lord Byron's life_, have obtained possessionof the Memoirs, if he had pleased to do so; he however neglected ordelayed to give effect to our verbal agreement, which, as well as thewritten instrument to which it related, being cancelled by the death ofLord Byron, there was no reason whatsoever why I was not at that instantperfectly at liberty to dispose of the MS. As I thought proper. Had Iconsidered only my own interest as a tradesman, I would have announcedthe work for immediate publication, and I cannot doubt that, under allthe circumstances, the public curiosity about these Memoirs would havegiven me a very considerable profit beyond the large sum I originallypaid for them; but you yourself are, I think, able to do me the justiceof bearing witness that I looked at the case with no such feelings, andthat my regard for Lord Byron's memory, and my respect for his survivingfamily, made me more anxious that the Memoirs should be immediatelydestroyed, since it was surmised that the publication might be injuriousto the former and painful to the latter. As I myself scrupulously refrained from looking into the Memoirs, Icannot, from my own knowledge, say whether such an opinion of thecontents was correct or not; it was enough for me that the friends ofLord and Lady Byron united in wishing for their destruction. Why Mr. Moore should have wished to preserve them I did not nor will I inquire;but, having satisfied myself that he had no right whatever in them, Iwas happy in having an opportunity of making, by a pecuniary sacrificeon my part, some return for the honour, and I must add, the profit, which I had derived from Lord Byron's patronage and friendship. You willalso be able to bear witness that--although I could not presume toimpose an obligation on the friends of Lord Byron or Mr. Moore, byrefusing to receive the repayment of the 2, 000 guineas advanced byme--yet I had determined on the destruction of the Memoirs without anyprevious agreement for such repayment:--and you know the Memoirs wereactually destroyed without any stipulation on my part, but even with adeclaration that I had destroyed my own private property--and Itherefore had no claim upon any party for remuneration. I remain, dear Sir, Your faithful servant, JOHN MURRAY. After the burning of the manuscript Sir Walter Scott wrote in his diary:"It was a pity that nothing save the total destruction of Byron'sMemoirs would satisfy his executors; but there was a reason--_premat noxalta. "_ Shortly after the burning of the Memoirs, Mr. Moore began to meditatewriting a Life of Lord Byron; "the Longmans looking earnestly andanxiously to it as the great source of my means of repaying them theirmoney. " [Footnote: Moore's Memoirs, iv. 253. ] Mr. Moore could not asyet, however, proceed with the Life, as the most important letters ofLord Byron were those written to Mr. Murray, which were in his exclusivepossession. Lord John Russell also was against his writing the Life ofByron. "If you write, " he wrote to Moore, "write poetry, or, if you can find agood subject, write prose; but do not undertake to write the life ofanother reprobate [referring to Moore's "Life of Sheridan"]. In short, do anything but write the life of Lord Byron. " [Footnote: Moore'sMemoirs, v. 51. ] Yet Moore grievously wanted money, and this opportunity presented itselfto him with irresistible force as a means of adding to his resources. Atlength he became reconciled to Mr. Murray through the intercession ofMr. Hobhouse. Moore informed the Longmans of the reconciliation, and, ina liberal and considerate manner, they said to him, "Do not let us standin the way of any arrangements you may make; it is our wish to see youfree from debt; and it would be only in this one work that we should beseparated. " It was in this way that Mr. Moore undertook to write for Mr. Murray the Life of Lord Byron. Mr. Murray agreed to repay Moore the2, 000 guineas he had given for the burned Memoirs and £2, 000 extra forediting the letters and writing the Life, and Moore in his diary saysthat he considered this offer perfectly liberal. Nothing, he adds, couldbe more frank, gentleman-like, and satisfactory than the manner in whichthis affair had been settled on all sides. CHAPTER XVII SCOTT'S NOVELS--BLACKWOOD AND MURRAY The account of Mr. Murray's dealings with Lord Byron has carried usconsiderably beyond the date at which we left the history of his generalbusiness transactions, and compels us to go back to the year 1814, when, as is related in a previous chapter, he had associated himself withWilliam Blackwood as his Edinburgh agent. Blackwood, like Murray, was anxious to have a share in the business ofpublishing the works of Walter Scott--especially the novels teeming fromthe press by "The Author of 'Waverley. '" Although Constable and theBallantynes were necessarily admitted to the knowledge of theirauthorship, to the world at large they were anonymous, and the authorstill remained unknown. Mr. Murray had, indeed, pointed out to Mr. Canning that "Waverley" was by Walter Scott; but Scott himself trailedso many red herrings across the path, that publishers as well as thepublic were thrown off the scent, and both Blackwood and Murraycontinued to be at fault with respect to the authorship of the "WaverleyNovels. " In February 1816 Ballantyne assured Blackwood that in a very few weekshe would have something very important to propose. On April 12following, Blackwood addressed the following letter to Murray, "moststrictly confidential"; and it contained important proposals: _Mr. W. Blackwood to John Murray_. MY DEAR MURRAY, Some time ago I wrote to you that James Ballantyne had dined with me, and from what then passed I expected that I would soon have somethingvery important to communicate. He has now fully explained himself to me, with liberty to inform you of anything he has communicated. This, however, he entreats of us to keep most strictly to ourselves, trustingto our honour that we will not breathe a syllable of it to the dearestfriends we have. He began by telling me that he thought he had it now in his power toshow me how sensible he was of the services I had done him, and howanxious he was to accomplish that union of interests which I had so longbeen endeavouring to bring about. Till now he had only made professions;now he would act. He said that he was empowered to offer me, along withyou, a work of fiction in four volumes, such as Waverley, etc. ; that hehad read a considerable part of it; and, knowing the plan of the whole, he could answer for its being a production of the very first class; butthat he was not at liberty to mention its title, nor was he at libertyto 'give the author's name. I naturally asked him, was it by the authorof "Waverley"? He said it was to have no reference to any other workwhatever, and everyone would be at liberty to form their own conjecturesas to the author. He only requested that, whatever we might suppose fromanything that might occur afterwards, we should keep strictly toourselves that we were to be the publishers. The terms he was empoweredby the author to offer for it were: 1. The author to receive one-half of the profits of each edition; theseprofits to be ascertained by deducting the paper and printing from theproceeds of the book sold at sale price; the publishers to be at thewhole of the expense of advertising. 2. The property of the book to bethe publishers', who were to print such editions as they chose. 3. Theonly condition upon which the author would agree to these terms is, thatthe publisher should take £600 of John Ballantyne's stock, selected fromthe list annexed, deducting 25 per cent, from the affixed sale prices. 4. If these terms are agreed to, the stock to the above amount to beimmediately delivered, and a bill granted at twelve months. 5. That inthe course of six or eight weeks, J. B. Expected to be able to put intomy hands the first two volumes printed, and that if on perusal we didnot like the bargain, we should be at liberty to give it up. This heconsidered to be most unlikely; but if it should be the case, he wouldbind himself to repay or redeliver the bill on the books being returned. 6. That the edition, consisting of 2, 000 copies, should be printed andready for delivery by the 1st of October next. I have thus stated to you as nearly as I can the substance of whatpassed. I tried in various ways to learn something with regard to theauthor; but he was quite impenetrable. My own impression now is, that itmust be Walter Scott, for no one else would think of burdening us withsuch trash as John B. 's wretched stock. This is such a burden, that I ampuzzled not a little. I endeavoured every way I could to get him topropose other terms, but he told me they could not be departed from in asingle part; and the other works had been taken on the same conditions, and he knew they would be greedily accepted again in the same quarter. Consider the matter seriously, and write to me as soon as you can. Aftergiving it my consideration, and making some calculations. I confess Ifeel inclined to hazard the speculation; but still I feel doubtful untilI hear what you think of it. Do not let my opinion, which may beerroneous, influence you, but judge for yourself. From the very strongterms in which Jas. B. Spoke of the work, I am sanguine enough to expectit will equal if not surpass any of the others. I would not lay so muchstress upon what he says if I were not assured that his great interest, as well as Mr. Scott's, is to stand in the very best way both with youand me. They are anxious to get out of the clutches of Constable, andBallantyne is sensible of the favour I have done and may still do him bygiving so much employment, besides what he may expect from you. FromConstable he can expect nothing. I had almost forgotten to mention thathe assured me in the most solemn manner that we had got the first offer, and he ardently hoped we would accept of it. If, however, we did not, hetrusted to our honour that we would say nothing of it; that the authorof this work would likely write more; and should we not take this, wemight have it in our power afterwards to do something with him, providedwe acted with delicacy in the transaction, as he had no doubt we woulddo. I hope you will be able to write to me soon, and as fully as youcan. If I have time tomorrow, or I should rather say this day, as it isnow near one o'clock, I will write you about other matters; and if Ihave no letter from you, will perhaps give you another scolding. Yours most truly, W. BLACKWOOD. A long correspondence took place between Blackwood and Murray onBallantyne's proposal. Blackwood was inclined to accept, notwithstandingthe odd nature of the proposal, in the firm belief that "the heart'sdesire" of Ballantyne was to get rid of Constable. He sent Murray a listof Ballantyne's stock, from which the necessary value of books was to beselected. It appeared, however, that there was one point on whichBlackwood had been mistaken, and that was, that the copyright of the newnovel was not to be absolutely conveyed, and that all that Ballantynemeant, or had authority to offer, was an edition, limited to sixthousand copies, of the proposed work. Although Murray considered it "ablind bargain, " he was disposed to accept it, as it might lead tosomething better. Blackwood accordingly communicated to Ballantyne thathe and Murray accepted his offer. _Mr. Wm. Blackwood to John Murray_. _April_ 27, 1816. "Everything is settled, and on Tuesday Ballantyne is to give a letterspecifying the whole terms of the transaction. He could not do itsooner, he said, as he had to consult the author. This, I think, makesit clear that it is Walter Scott, who is at Abbotsford just now. Whatsurprised me a good deal was, James Ballantyne told me that his brotherJohn had gone out there with Constable, and Godwin (author of 'CalebWilliams'), whom Scott was anxious to see. They are really a strange setof people.... I am not over fond of all these mysteries, but they are amysterious set of personages, and we must manage with them in the bestway that we can. " A letter followed from James Ballantyne to Murray (May I, 1816), congratulating him upon concluding the bargain through Blackwood, andsaying: "I have taken the liberty of drawing upon you at twelve months for £300for your share.... It will be a singularly great accommodation if youcan return the bill in course of post. " Although Ballantyne had promised that the first edition of the proposedwork should be ready by October 1, 1816, Blackwood found that in Junethe printing of the work had not yet commenced. Ballantyne said he hadnot yet got any part of the manuscript from the author, but that hewould press him again on the subject. The controversy still continued asto the authorship of the Waverley Novels. "For these six months past, "wrote Blackwood (June 6, 1816), "there have been various rumours withregard to Greenfield being the author of these Novels, but I never paidmuch attention to it; the thing appeared to me so very improbable.... But from what I have heard lately, and from what you state, I now beginto think that Greenfield may probably be the author. " On the other hand, Mr. Mackenzie called upon Blackwood, and informed him that "he was nowquite convinced that Thomas Scott, Walter's brother in Canada, writesall the novels. " The secret, however, was kept for many years longer. Blackwood became quite provoked at the delay in proceeding with theproposed work. _Mr. Wm. Blackwood to John Murray_. _June_ 21, 1816. "I begin to fear that S. B. And Cy. Are a nest of----. There is neitherfaith nor truth in them. In my last letter I mentioned to you that therewas not the smallest appearance of the work being yet begun, and thereis as little still. James Ballantyne shifts this off his own shouldersby saying that he cannot help it. Now, my own belief is that at the timehe made such solemn promises to me that the first volume would be in myhands in a month, he had not the smallest expectation of this being thecase; but he knew that he would not have got our bills, which heabsolutely wanted, without holding this out. It is now seven weeks sincethe bills were granted, and it is five weeks since I gave him the listof books which were to be delivered. I have applied to him again andagain for them, and on Tuesday last his man at length called on me tosay that John Ballantyne & Co. Could not deliver fifty sets of 'Kerr'sVoyages'--that they had only such quantities of particular odd volumesof which he showed me a list. " Blackwood called upon Ballantyne, but he could not see him, and insteadof returning Blackwood's visit, he sent a note of excuse. Next time theymet was at Hollingworth's Hotel, after which Ballantyne sent Blackwood aletter "begging for a loan of £50 till next week, but not a word ofbusiness in it. " Next time they met was at the same hotel, when the twodined with Robert Miller. _Mr. Wm. Blackwood to John Murray_. "After dinner I walked home with J. B. Perhaps from the wine he haddrunk, he was very communicative, and gave me a great deal of verycurious and interesting private history. Would you believe it, thatabout six weeks ago--at the very time our transaction was goingon--these worthies, Scott, Ballantyne & Co. , concluded a transactionwith Constable for 10, 000 copies of this said 'History of Scotland'[which had been promised to Blackwood and Murray] in 4 vols. , andactually received bills for the profits expected to be realized fromthis large number! Yet, when I put James Ballantyne in mind on Tuesdayof what he had formally proposed by desire of Mr. Scott, and assured uswe were positively to get the work, and asked him if there was any truthin the rumour I had heard, and even that you had heard, about Mr. Scottbeing about to publish a 'History of Scotland' with his name, andfurther asked him if Mr. Scott was now ready to make any arrangementswith us about it (for it never occurred to me that he could makearrangements with any one else), he solemnly assured me that he knewnothing about it! Now, after this, what confidence can we have inanything that this man will say or profess! I confess I am sadlymortified at my own credulousness. John I always considered as no betterthan a swindler, but James I put some trust and confidence in. Youjudged more accurately, for you always said that 'he was a damnedcunning fellow!' Well, there is every appearance of your being right;but his cunning (as it never does) will not profit him. Within thesethree years I have given him nearly £1, 400 for printing, and in returnhave only received empty professions, made, to be sure, in the mostdramatic manner. Trite as the saying is, honesty is always the bestpolicy; and if we live a little longer, we shall see what will be theend of all their cunning, never-ending labyrinths of plots and schemes. Constable is the proper person for them; set a thief to catch a thief:Jonathan Wild will be fully a match for any of the heroes of the'Beggar's Opera. ' My blood boils when I think of them, and still morewhen I think of my allowing myself so long to keep my eyes shut to whatI ought to have seen long ago. But the only apology I make to myself is, that one does not wish to think so ill of human nature. There is an oldScotch proverb, 'He has need o' a lang spoon that sups wi' the De'il, 'and since we are engaged, let us try if we can partake of the brothwithout scalding ourselves. I still hope that we may; and however muchmy feelings revolt at having any connection in future with them, yet Ishall endeavour to the best of my power to repress my bile, and to turntheir own tricks against themselves. One in business must submit to manythings, and swallow many a bitter pill, when such a man as Walter Scottis the object in view. You will see, by this day's Edinburgh papers, that the copartnery of John Ballantyne & Co. Is formally dissolved. Miller told me that, before James Ballantyne could get his wife'sfriends to assent to the marriage, Walter Scott was obliged to grantbonds and securities, taking upon himself all the engagements of JohnBallantyne & Co. , as well as of James Ballantyne & Co. ; [Footnote:Lockhart says, in his "Life of Scott, " that "in Feb. , 1816, when JamesBallantyne married, it is clearly proved, by letters in his handwriting, that he owed to Scott more than £3, 000 of personal debt. "] so that, ifthere was any difficulty on their part, he bound himself to fulfil thewhole. When we consider the large sums of money Walter Scott has got forhis works, the greater part of which has been thrown into the hands ofthe Ballantynes, and likewise the excellent printing business J. B. Hashad for so many years, it is quite incomprehensible what has become ofall the money. Miller says, 'It is just a jaw hole which swallows upall, ' and from what he has heard he does not believe Walter Scott isworth anything. " Murray was nevertheless willing to go on until the terms of his bargainwith Ballantyne were fulfilled, and wrote to Blackwood that he was"resolved to swallow the pill, bitter though it was, " but he expressedhis surprise that "Mr. Scott should have allowed his property to besquandered as it has been by these people. " Blackwood, however, was in great anxiety about the transaction, fearingthe result of the engagement which he and Murray had entered into. _Mr. Wm. Blackwood to John Murray_. _July 2_, 1816. "This morning I got up between five and six, but instead of sitting downto write to you, as I had intended, I mounted my pony and took a longride to collect my thoughts. Sitting, walking, or riding is all thesame. I feel as much puzzled as ever, and undetermined whether or not tocut the Gordian knot. Except my wife, there is not a friend whom I dareadvise with. I have not once ventured to mention the business at all tomy brother, on account of the cursed mysteries and injunctions ofsecrecy connected with it. I know he would blame me for ever engaging init, for he has a very small opinion of the Ballantynes. I cannottherefore be benefited by his advice. Mrs. Blackwood, though she alwaysdisliked my having any connection with the Ballantynes, rather thinks weshould wait a few weeks longer, till we see what is produced. I believe, after all, this is the safest course to pursue. I would beg of you, however, to think maturely upon the affair, taking into account Mr. Scott's usefulness to the _Review_. Take a day or two to consider thematter fully, and then give me your best advice.... As to Constable orhis triumphs, as he will consider them, I perfectly agree with you thatthey are not to be coveted by us, and that they should not give us amoment's thought. Thank God, we shall never desire to compass any of ourends by underhand practices. " Meanwhile correspondence with Ballantyne about the work of fiction--thename of which was still unknown-was still proceeding. Ballantyne saidthat the author "promised to put the first volume in his hands by theend of August, and that the whole would be ready for publication byChristmas. " Blackwood thought this reply was "humbug, as formerly. "Nevertheless, he was obliged to wait. At last he got the first sight ofthe manuscript. _Mr. Wm. Blackwood to John Murray_. _August_ 23, 1816. _Midnight_. "MY DEAR MURRAY, --I have this moment finished the reading of 192 pagesof our book--for ours it must be, --and I cannot go to bed withouttelling you what is the strong and most favourable impression it hasmade upon me. If the remainder be at all equal--which it cannot fail tobe, from the genius displayed in what is now before me--we have beenmost fortunate indeed. The title as, TALKS OF MY LANDLORD; _collectedand reported by Jedediah Cleishbotham, Pariah Clerk and Schoolmaster ofGandercleugh_. " Mr. Blackwood then proceeds to give an account of the Introduction, thecommencement of "The Black Dwarf, " the first of the tales, and thegeneral nature of the story, to the end of the fourth chapter. Hisletter is of great length, and extends to nine quarto pages. Heconcludes: "There cannot be a doubt as to the splendid merit of the work. It wouldnever have done to have hesitated and higgled about seeing more volumes. In the note which accompanied the sheets, Ballantyne says, 'each volumecontains a Tale, ' so there will be four in all. [Footnote: This, theoriginal intention, was departed from. ] The next relates to the periodof the Covenanters. I have now neither doubts nor fears with regard tothe whole being good, and I anxiously hope that you will have as little. I am so happy at the fortunate termination of all my pains andanxieties, that I cannot be in bad humour with you for not writing metwo lines in answer to my last letters. I hope I shall hear from youto-morrow; but I entreat of you to write me in course of post, as I wishto hear from you before I leave this [for London], which I intend to doon this day se'nnight by the smack. " At length the principal part of the manuscript of the novel was in thepress, and, as both the author and the printer were in sore straits formoney, they became importunate on Blackwood and Murray for payment onaccount. They had taken Ballantyne's "wretched stock" of books, asBlackwood styled them, and Lockhart, in his "Life of Scott, " infers thatMurray had consented to anticipate the period of his payments. At allevents, he finds in a letter of Scott's, written in August, these wordsto John Ballantyne: "Dear John, --I have the pleasure to enclose Murray'sacceptances. I earnestly recommend you to push, realising as much as youcan. "Consider weel, gude mon, We hae but borrowed gear, The horse that I ride on, It is John Murray's mear. " Scott was at this time sorely pressed for ready money. He was buying onepiece of land after another, usually at exorbitant prices, and havingalready increased the estate of Abbotsford from 150 to nearly 1, 000acres, he was in communication with Mr. Edward Blore as to the erectionof a dwelling adjacent to the cottage, at a point facing the Tweed. Thishouse grew and expanded, until it became the spacious mansion ofAbbotsford. The Ballantynes also were ravenous for more money; but theycould get nothing from Blackwood and Murray before the promised work wasfinished. At last the book was completed, printed, and published on December 1, 1816; but without the magical words, "by the Author of 'Waverley, '" onthe title-page. All doubts as to the work being by the author of"Waverley, " says Lockhart, had worn themselves out before the lapse of aweek. _John Murray to Mr. Wm. Blackwood_. _December_ 13, 1816. "Having now heard every one's opinion about our 'Tales of my Landlord, 'I feel competent to assure you that it is universally in their favour. There is only 'Meg Merrilies' in their way. It is even, I think, superior to the other three novels. You may go on printing as many andas fast as you can; for we certainly need not stop until we come to theend of our, unfortunately, limited 6, 000.... My copies are more thangone, and if you have any to spare pray send them up instantly. " On the following day Mr. Murray wrote to Mr. Scott: _John Murray to Mr. Scott_. _December_ 14, 1816. DEAR SIR, Although I dare not address you as the author of certain Tales--which, however, must be written either by Walter Scott or the devil--yetnothing can restrain me from thinking that it is to your influence withthe author of them that I am indebted for the essential honour of beingone of their publishers; and I must intrude upon you to offer my mosthearty thanks, not divided but doubled, alike for my worldly gaintherein, and for the great acquisition of professional reputation whichtheir publication has already procured me. As to delight, I believe Icould, under any oath that could be proposed, swear that I neverexperienced such great and unmixed pleasure in all my life as thereading of this exquisite work has afforded me; and if you witnessed thewet eyes and grinning cheeks with which, as the author's chamberlain, Ireceive the unanimous and vehement praise of them from every one who hasread them, or heard the curses of those whose needs my scanty supplywould not satisfy, you might judge of the sincerity with which I nowentreat you to assure the author of the most complete success. Afterthis, I could throw all the other books which I have in the press intothe Thames, for no one will either read them or buy. Lord Holland said, when I asked his opinion: "Opinion? we did not one of us go to bed allnight, and nothing slept but my gout. " Frere, Hallam, and Boswell; LordGlenbervie came to me with tears in his eyes. "It is a cordial, " hesaid, "which has saved Lady Glenbervie's life. " Heber, who found it onhis table on his arrival from a journey, had no rest till he had readit. He has only this moment left me, and he, with many others, agreesthat it surpasses all the other novels. Wm. Lamb also; Gifford neverread anything like it, he says; and his estimate of it absolutelyincreases at each recollection of it. Barrow with great difficulty wasforced to read it; and he said yesterday, "Very good, to be sure, butwhat powerful writing is _thrown away_. " Heber says there are only twomen in the world, Walter Scott and Lord Byron. Between you, you havegiven existence to a third. Ever your faithful servant, JOHN MURRAY. This letter did not effectually "draw the badger. " Scott replied in thefollowing humorous but Jesuitical epistle: _Mr. Scott to John Murray_. _December 18, 1816_. MY DEAR SIR, I give you hearty joy of the success of the Tales, although I do notclaim that paternal interest in them which my friends do me the creditto assign to me. I assure you I have never read a volume of them tillthey were printed, and can only join with the rest of the world inapplauding the true and striking portraits which they present of oldScottish manners. I do not expect implicit reliance to be placed on my disavowal, becauseI know very well that he who is disposed not to own a work mustnecessarily deny it, and that otherwise his secret would be at the mercyof all who chose to ask the question, since silence in such a case mustalways pass for consent, or rather assent. But I have a mode ofconvincing you that I am perfectly serious in my denial--pretty similarto that by which Solomon distinguished the fictitious from the realmother--and that is by reviewing the work, which I take to be anoperation equal to that of quartering the child.... Kind compliments toHeber, whom I expected at Abbotsford this summer; also to Mr. Croker andall your four o'clock visitors. I am just going to Abbotsford, to make asmall addition to my premises there. I have now about seven hundredacres, thanks to the booksellers and the discerning public. Yours truly, WALTER SCOTT. The happy chance of securing a review of the Tales by the author of"Waverley" himself exceeded Murray's most sanguine expectations, andfilled him with joy. He suggested that the reviewer, instead of sendingan article on the Gypsies, as he proposed, should introduce whatever hehad to say about that picturesque race in his review of the Tales, byway of comment on the character of Meg Merrilies. The review waswritten, and appeared in No. 32 of the _Quarterly_, in January 1817, bywhich time the novel had already gone to a third edition. It is curiousnow to look back upon the author reviewing his own work. He adoptedMurray's view, and besides going over the history of "Waverley, " and thecharacters introduced in that novel, he introduced a disquisition aboutMeg Merrilies and the Gypsies, as set forth in his novel of "GuyMannering. " He then proceeded to review the "Black Dwarf" and "OldMortality, " but with the utmost skill avoided praising them, and ratherendeavoured to put his friends off the scent by undervaluing them, andfinding fault. The "Black Dwarf, " for example, was full of "violentevents which are so common in romance, and of such rare occurrence inreal life. " Indeed, he wrote, "the narrative is unusually artificial;neither hero nor heroine excites interest of any sort, being just thatsort of _pattern_ people whom nobody cares a farthing about. " "The other story, " he adds, "is of much deeper interest. " He describesthe person who gave the title to the novel--Robert Paterson, of theparish of Closeburn, in Dumfriesshire--and introduces a good deal ofhistorical knowledge, but takes exception to many of the circumstancesmentioned in the story, at the same time quoting some of the bestpassages about Cuddie Headrigg and his mother. In respect to theinfluence of Claverhouse and General Dalzell, the reviewer states that"the author has cruelly falsified history, " and relates the actualcircumstances in reference to these generals. "We know little, " he says, "that the author can say for himself to excuse these sophistications, and, therefore, may charitably suggest that he was writing a romance, and not a history. " In conclusion, the reviewer observed, "We intendedhere to conclude this long article, when a strong report reached us ofcertain trans-Atlantic confessions, which, if genuine (though of this weknow nothing), assign a different author to these volumes than the partysuspected by our Scottish correspondents. Yet a critic may be excusedseizing upon the nearest suspicious person, on the principle happilyexpressed by Claverhouse in a letter to the Earl of Linlithgow. He hadbeen, it seems, in search of a gifted weaver who used to hold forth atconventicles. "I sent to seek the webster (weaver); they brought in his_brother_ for him; though he maybe cannot preach like his brother, Idoubt not but he is as well-principled as he, wherefore I thought itwould be no great fault to give him the trouble to go to the jail withthe rest. " Mr. Murray seems to have accepted the suggestion and wrote in January1817 to Mr. Blackwood: "I can assure you, but _in the greatest confidence_, that I havediscovered the author of all these Novels to be Thomas Scott, WalterScott's brother. He is now in Canada. I have no doubt but that Mr. Walter Scott did a great deal to the first 'Waverley Novel, ' because ofhis anxiety to serve his brother, and his doubt about the success of thework. This accounts for the many stories about it. Many persons hadpreviously heard from Mr. Scott, but you may rely on the certainty ofwhat I have told you. The whole country is starving for want of acomplete supply of the 'Tales of my Landlord, ' respecting the interestand merit of which there continues to be but one sentiment. " A few weeks later Blackwood wrote to Murray: _January_ 22, 1817. "It is an odd story here, that Mr. And Mrs. Thomas Scott are the authorsof all these Novels. I, however, still think, as Mr. Croker said to mein one of his letters, that if they were not by Mr. Walter Scott, theonly alternative is to give them to the devil, as by one or the otherthey must be written. " On the other hand, Bernard Barton wrote to Mr. Murray, and said that hehad "heard that James Hogg, the Ettrick Shepherd, was the author of'Tales of my Landlord, ' and that he had had intimation from himself tothat effect, " by no means an improbable story considering Hogg's vanity. Lady Mackintosh also wrote to Mr. Murray: "Did you hear who this _new_author of 'Waverley' and 'Guy Mannering' is? Mrs. Thomas Scott, as Mr. Thomas Scott assured Lord Selkirk (who had been in Canada), and hislordship, like Lord Monboddo, believes it. " Murray again wrote toBlackwood (February 15, 1817): "What is your theory as to the author of'Harold the Dauntless'? I will believe, till within an inch of my life, that the author of 'Tales of my Landlord' is Thomas Scott. " Thus matters remained until a few years later, when George IV. Was onhis memorable visit to Edinburgh. Walter Scott was one of the heroes ofthe occasion, and was the selected cicerone to the King. One day GeorgeIV. , in the sudden and abrupt manner which is peculiar to our RoyalFamily, asked Scott point-blank: "By the way, Scott, are you the authorof 'Waverley'?" Scott as abruptly answered: "No, Sire!" Having made thisanswer (said Mr. Thomas Mitchell, who communicated the information toMr. Murray some years later), "it is supposed that he considered it amatter of honour to keep the secret during the present King's reign. Ifthe least personal allusion is made to the subject in Sir Walter'spresence, Matthews says that his head gently drops upon his breast, andthat is a signal for the person to desist. " With respect to the first series of the "Tales of my Landlord, " so soonas the 6, 000 copies had been disposed of which the author, throughBallantyne, had covenanted as the maximum number to be published byMurray and Blackwood, the work reverted to Constable, and was publisheduniformly with the other works by the author of "Waverley. " CHAPTER XVIII ALLIANCE WITH BLACKWOOD--BLACKWOOD'S "EDINBURGH MAGAZINE"--TERMINATIONOF PARTNERSHIP We have already seen that Mr. Murray had some correspondence with ThomasCampbell in 1806 respecting the establishment of a monthly magazine;such an undertaking had long been a favourite scheme of his, and he hadmentioned the subject to many friends at home as well as abroad. When, therefore, Mr. Blackwood started his magazine, Murray was ready to enterinto his plans, and before long announced to the public that he hadbecome joint proprietor and publisher of Blackwood's _EdinburghMagazine_. There was nothing very striking in the early numbers of the _Magazine_, and it does not appear to have obtained a considerable circulation. Thefirst editors were Thomas Pringle, who--in conjunction with afriend--was the author of a poem entitled "The Institute, " and JamesCleghorn, best known as a contributor to the _Farmers' Magazine_. Constable, who was himself the proprietor of the _Scots Magazine_ aswell as of the _Farmers' Magazine_, desired to keep the monopoly of theScottish monthly periodicals in his own hands, and was greatly opposedto the new competitor. At all events, he contrived to draw away fromBlackwood Pringle and Cleghorn, and to start a new series of the _ScotsMagazine_ under the title of the _Edinburgh Magazine_. Blackwoodthereupon changed the name of his periodical to that by which it hassince been so well known. He undertook the editing himself, but soonobtained many able and indefatigable helpers. There were then two young advocates walking the Parliament House insearch of briefs. These were John Wilson (Christopher North) and JohnGibson Lockhart (afterwards editor of the _Quarterly_). Both wereWest-countrymen--Wilson, the son of a wealthy Paisley manufacturer, andLockhart, the son of the minister of Cambusnethan, in Lanarkshire--andboth had received the best of educations, Wilson, the robust Christian, having carried off the Newdigate prize at Oxford, and Lockhart, havinggained the Snell foundation at Glasgow, was sent to Balliol, and took afirst class in classics in 1813. These, with Dr. Maginn--under the_sobriquet_ of "Morgan O'Dogherty, "--Hogg--the Ettrick Shepherd, --DeQuincey--the Opium-eater, --Thomas Mitchell, and others, were theprincipal writers in _Blackwood_. No. 7, the first of the new series, created an unprecedented stir inEdinburgh. It came out on October 1, 1817, and sold very rapidly, butafter 10, 000 had been struck off it was suppressed, and could be hadneither for love nor money. The cause of this sudden attraction was anarticle headed "Translation from an Ancient Chaldee Manuscript, "purporting to be an extract from some newly discovered historicaldocument, every paragraph of which contained a special hit at someparticular person well known in Edinburgh society. There was very littleill-nature in it; at least, nothing like the amount which it excited inthose who were, or imagined themselves to be, caricatured in it. Constable, the "Crafty, " and Pringle and Cleghorn, editors of the_Edinburgh Magazine_, as well as Jeffrey, editor of the _EdinburghReview_, came in for their share of burlesque description. Among the persons delineated in the article were the publisher ofBlackwood's _Edinburgh Magazine_, whose name "was as it had been, thecolour of Ebony": indeed the name of Old Ebony long clung to thejournal. The principal writers of the article were themselves includedin the caricature. Hogg, the Ettrick Shepherd, was described as "thegreat wild boar from the forest of Lebanon, and he roused up his spirit, and I saw him whetting his dreadful tusks for the battle. " Wilson was"the beautiful leopard, " and Lockhart "the scorpion, "--names which wereafterwards hurled back at them with interest. Walter Scott was describedas "the great magician who dwelleth in the old fastness, hard by theriver Jordan, which is by the Border. " Mackenzie, Jameson, Leslie, Brewster, Tytler, Alison, M'Crie, Playfair, Lord Murray, the Duncans--infact, all the leading men of Edinburgh were hit off in the same fashion. Mrs. Garden, in her "Memorials of James Hogg, " says that "there is nodoubt that Hogg wrote the first draft; indeed, part of the original isstill in the possession of the family.... Some of the more irreverentpassages were not his, or were at all events largely added to by othersbefore publication. " [Footnote: Mrs. Garden's "Memorials of James Hogg, "p. 107. ] In a recent number of _Blackwood_ it is said that: "Hogg's name is nearly associated with the Chaldee Manuscript. Of coursehe claimed credit for having written the skit, and undoubtedly heoriginated the idea. The rough draft came from his pen, and we cannotspeak with certainty as to how it was subsequently manipulated. Butthere is every reason to believe that Wilson and Lockhart, probablyassisted by Sir William Hamilton, went to work upon it, and so alteredit that Hogg's original offspring was changed out of all knowledge. "[Footnote: _Blackwood's Magazine_, September 1882, pp. 368-9. ] The whole article was probably intended as a harmless joke; and thepersons indicated, had they been wise, might have joined in the laugh ortreated the matter with indifference. On the contrary, however, theyfelt profoundly indignant, and some of them commenced actions in theCourt of Session for the injuries done to their reputation. The same number of _Blackwood_ which contained the "Translation from anAncient Chaldee Manuscript, " contained two articles, one probably byWilson, on Coleridge's "Biographia Literaria, " the other, signed "Z, " byLockhart, being the first of a series on "The Cockney School of Poetry. "They were both clever, but abusive, and exceedingly personal in theirallusions. Murray expostulated with Blackwood on the personality of the articles. He feared lest they should be damaging to the permanent success of thejournal. Blackwood replied in a long letter, saying that the journal wasprospering, and that it was only Constable and his myrmidons who wereopposed to it, chiefly because of its success. In August 1818, Murray paid £1, 000 for a half share in the magazine, and from this time he took a deep and active interest in its progress, advising Blackwood as to its management, and urging him to introducemore foreign literary news, as well as more scientific information. Hedid not like the idea of two editors, who seem to have taken themanagement into their own hands. Subsequent numbers of _Blackwood_ contained other reviews of "TheCockney School of Poetry": Leigh Hunt, "the King of the Cockneys, " wasattacked in May, and in August it was the poet Keats who came under thecritic's lash, four months after Croker's famous review of "Endymion" inthe _Quarterly_. [Footnote: It was said that Keats was killed by thisbrief notice, of four pages, in the _Quarterly_; and Byron, in his "DonJuan, " gave credit to this statement: "Poor Keats, who was killed off by one critique, Just as he really promised something great, ... 'Tis strange, the mind, that very fiery particle, Should let itself be snuffed out by an article. " Leigh Hunt, one of Keats' warmest friends, when in Italy, told LordByron (as he relates in his Autobiography) the real state of the case, proving to him that the supposition of Keats' death being the result ofthe review was a mistake, and therefore, if printed, would be amisrepresentation. But the stroke of wit was not to be given up. EitherMr. Gifford, or "the poet-priest Milman, " has generally, buterroneously, been blamed for being the author of the review in the_Quarterly_, which, as is now well known, was written by Mr. Croker. ] The same number of _Blackwood_ contained a short article aboutHazlitt--elsewhere styled "pimpled Hazlitt. " It was very short, andentitled "Hazlitt cross-questioned. " Hazlitt considered the article fullof abuse, and commenced an action for libel against the proprietors ofthe magazine. Upon this Blackwood sent Hazlitt's threatening letter toMurray, with his remarks: _Mr. Blackwood to John Murray_. _September_ 22, 1818. "I suppose this fellow merely means to make a little bluster, and try ifhe can pick up a little money. There is nothing whatever actionable inthe paper.... The article on Hazlitt, which will commence next number, will be a most powerful one, and this business will not deprive it ofany of its edge. " _September_ 25, 1818. "What are people saying about that fellow Hazlitt attempting toprosecute? There was a rascally paragraph in the _Times_ of Friday lastmentioning the prosecution, and saying the magazine was a work filledwith private slander. My friends laugh at the idea of his prosecution. " Mr. Murray, however, became increasingly dissatisfied with this state ofthings; he never sympathised with the slashing criticisms of_Blackwood_, and strongly disapproved of the personalities, an opinionwhich was shared by most of his literary friends. At the same time hisname was on the title-page of the magazine, and he was jointlyresponsible with Blackwood for the articles which appeared there. In a long letter dated September 28, 1818, Mr. Murray deprecated thepersonality of the articles in the magazine, and entreated that they bekept out. If not, he begged that Blackwood would omit his name from thetitle-page of the work. A long correspondence took place during the month of October betweenMurray and Blackwood: the former continuing to declaim against thepersonality of the articles; the latter averring that there was nothingof the sort in the magazine. If Blackwood would only keep out thesepersonal attacks, Murray would take care to send him articles by Mr. Frere, Mr. Barrow, and others, which would enhance the popularity andrespectability of the publication. In October of this year was published an anonymous pamphlet, entitled"Hypocrisy Unveiled, " which raked up the whole of the joke contained inthe "Translation from an Ancient Chaldee Manuscript, " published a yearbefore. The number containing it had, as we have already seen, beensuppressed, because of the offence it had given to many persons ofcelebrity, while the general tone of bitterness and personality had beensubsequently modified, if not abandoned. Murray assured Blackwood thathis number for October 1818 was one of the best he had ever read, and hedesired him to "offer to his friends his very best thanks andcongratulations upon the production of so admirable a number. " "Withthis number, " he said, "you have given me a fulcrum upon which I willmove heaven and earth to get subscribers and contributors. " Indeed, several of the contributions in this surpassingly excellent number hadbeen sent to the Edinburgh publisher through the instrumentality ofMurray himself. "Hypocrisy Unveiled" was a lampoon of a scurrilous and commonplacecharacter, in which the leading contributors to and the publishers ofthe magazine were violently attacked. Both Murray and Blackwood, whowere abused openly, by name, resolved to take no notice of it; butLockhart and Wilson, who were mentioned under the thin disguise of "theScorpion" and "the Leopard, " were so nettled by the remarks onthemselves, that they, in October 1818, both sent challenges to theanonymous author, through the publisher of the pamphlet. This mostinjudicious step only increased their discomfiture, as the unknownwriter not only refused to proclaim his identity, but published andcirculated the challenges, together with a further attack on Lockhartand Wilson. This foolish disclosure caused bitter vexation to Murray, who wrote: _John Murray to Mr. Blackwood_. _October_ 27, 1818. My DEAR BLACKWOOD, I really can recollect no parallel to the palpable absurdity of your twofriends. If they had planned the most complete triumph to theiradversaries, nothing could have been so successfully effective. Theyhave actually given up their names, as the authors of the offencescharged upon them, by implication only, in the pamphlet. How they couldpossibly conceive that the writer of the pamphlet would be such an idiotas to quit his stronghold of concealment, and allow his head to bechopped off by exposure, I am at a loss to conceive.... I declare to God that had I known what I had so incautiously engaged in, I would not have undertaken what I have done, or have suffered what Ihave in my feelings and character--which no man had hitherto theslightest cause for assailing--I would not have done so for any sum.... In answer to these remonstrances Blackwood begged him to dismiss thematter from his mind, to preserve silence, and to do all that waspossible to increase the popularity of the magazine. The next number, he said, would be excellent and unexceptionable; and it proved to be so. The difficulty, however, was not yet over. While the principal editorsof the Chaldee Manuscript had thus revealed themselves to the author of"Hypocrisy Unveiled, " the London publisher of _Blackwood_ was, inNovember 1818, assailed by a biting pamphlet, entitled "A Letter to Mr. John Murray, of Albemarle Street, occasioned by his having undertakenthe publication, in London, of _Blackwood's Magazine_. " "The curse ofhis respectability, " he was told, had brought the letter upon him. "Yourname stands among the very highest in the department of Literature whichhas fallen to your lot: the eminent persons who have confided in you, and the works you have given to the world, have conduced to yourestablishment in the public favour; while your liberality, yourimpartiality, and your private motives, bear testimony to the justice ofyour claims to that honourable distinction. " Other criticisms of the same kind reached Mr. Murray's ear. Moore, inhis Diary (November 4, 1818), writes: "Received two most civil andanxious letters from the great 'Bibliopola Tryphon' Murray, expressinghis regret at the article in _Blackwood_, and his resolution to give upall concern in it if it contained any more such personalities. "[Footnote: "Memoirs, Journal, and Correspondence of Thomas Moore, " ii. 210. By Lord John Russell. ] Finally the Hazlitt action was settled. Blackwood gave to Murray thefollowing account of the matter: _December_ 16, 1818. "I have had two letters from Mr. Patmore, informing me that Mr. Hazlittwas to drop the prosecution. His agent has since applied to mineoffering to do this, if the expenses and a small sum for some charitywere paid. My agent told him he would certainly advise any client of histo get out of court, but that he would never advise me to pay anythingto be made a talk of, as a sum for a charity would be. He would adviseme, he said, to pay the expenses, and a trifle to Hazlitt himselfprivately. Hazlitt's agent agreed to this. " [Footnote: I have not beenable to discover what sum, if any, was paid to Hazlitt privately. ] Notwithstanding promises of amendment, Murray still complained of thepersonalities, and of the way in which the magazine was edited. He alsoobjected to the "echo of the _Edinburgh Review's_ abuse of SharonTurner. It was sufficient to give pain to me, and to my most valuedfriend. There was another ungentlemanly and uncalled-for thrust atThomas Moore. That just makes so many more enemies, unnecessarily; andyou not only deprive me of the communications of my friends, but youpositively provoke them to go over to your adversary. " It seemed impossible to exercise any control over the editors, andMurray had no alternative left but to expostulate, and if hisexpostulations were unheeded, to retire from the magazine. The lastcourse was that which he eventually decided to adopt, and the end of thepartnership in _Blackwood's Magazine_, which had long been anticipated, at length arrived. Murray's name appeared for the last time on No. 22, for January 1819; the following number bore no London publisher's name;but on the number for March the names of T. Cadell and W. Davies wereadvertised as the London agents for the magazine. On December 17, 1819, £1, 000 were remitted to Mr. Murray in payment ofthe sum which he had originally advanced to purchase his share, and hisconnection with _Blackwood's Magazine_ finally ceased. He thereupontransferred his agency for Scotland to Messrs. Oliver & Boyd, with whosefirm it has ever since remained. The friendly correspondence betweenMurray and Blackwood nevertheless continued, as they were jointlyinterested in several works of importance. In the course of the following year, "Christopher North" made thefollowing statement in _Blackwood's Magazine_ in "An Hour's Tête-à-têtewith the Public": "The Chaldee Manuscript, which appeared in our seventh number, gave usboth a lift and a shove. Nothing else was talked of for a long while;and after 10, 000 copies had been sold, it became a very great rarity, quite a desideratum.... The sale of the _Quarterly_ is about 14, 000, ofthe _Edinburgh_ upwards of 7, 000.... It is not our intention, atpresent, to suffer our sale to go beyond 17, 000.... Mr. Murray, underwhose auspices our _magnum opus_ issued for a few months from AlbemarleStreet, began to suspect that we might be eclipsing the _QuarterlyReview_. No such eclipse had been foretold; and Mr. Murray, being nogreat astronomer, was at a loss to know whether, in the darkness thatwas but too visible, we were eclipsing the _Quarterly_, or the_Quarterly_ eclipsing us. We accordingly took our pen, and erased hisname from our title-page, and he was once more happy. Under our presentpublishers we carry everything before us in London. " Mr. Murray took no notice of this statement, preferring, without anymore words, to be quit of his bargain. It need scarcely be added that when Mr. Blackwood had got his criticsand contributors well in hand--when his journal had passed its friskyand juvenile life of fun and frolic--when the personalities had ceasedto appear in its columns, and it had reached the years of judgment anddiscretion--and especially when its principal editor, Mr. John Wilson(Christopher North), had been appointed to the distinguished position ofProfessor of Moral Philosophy in the University of Edinburgh--thejournal took that high rank in periodical literature which it has eversince maintained. CHAPTER XIX WORKS PUBLISHED IN 1817-18--CORRESPONDENCE, ETC. -- Scott was now beginning to suffer from the terrible mental and bodilystrain to which he had subjected himself, and was shortly after seizedwith the illness to which reference has been made in a previous chapter, and which disabled him for some time. Blackwood informed Murray (March7, 1817) that Mr. Scott "has been most dangerously ill, with violentpain arising from spasmodic action in the stomach; but he is graduallygetting better. " For some time he remained in a state of exhaustion, unable either tostir for weakness and giddiness; or to read, for dazzling in his eyes;or to listen, for a whizzing sound in his ears--all indications of toomuch brain-work and mental worry. Yet, as soon as he was able to resumehis labours, we find him characteristically employed in helping hispoorer friends. _Mr. Blackwood to John Murray_. _May_ 28, 1817. "Mr. Scott and some of his friends, in order to raise a sum of money tomake the poor Shepherd comfortable, have projected a fourth edition of"The Queen's Wake, " with a few plates, to be published by subscription. We have inserted your name, as we have no doubt of your doing everythingyou can for the poor poet. The advertisement, which is excellent, iswritten by Mr. Scott. " Hogg was tempted by the Duke of Buccleuch's gift of a farm on EltriveLake to build himself a house, as Scott was doing, and applied to Murrayfor a loan of £50, which was granted. In acknowledging the receipt ofthe money he wrote: _Mr. James Hogg to John Murray_. _August_ 11, 1818. .... I am told Gifford has a hard prejudice against me, but I cannotbelieve it. I do not see how any man can have a prejudice against me. Hemay, indeed, consider me an intruder in the walks of literature, but Iam only a saunterer, and malign nobody who chooses to let me pass.... Iwas going to say before, but forgot, and said quite another thing, thatif Mr. Gifford would point out any light work for me to review for him, I'll bet a MS. Poem with him that I'll write it better than he expects. Yours ever most sincerely, JAMES HOGG. As Scott still remained the Great Unknown, Murray's correspondence withhim related principally to his articles in the _Quarterly_, to which hecontinued an occasional contributor. Murray suggested to him thesubjects of articles, and also requested him to beat up for a few morecontributors. He wanted an article on the Gypsies, and if Scott couldnot muster time to do it, he hoped that Mr. Erskine might be persuadedto favour him with an essay. Scott, however, in the midst of pain and distress, was now busy with his"Rob Roy, " which was issued towards the end of the year. A short interruption of his correspondence with Murray occurred--Scottbeing busy in getting the long buried and almost forgotten "Regalia ofScotland" exposed to light; he was also busy with one of his bestnovels, the "Heart of Midlothian. " Murray, knowing nothing of thesethings, again endeavoured to induce him to renew his correspondence, especially his articles for the _Review_. In response Scott contributedarticles on Kirkton's "History of the Church of Scotland, " on MilitaryBridges, and on Lord Orford's Memoirs. Towards the end of the year, Mr. Murray paid a visit to Edinburgh onbusiness, and after seeing Mr. Blackwood, made his way southward, to payhis promised visit to Walter Scott at Abbotsford, an account of whichhas already been given in the correspondence with Lord Byron. James Hogg, who was present at the meeting of Scott and Murray atAbbotsford, wrote to Murray as follows: _James Hogg to John Murray_. EDINBURGH, _February_ 20, 1819. MY DEAR SIR, I arrived here the day before yesterday for my spring campaign inliterature, drinking whiskey, etc. , and as I have not heard a word ofyou or from you since we parted on the top of the hill above Abbotsford, I dedicate my first letter from the metropolis to you. And first of all, I was rather disappointed in getting so little cracking with you at thattime. Scott and you had so much and so many people to converse about, whom nobody knew anything of but yourselves, that you two got all tosay, and some of us great men, who deem we know everything at home, found that we knew nothing. You did not even tell me what conditions youwere going to give me for my "Jacobite Relics of Scotland, " the firstpart of which will make its appearance this spring, and I think bidsfair to be popular.... Believe me, yours very faithfully, JAMES HOGG. After the discontinuance of Murray's business connection with Blackwood, described in the preceding chapter, James Hogg wrote in greatconsternation: _Mr. James Hogg to John Murray_, ELTRIVE, by SELKIRK, _December_ 9, 1829. MY DEAR SIR, By a letter from Blackwood to-day, I have the disagreeable intelligencethat circumstances have occurred which I fear will deprive me of you asa publisher--I hope never as a friend; for I here attest, though I haveheard some bitter things against you, that I never met with any manwhatever who, on so slight an acquaintance, has behaved to me so muchlike a gentleman. Blackwood asks to transfer your shares of my triflingworks to his new agents. I answered, "Never! without your permission. "As the "Jacobite Relics" are not yet published, and as they would onlyinvolve you further with one with whom you are going to close accounts, I gave him liberty to transfer the shares you were to have in them toMessrs. Cadell & Davies. But when I consider your handsome subscriptionfor "The Queen's Wake, " if you have the slightest inclination to retainyour shares of that work and "The Brownie, " as your name is on them, _along with Blackwood_, I would much rather, not only from affection, but interest, that you should continue to dispose of them. I know these books are of no avail to you; and that if you retain them, it will be on the same principle that you published them, namely, one offriendship for your humble poetical countryman. I'll never forget yourkindness; for I cannot think that I am tainted with the general vice ofauthors' _ingratitude_; and the first house that I call at in Londonwill be the one in Albemarle Street. I remain, ever yours most truly, JAMES HOGG. Murray did not cease to sell the Shepherd's works, and made arrangementswith Blackwood to continue his agency for them, and to account for thesales in the usual way. The name of Robert Owen is but little remembered now, but at the earlypart of the century he attained some notoriety from his endeavours toreform society. He was manager of the Lanark Cotton Mills, but in 1825he emigrated to America, and bought land on the Wabash whereon to starta model colony, called New Harmony. This enterprise failed, and hereturned to England in 1827. The following letter is in answer to hisexpressed intention of adding Mr. Murray's name to the title-page of thesecond edition of his "New View of Society. " _John Murray to Mr. Robert Owen_. _September_ 9, 1817. DEAR SIR, As it is totally inconsistent with my plans to allow my name to beassociated with any subject of so much political notoriety and debate asyour New System of Society, I trust that you will not consider it as anydiminution of personal regard if I request the favour of you to cause myname to be immediately struck out from every sort of advertisement thatis likely to appear upon this subject. I trust that a moment'sreflection will convince which I understand you talked of sending to myhouse. I beg leave again to repeat that I retain the same sentiments ofpersonal esteem, and that I am, dear Sir, Your faithful servant, JOHN MURRAY. Among the would-be poets was a young Quaker gentleman ofStockton-on-Tees who sent Mr. Murray a batch of poems. The publisherwrote an answer to his letter, which fell into the hands of the poet'sfather, who bore the same name as his son. The father answered: _Mr. Proctor to Mr. Murray_. ESTEEMED FRIEND, I feel very much obliged by thy refusing to _publish_ the papers sentthee by my son. I was entirely ignorant of anything of the kind, orshould have nipt it in the bud. On receipt of this, please burn thewhole that was sent thee, and at thy convenience inform me that it hasbeen done. With thanks for thy highly commendable care. I am respectfully, thy friend, JOHN PROCTOR. The number of persons who desired to publish poetry was surprising, evenSharon Turner, Murray's solicitor, whose valuable historical works hadbeen published by the Longmans, wrote to him about the publication ofpoems, which he had written "to idle away the evenings as well as hecould. " Murray answered his letter: _John Murray to Mr. Sharon Turner_. _November_ 17, 1817. I do not think it would be creditable to your name, or advantageous toyour more important works, that the present one should proceed from adifferent publisher. Many might fancy that Longman had declined it. Longman might suspect me of interference; and thus, in the uncertaintyof acting with propriety myself, I should have little hope of givingsatisfaction to you. I therefore refer the matter to your own feelingsand consideration. It has afforded me great pleasure to learn frequentlyof late that you are so much better. I hope during the winter, if wehave any, to send you many amusing books to shorten the tediousness oftime, and charm away your indisposition. Mrs. Murray is still up andwell, and desires me to send her best compliments to you and Mrs. Turner. Ever yours faithfully, J. MURRAY. Mr. Turner thanked Mr. Murray for his letter, and said that if heproceeded with his intentions he would adopt his advice. "I have alwaysfound Longman very kind and honourable, but I will not offer him nowwhat you think it right to decline. " During Gifford's now almost incessant attacks of illness, Mr. Crokertook charge of the _Quarterly Review_. The following letter embodiessome of his ideas as to editing: _Mr. Croker to John Murray_. BRIGHTON, _March_ 29, 1823. DEAR MURRAY, As I shall not be in Town in time to see you to-morrow, I send you somepapers. I return the _Poor_ article [Footnote: "On the Poor Laws, " byMr. Gleig. ] with its additions. Let the author's amendments be attendedto, and let his termination be inserted _between_ his former conclusionand that which I have written. It is a good article, not overdone andyet not dull. I return, to be set up, the article [by Captain Procter]on Southey's "Peninsular War. " It is very bad--a mere _abstractedhistory of the war itself_, and not in the least a _review of the book_. I have taken pains to remove some part of this error, but you must feelhow impossible it is to change the whole frame of such an article. Atouch thrown in here and there will give some relief, and the characterof a _review_ will be in some small degree preserved. This cursed systemof writing dissertations will be the death of us, and if I were to editanother number, I should make a great alteration in that particular. Butfor this time I must be satisfied with plastering up what I have nottime to rebuild. One thing I would do immediately if I were you. I wouldpay for articles of _one_ sheet as much as for articles of two andthree, and, in fact, I would _scarcely_ permit an article to exceed onesheet. I would reserve such extension for matters of great and immediateinterest and importance. I am delighted that W. [Footnote: ProbablyBlanco White. ] undertakes one, he will do it well; but remember thenecessity of _absolute secrecy_ on this point, and indeed on all others. If you were to publish such names as Cohen and Croker and Collinson andColeridge, the magical WE would have little effect, and your _Review_would be absolutely despised--_omne ignotum pro mirifico_. I suppose Ishall see you about twelve on Tuesday. Could you not get me a gay lightarticle or two? If I am to _edit_ for you, I cannot find time to_contribute_. Madame Campan's poem will more than expend my leisure. Icame here for a little recreation, and I am all day at the desk as if Iwere at the Admiralty. This Peninsular article has cost me two days'hard work, and is, after all, not worth the trouble; but we must havesomething about it, and it is, I suppose, too late to expect anythingbetter. Mr. Williams's article on Sir W. Scott [Lord Stowell] iscontemptible, and would expose your _Review_ to the ridicule of thewhole bar; but it may be made something of, and I like the subject. Ihad a long and amusing talk with the Chancellor the night before last, on his own and his brother's judgments; I wish I had time to embody ourconversation in an article. Yours ever, J. W. C. Southey is _very_ long, but as good as he is long--I have nearly donewith him. I write _very slowly_, and cannot write long. This letter iswritten at three sittings. No sooner had Croker got No. 56 of the _Review_ out of his hands than hemade a short visit to Paris. On this Mr. Barrow writes to Murray; _Mr. Barrow to John Murray_. _April_ 2, 1823. "Croker has run away to Paris, and left poor Gifford helpless. What willbecome of the _Quarterly?_ ... Poor Gifford told me yesterday that hefelt he _must_ give up the Editorship, and that the doctors had_ordered_ him to do so. " Some months later, Barrow wrote to Murray saying that he had seenGifford that morning: _Mr. Barrow to John Murray_. _August_ 18, 1823. "I told him to look out for some one to conduct the _Review_, but hecomes to no decision. I told him that you very naturally looked to himfor naming a proper person. He replied he had--Nassau Senior--but thatyou had taken some dislike to him. [Footnote: This, so far as can beascertained, was a groundless assumption on Mr. Gifford's part. ] I thensaid, 'You are now well; go on, and let neither Murray nor you troubleyourselves about a future editor yet; for should you even break down inthe midst of a number, I can only repeat that Croker and myself willbring it round, and a second number if necessary, to give him time tolook out for and fix upon a proper person, but that the work should notstop. ' I saw he did not like to continue the subject, and we talked ofsomething else. " Croker also was quite willing to enter into this scheme, and jointlywith Barrow to undertake the temporary conduct of the _Review_. Theyreceived much assistance also from Mr. J. T. Coleridge, then a youngbarrister. Mr. Coleridge, as will be noticed presently, became for atime editor of the _Quarterly_. "Mr. C. Is too long, " Gifford wrote toMurray, "and I am sorry for it. But he is a nice young man, and shouldbe encouraged. " CHAPTER XX HALLAM BASIL HALL--CRABBE--HOPE--HORACE AND JAMES SMITH In 1817 Mr. Murray published for Mr. Hallam his "View of the State ofEurope during the Middle Ages. " The acquaintance thus formed led to aclose friendship, which lasted unbroken till Mr. Murray's death. Mr. Murray published at this time a variety of books of travel. Some ofthese were sent to the Marquess of Abercorn--amongst them Mr. (afterwards Sir) Henry Ellis's "Proceedings of Lord Amherst's Embassy toChina, " [Footnote: "Journal of the Proceedings of the late Embassy toChina, comprising a Correct Narrative of the Public Transactions of theEmbassy, of the Voyage to and from China, and of the Journey from theMouth of the Peiho to the Return to Canton. " By Henry Ellis, Esq. , Secretary of the Embassy, and Third Commissioner. ] about which theMarchioness, at her husband's request, wrote to the publisher asfollows: _Marchioness of Abercorn to John Murray_, _December_ 4, 1817. "He returns Walpole, as he says since the age of fifteen he has read somuch Grecian history and antiquity that he has these last ten years beensick of the subject. He does not like Ellis's account of 'The Embassy toChina, ' [Footnote: Ellis seems to have been made very uncomfortable bythe publication of his book. It was severely reviewed in the _Times_, where it was said that the account (then in the press) by Clark Abel, M. D. , Principal Medical Officer and Naturalist to the Embassy, would begreatly superior. On this Ellis wrote to Murray (October 19, 1817): "Anindividual has seldom committed an act so detrimental to his interestsas I have done in this unfortunate publication; and I shall be too happywhen the lapse of time will allow of my utterly forgetting theoccurrence. I am already indifferent to literary criticism, and hadalmost forgotten Abel's approaching competition. " The work went throughtwo editions. ] but is pleased with Macleod's [Footnote: "Narrative of aVoyage in His Majesty's late ship _Alceste_ to the Yellow Sea, along theCoast of Corea, and through its numerous hitherto undiscovered Islandsto the Island of Lewchew, with an Account of her Shipwreck in theStraits of Gaspar. " By John MacLeod, surgeon of the _Alceste_. ]narrative. He bids me tell you to say the best and what is leastobnoxious of the [former] book. The composition and the narrative are sothoroughly wretched that he should be ashamed to let it stand in hislibrary. He will be obliged to you to send him Leyden's 'Africa. ' Leydenwas a friend of his, and desired leave to dedicate to him while helived. " Mr. Murray, in his reply, deprecated the severity of the Marquess ofAbercorn's criticism on the work of Sir H. Ellis, who had done the bestthat he could on a subject of exceeding interest. _John Murray to Lady Abercorn_. "I am now printing Captain Hall's account (he commanded the _Lyra_), andI will venture to assure your Ladyship that it is one of the mostdelightful books I ever read, and it is calculated to heal the woundinflicted by poor Ellis. I believe I desired my people to send youGodwin's novel, which is execrably bad. But in most cases book readersmust balance novelty against disappointment. And in reply to a request for more books to replace those condemned ordull, he asks dryly: "Shall I withhold 'Rob Roy' and 'Childe Harold' from your ladyship untiltheir merits have been ascertained? Even if an indifferent book, it issomething to be amongst the first to _say_ that it is bad. You will bealarmed, I fear, at having provoked so many reasons for sending you dullpublications.... I am printing two short but very clever novels by poorMiss Austen, the author of 'Pride and Prejudice. ' I send Leyden's'Africa' for Lord Abercorn, who will be glad to hear that the 'Life andPosthumous Writings' will be ready soon. " The Marchioness, in her answer to the above letter, thanked Mr. Murrayfor his entertaining answer to her letter, and said: _Marchioness of Abercorn to John Murray_. "Lord Abercorn says he thinks your conduct with respect to sending booksback that he does not like is particularly liberal. He bids me tell youhow very much he likes Mr. Macleod's book; we had seen some of it inmanuscript before it was published. We are very anxious for Hall'saccount, and I trust you will send it to us the moment you can get acopy finished. "No, indeed! you must not (though desirous you may be to punish us forthe severity of the criticism on poor Ellis) keep back for a moment 'RobRoy' or the fourth canto of 'Childe Harold. ' I have heard a good dealfrom Scotland that makes me continue _surmising_ who is the author ofthese novels. Our friend Walter paid a visit last summer to a gentlemanon the banks of Loch Lomond--the scene of Rob Roy's exploits--and was atgreat pains to learn all the traditions of the country regarding himfrom the clergyman and old people of the neighbourhood, of which he gota considerable stock. I am very glad to hear of a 'Life of Leyden. ' Hewas a very surprising young man, and his death is a great loss to theworld. Pray send us Miss Austen's novels the moment you can. LordAbercorn thinks them next to W. Scott's (if they are by W. Scott); it isa great pity that we shall have no more of hers. Who are the _QuarterlyReviewers_? I hear that Lady Morgan suspects Mr. Croker of havingreviewed her 'France, ' and intends to be revenged, etc. "Believe me to be yours, with great regard, "A. J. ABERCORN. " From many communications addressed to Mr. Murray about the beginning of1818, it appears that he had proposed to start a _Monthly Register_, [Footnote: The announcement ran thus: "On the third Saturday in January, 1818, will be published the first number of a NEW PERIODICAL JOURNAL, the object of which will be to convey to the public a great variety ofnew, original, and interesting matter; and by a methodical arrangementof all Inventions in the Arts, Discoveries in the Sciences, andNovelties in Literature, to enable the reader to keep pace with humanknowledge. To be printed uniformly with the QUARTERLY REVIEW. The priceby the year will be £2 2s. "] and he set up in print a specimen copy. Many of his correspondents offered to assist him, amongst others Mr. J. Macculloch, Lord Sheffield, Dr. Polidori, then settled at St. Peter's, Norwich, Mr. Bulmer of the British Museum, and many other contributors. He sent copies of the specimen number to Mr. Croker and received thefollowing candid reply: _Mr. Croker to John Murray_. _January_ 11, 1818. MY DEAR MURRAY, Our friend Sepping [Footnote: A naval surveyor. ] says, "Nothing isstronger than its weakest part, " and this is as true in book-making asin shipbuilding. I am sorry to say your _Register_ has, in my opinion, agreat many weak parts. It is for nobody's use; it is too popular andtrivial for the learned, and too abstruse and plodding for themultitude. The preface is not English, nor yet Scotch or Irish. It musthave been written by Lady Morgan. In the body of the volume, there isnot _one_ new nor curious article, unless it be Lady Hood's "TigerHunt. " In your Mechanics there is a miserable want of information, andin your Statistics there is a sad superabundance of American hyperboleand dulness mixed together, like the mud and gunpowder which, when aboy, I used to mix together to make a fizz. Your Poetry is so bad that Ilook upon it as your personal kindness to me that you did not put mylines under that head. Your criticism on Painting begins by callingWest's very pale horse "an extraordinary effort of human _genius_. " Yourcriticism on Sculpture begins by applauding _beforehand_ Mr. Wyatt's_impudent_ cenotaph. Your criticism on the Theatre begins by_denouncing_ the best production of its kind, 'The Beggar's Opera. ' Yourarticle on Engraving puts under the head of Italy a stone drawing madein Paris. Your own engraving of the Polar Regions is confused and dirty;and your article on the Polar Seas sets out with the assertion of a factof which I was profoundly ignorant, namely, that the PhysicalConstitution of the Globe is subject to _constant changes_ andrevolution. Of _constant changes_ I never heard, except in one ofCongreve's plays, in which the fair sex is accused of _constantinconstancy_; but suppose that for _constant_ you read _frequent_. Ishould wish you, for my own particular information, to add in a note afew instances of the Physical Changes in the Constitution of the Globe, which have occurred since the year 1781, in which I happened to be born. I know of none, and I should be sorry to go out of the world ignorant ofwhat has passed in my own time. You send me your proof "for my boldestcriticism. " I have hurried over rather than read through the pages, andI give you honestly, and as plainly as an infamous pen (the same, Ipresume, which drew your polar chart) will permit, my hasty impression. If you will call here to-morrow between twelve and one, I will talk withyou on the subject. Yours, J. W. C. The project was eventually abandoned. Murray entered into thearrangement, already described, with Blackwood, of the _EdinburghMagazine_. The article on the "Polar Ice" was inserted in the_Quarterly_. Towards the end of 1818, Mr. Crabbe called upon Mr. Murray and offeredto publish through him his "Tales of the Hall, " consisting of abouttwelve thousand lines. He also proposed to transfer to him from Mr. Colburn his other poems, so that the whole might be printed uniformly. Mr. Crabbe, who up to this period had received very little for hiswritings, was surprised when Mr. Murray offered him no less than £3, 000for the copyright of his poems. It seemed to him a mine of wealthcompared to all that he had yet received. The following morning(December 6) he breakfasted with Mr. Rogers, and Tom Moore was present. Crabbe told them of his good fortune, and of the magnificent offer hehad received. Rogers thought it was not enough, and that Crabbe shouldhave received £3, 000 for the "Tales of the Hall" alone, and that hewould try if the Longmans would not give more. He went to PaternosterRow accordingly, and tried the Longmans; but they would not give morethan £1, 000 for the new work and the copyright of the old poems--thatis, only one-third of what Murray had offered. [Footnote: "Memoirs, Journals, Correspondence, of Thomas Moore, " by Lord John Russell, ii. 237. ] When Crabbe was informed of this, he was in a state of greatconsternation. As Rogers had been bargaining with another publisher forbetter terms, the matter seemed still to be considered open; and in themeantime, if Murray were informed of the event, he might feel umbrageand withdraw his offer. Crabbe wrote to Murray on the subject, butreceived no answer. He had within his reach a prize far beyond his mostsanguine hopes, and now, by the over-officiousness of his friends, hewas in danger of losing it. In this crisis Rogers and Moore called uponMurray, and made enquiries on the subject of Crabbe's poems. "Oh, yes, "he said, "I have heard from Mr. Crabbe, and look upon the matter assettled. " Crabbe was thus released from all his fears. When he receivedthe bills for £3, 000, he insisted on taking them with him to Trowbridgeto show them to his son John. It proved after all that the Longmans were right in their offer toRogers; Murray was far too liberal. Moore, in his Diary (iii. 332), says, "Even if the whole of the edition (3, 000) were sold, Murray wouldstill be £1, 900 minus. " Crabbe had some difficulty in getting his oldpoems out of the hands of his former publisher, who wrote to him in astrain of the wildest indignation, and even threatened him with legalproceedings, but eventually the unsold stock, consisting of 2, 426copies, was handed over by Hatchard & Colburn to Mr. Murray, and nothingmore was heard of this controversy between them and the poet. "Anastasius, or Memoirs of a Modern Greek, written at the Close of the18th Century, " was published anonymously, and was confidently assertedto be the work of Lord Byron, as the only person capable of havingproduced it. When the author was announced to be Mr. Thomas Hope, ofDeepdene, some incredulity was expressed by the _literati_. The Countess of Blessington, in her "Conversations with Lord Byron, "says: "Byron spoke to-day in terms of high commendation of Hope's'Anastasius'; said he had wept bitterly over many pages of it, and fortwo reasons--first, that he had not written it; and, secondly, that Hopehad; for that it was necessary to like a man excessively to pardon hiswriting such a book--a book, he said, excelling all recent productionsas much in wit and talent as in true pathos. He added that he would havegiven his two most approved poems to have been the author of'Anastasius. '" The work was greatly read at the time, and went throughmany large editions. The refusal of the "Rejected Addresses, " by Horace and James Smith, wasone of Mr. Murray's few mistakes. Horace was a stockbroker, and James asolicitor. They were not generally known as authors, though theycontributed anonymously to the _New Monthly Magazine_, which wasconducted by Campbell the poet. In 1812 they produced a collectionpurporting to be "Rejected Addresses, presented for competition at theopening of Drury Lane Theatre. " They offered the collection to Mr. Murray for £20, but he declined to purchase the copyright. The Smithswere connected with Cadell the publisher, and Murray, thinking that theMS. Had been offered to and rejected by him, declined to look into it. The "Rejected Addresses" were eventually published by John Miller, andexcited a great deal of curiosity. They were considered to be the bestimitations of living poets ever made. Byron was delighted with them. Hewrote to Mr. Murray that he thought them "by far the best thing of thekind since the 'Rolliad. '" Crabbe said of the verses in imitation ofhimself, "In their versification they have done me admirably. " When heafterwards met Horace Smith, he seized both hands of the satirist, andsaid, with a good-humoured laugh, "Ah! my old enemy, how do you do?"Jeffrey said of the collection, "I take them, indeed, to be the verybest imitations (and often of difficult originals) that ever were made, and, considering their extent and variety, to indicate a talent to whichI do not know where to look for a parallel. " Murray had no sooner readthe volume than he spared no pains to become the publisher, but it wasnot until after the appearance of the sixteenth edition that he was ableto purchase the copyright for £131. Towards the end of 1819, Mr. Murray was threatened with an action onaccount of certain articles which had appeared in Nos. 37 and 38 of the_Quarterly_ relative to the campaign in Italy against Murat, King ofNaples. The first was written by Dr. Reginald (afterwards Bishop) Heber, under the title of "Military and Political Power of Russia, by SirRobert Wilson"; the second was entitled "Sir Robert Wilson's Reply. "Colonel Macirone occupied a very unimportant place in both articles. Hehad been in the service of Murat while King of Naples, and acted as hisaide-de-camp, which post he retained after Murat became engaged inhostilities with Austria, then in alliance with England. Macirone wasfurnished with a passport for _himself_ as envoy of the Allied Powers, and provided with another passport for Murat, under the name of CountLipona, to be used by him in case he abandoned his claim to the throneof Naples. Murat indignantly declined the proposal, and took refuge inCorsica. Yet Macirone delivered to Murat the passport. Not only so, buthe deliberately misled Captain Bastard, the commander of a small Englishsquadron which had been stationed at Bastia to intercept Murat in theevent of his embarking for the purpose of regaining his throne atNaples. Murat embarked, landed in Italy without interruption, and wassoon after defeated and taken prisoner. He thereupon endeavoured to usethe passport which Macirone had given him, to secure his release, but itwas too late; he was tried and shot at Pizzo. The reviewer spoke ofColonel Macirone in no very measured terms. "For Murat, " he said, "wecannot feel respect, but we feel very considerable pity. Of Mr. Macironewe are tempted to predict that he has little reason to apprehend thehonourable mode of death which was inflicted on his master. _His_vocation seems to be another kind of exit. " Macirone gave notice of an action for damages, and claimed no less than£10, 000. Serjeant Copley (afterwards Lord Lyndhurst), thenSolicitor-General, and Mr. Gurney, were retained for Mr. Murray by hislegal adviser Mr. Sharon Turner. The case came on, and on the Bench were seated the Duke of Wellington, Lord Liverpool, and other leading statesmen, who had been subpoenaed aswitnesses for the defence. One of the Ridgways, publishers, had alsobeen subpoenaed with an accredited copy of Macirone's book; but it wasnot necessary to produce him as a witness, as Mr. Ball, the counsel forMacirone, _quoted_ passages from it, and thus made the entire bookavailable as evidence for the defendant, a proceeding of which SerjeantCopley availed himself with telling effect. He substantiated the factsstated in the _Quarterly_ article by passages quoted from ColonelMacirone's own "Memoirs. " Before he had concluded his speech, it becameobvious that the Jury had arrived at the conclusion to which he wishedto lead them; but he went on to drive the conclusion home by a splendidperoration. [Footnote: Given in Sir Theodore Martin's "Life of LordLyudhurst, " p. 170. ] The Jury intimated that they were all agreed; butthe Judge, as a matter of precaution, proceeded to charge them on theevidence placed before them; and as soon as he had concluded, the Jury, without retiring from the box, at once returned their verdict for thedefendant. Although Mr. Murray had now a house in the country, he was almostinvariably to be found at Albemarle Street. We find, in one of hisletters to Blackwood, dated Wimbledon, May 22, 1819, the following: "Ihave been unwell with bile and rheumatism, and have come to a littleplace here, which I have bought lately, for a few days to recruit. " The following description of a reception at Mr. Murray's is taken fromthe "Autobiography" of Mrs. Bray, the novelist. She relates that in theautumn of 1819 she made a visit to Mr. Murray, with her first husband, Charles Stothard, son of the well-known artist, for the purpose ofshowing him the illustrations of his "Letters from Normandy andBrittany. " "We did not know, " she says, "that Mr. Murray held daily from aboutthree to five o'clock a literary levée at his house. In this way hegathered round him many of the most eminent men of the time. On calling, we sent up our cards, and finding he was engaged, proposed to retreat, when Mr. Murray himself appeared and insisted on our coming up. I wasintroduced to him by my husband, and welcomed by him with all thecordiality of an old acquaintance. He said Sir Walter Scott was there, and he thought that we should like to see him, and to be introduced tohim. 'You will know him at once, ' added Mr. Murray, 'he is sitting onthe sofa near the fire-place. ' We found Sir Walter talking to Mr. Gifford, then the Editor of the _Quarterly Review_. The room was filledwith men and women, and among them several of the principal authors andauthoresses of the day; but my attention was so fixed on Sir Walter andMr. Gifford that I took little notice of the rest. Many of those presentwere engaged in looking at and making remarks upon a drawing, whichrepresented a Venetian Countess (Guiccioli), the favourite, but not veryrespectable friend of Lord Byron. Mr. Murray made his way through thethrong in order to lead us up to Sir Walter. We were introduced. Mr. Murray, anxious to remove the awkwardness of a first introduction, wished to say something which would engage a conversation betweenourselves and Sir Walter Scott, and asked Charles if he happened to haveabout him his drawing of the Bayeux tapestry to show to Sir Walter. Charles smiled and said 'No'; but the saying answered the desired end;something had been said that led to conversation, and Sir Walter, Gifford, Mr. Murray, and Charles chatted on, and I listened. "Gifford looked very aged, his face much wrinkled, and he seemed to bein declining health; his dress was careless, and his cravat andwaistcoat covered with snuff. There was an antique, philosophic castabout his head and countenance, better adapted to exact a feeling ofcuriosity in a stranger than the head of Sir Walter Scott; the latterseemed more a man of this world's mould. Such, too, was his character;for, with all his fine genius, Sir Walter would never have been sosuccessful an author, had he not possessed so large a share of commonsense, united to a business-like method of conducting his affairs, eventhose which perhaps I might venture to call the affairs of imagination. We took our leave; and before we got further than the first landing, wemet Mr. Murray conducting Sir Walter downstairs; they were going to havea private chat before the departure of the latter. " [Footnote: "Mrs. Bray's Autobiography, " pp. 145-7. ] CHAPTER XXI MEMOIRS OF LADY HERVEY AND HORACE WALPOLE--BELZONI--MILMAN--SOUTHEY--MRS. RUNDELL, ETC. About the beginning of 1819 the question of publishing the letters andreminiscences of Lady Hervey, grandmother of the Earl of Mulgrave, wasbrought under the notice of Mr. Murray. Lady Hervey was the daughter ofBrigadier-General Lepel, and the wife of Lord Hervey of Ickworth, authorof the "Memoirs of the Court of George II. And Queen Caroline. " Herletters formed a sort of anecdotal history of the politics andliterature of her times. A mysterious attachment is said to have existedbetween her and Lord Chesterfield, who, in his letters to his son, desired him never to mention her name when he could avoid it, while she, on the other hand, adopted all Lord Chesterfield's opinions, asafterwards appeared in the aforesaid letters. Mr. Walter Hamilton, author of the "Gazetteer of India, " an old and intimate friend of Mr. Murray, who first brought the subject under Mr. Murray's notice, said, "Lady Hervey writes more like a man than a woman, something like LadyM. W. Montagu, and in giving her opinion she never minces matters. " Mr. Hamilton recommended that Archdeacon Coxe, author of the "Lives of SirRobert and Horace Walpole, " should be the editor. Mr. Murray, however, consulted his _fidus Achates_, Mr. Croker; and, putting the letters inhis hands, asked him to peruse them, and, if he approved, to edit them. The following was Mr. Croker's answer: _Mr. Croker to John Murray_. _November_ 22, 1820. DEAR MURRAY, I shall do more than you ask. I shall give you a biographicalsketch--sketch, do you hear?--of Lady Hervey, and notes on her letters, in which I shall endeavour to enliven a little the _sameness_ of myauthor. Don't think that I say _sameness_ in derogation of dear MaryLepel's _powers_ of entertainment. I have been _in love_ with her a longtime; which, as she was dead twenty years before I was born, I maywithout indiscretion avow; but all these letters being written in ajournal style and to one person, there is a want of that variety whichLady Hervey's mind was capable of giving. I have applied to her familyfor a little assistance; hitherto without success; and I think, as a_lover_ of Lady Hervey's, I might reasonably resent the littleenthusiasm I find that her descendants felt about her. In order toenable me to do this little job for you, I wish you would procure for mea file, if such a thing exists, of any newspaper from about 1740 to1758, at which latter date the _Annual Register_ begins, as I remember. So many little circumstances are mentioned in letters, and forgotten inhistory, that without some such guide, I shall make but blind work ofit. If it be necessary, I will go to the Museum and _grab_ them, as mybetters have done before me. My dear little Nony [Footnote: Mr. Croker'sadopted daughter, afterwards married to Sir George Barrow. ] was worselast night, and not better all to-day; but this evening they make mehappy by saying that she is decidedly improved. Yours ever, J. W. CROKER. Send me "Walpoliana, " I have lost or mislaid mine. Are there any memoirsabout the date of 1743, or later, beside Bubb's? That Mr. Croker made all haste and exercised his usual painstakingindustry in doing "this little job" for Mr. Murray will be evident fromthe following letters: _Mr. Croker to John Murray_. _December_ 27, 1820. DEAR MURRAY, I have done "Lady Hervey. " I hear that there is a Mr. Vincent in theTreasury, the son of a Mr. And Mrs. Vincent, to whom the late GeneralHervey, the favourite son of Lady Hervey, left his fortune and hispapers. Could you find out who they are? Nothing is more surprising thanthe ignorance in which I find all Lady Hervey's descendants about her. Most of them never heard her maiden name. It reminds one of Walpolewriting to George Montagu, to tell him who his grandmother was! I amanxious to knock off this task whilst what little I know of it is freshin my recollection; for I foresee that much of the entertainment of thework must depend on the elucidations in the Notes. Yours, J. W. C. The publication of Lady Hervey's letters in 1821 was so successful thatMr. Croker was afterwards induced to edit, with great advantage, lettersand memorials of a similar character. [Footnote: As late as 1848, Mr. Croker edited Lord Hervey's "Memoirs of the Court of George II. AndQueen Caroline, " from the family archives at Ickworth. The editor in hispreface said that Lord Hervey was almost the Boswell of George II. AndQueen Caroline. ] The next important _mémoires pour servir_ were brought under Mr. Murray's notice by Lord Holland, in the following letter: _Lord Holland to John Murray_. HOLLAND HOUSE, _November_ 1820. SIR, I wrote a letter to you last week which by some accident LordLauderdale, who had taken charge of it, has mislaid. The object of itwas to request you to call here some morning, and to let me know thehour by a line by two-penny post. I am authorized to dispose of twohistorical works, the one a short but admirably written and interestingmemoir of the late Lord Waldegrave, who was a favourite of George II. , and governor of George III. When Prince of Wales. The second consists ofthree close-written volumes of "Memoirs by Horace Walpole" (afterwardsLord Orford), which comprise the last nine years of George II. 's reign. I am anxious to give you the refusal of them, as I hear you have alreadyexpressed a wish to publish anything of this kind written by HoraceWalpole, and had indirectly conveyed that wish to Lord Waldegrave, towhom these and many other MSS. Of that lively and laborious writerbelong. Lord Lauderdale has offered to assist me in adjusting the termsof the agreement, and perhaps you will arrange with him; he lives atWarren's Hotel, Waterloo Place, where you can make it convenient to meethim. I would meet you there, or call at your house; but before you canmake any specific offer, you will no doubt like to look at the MSS. , which are here, and which (not being mine) I do not like to exposeunnecessarily to the risk even of a removal to London and back again. I am, Sir, your obedient humble Servant, etc. , VASSALL HOLLAND. It would appear that Mr. Murray called upon Lord Holland and looked overthe MSS. , but made no proposal to purchase the papers. The matter layover until Lord Holland again addressed Mr. Murray. _Lord Holland to John Murray_. "It appears that you are either not aware of the interesting nature ofthe MSS. Which I showed you, or that the indifference produced by thepresent frenzy about the Queen's business [Footnote: The trial of QueenCaroline was then occupying public attention. ] to all literarypublications, has discouraged you from an undertaking in which you wouldotherwise engage most willingly. However, to come to the point. I haveconsulted Lord Waldegrave on the subject, and we agree that the twoworks, viz. His grandfather, Lord Waldegrave's "Memoirs, " and HoraceWalpole's "Memoirs of the Last Nine Years of George II. , " should not besold for less than 3, 000 guineas. If that sum would meet your ideas, orif you have any other offer to make, I will thank you to let me knowbefore the second of next month. " Three thousand guineas was certainly a very large price to ask for theMemoirs, and Mr. Murray hesitated very much before acceding to LordHolland's proposal. He requested to have the MSS. For the purpose ofconsulting his literary adviser--probably Mr. Croker, though thefollowing remarks, now before us, are not in his handwriting. "This book of yours, " says the critic, "is a singular production. It isill-written, deficient in grammar, and often in English; and yet itinterests and even amuses. Now, the subjects of it are all, I suppose, gone _ad plures_; otherwise it would be intolerable. The writer richlydeserves a licking or a cudgelling to every page, and yet I am ashamedto say I have travelled unwearied with him through the whole, dividedbetween a grin and a scowl. I never saw nor heard of such an animal as asplenetic, bustling kind of a poco-curante. By the way, if you happen tohear of any plan for making me a king, be so good as to say that I amdeceased; or tell any other good-natured lie to put the king-makers offtheir purpose. I really cannot submit to be the only slave in thenation, especially when I have a crossing to sweep within five yards ofmy door, and may gain my bread with less ill-usage than a king isobliged to put up with. If half that is here told be true, Lord Hollandseems to me to tread on 'ignes Suppositos cineri doloso' in retouching any part of the manuscript. He is so perfectly kind andgood-natured, that he will feel more than any man the complaints ofpartiality and injustice; and where he is to stop, I see not. There isso much abuse that little is to be gained by an occasional erasure, while suspicion is excited. He would have consulted his quiet more byleaving the author to bear the blame of his own scandal. " Notwithstanding this adverse judgment, Mr. Murray was disposed to buythe Memoirs. Lord Holland drove a very hard bargain, and endeavoured toobtain better terms from other publishers, but he could not, andeventually Mr. Murray paid to Lord Waldegrave, through Lord Holland, thesum of £2, 500 on November 1, 1821, for the Waldegrave and WalpoleMemoirs. They were edited by Lord Holland, who wrote a preface to each, and were published in the following year, but never repaid theirexpenses. After suffering considerable loss by this venture, Mr. Murray's rights were sold, after his death, to Mr. Colburn. The last of the _mémoires pour servir_ to which we shall here refer wasthe Letters of the Countess of Suffolk, bedchamber woman to the Princessof Wales (Caroline of Anspach), and a favourite of the Prince of Wales, afterwards George II. The Suffolk papers were admirably edited by Mr. Croker. Thackeray, in his "Lecture on George the Second, " says of hiswork: "Even Croker, who edited her letters, loves her, and has thatregard for her with which her sweet graciousness seems to have inspiredalmost all men, and some women, who came near her. " The following letterof Croker shows the spirit in which he began to edit the Countess'sletters: _Mr. Croker to John Murray_. _May_ 29, 1822. DEAR MURRAY, As you told me that you are desirous of publishing the Suffolk volume byNovember, and as I have, all my life, had an aversion to making any onewait for me, I am anxious to begin my work upon them, and, if we are tobe out by November, I presume it is high time. I must beg of you toanswer me the following questions. 1st. What shape will you adopt? I think the correspondence of a naturerather too light for a quarto, and yet it would look well on the sameshelf with Horace Walpole's works. If you should prefer an octavo, likeLady Hervey's letters, the papers would furnish two volumes. I, for mypart, should prefer the quarto size, which is a great favourite with me, and the letters of such persons as Pope, Swift, and Gay, the Duchessesof Buckingham, Queensberry, and Marlbro', Lords Peterborough, Chesterfield, Bathurst, and Lansdowne, Messrs. Pitt, Pulteney, Pelham, Grenville, and Horace Walpole, seem to me almost to justify themagnificence of the quarto; though, in truth, all their epistles are, inits narrowest sense, _familiar_, and treat chiefly of tittle-tattle. Decide, however, on your own view of your interests, only recollect thatthese papers are not to cost you more than "Belshazzar, " [Footnote: Mr. Milman's poem, for which Mr. Murray paid 500 guineas. ] which I take tobe of about the intrinsic value of the _writings on the walls_, and nota third of what you have given Mr. Crayon for his portrait of SquireBracebridge. 2nd. Do you intend to have any portraits? One of Lady Suffolk is almostindispensable, and would be enough. There are two of her at StrawberryHill; one, I think, a print, and neither, if I forget not, very good. There is also a print, an unassuming one, in Walpole's works, but a goodartist would make something out of any of these, if even we can getnothing better to make our copy from. If you were to increase yournumber of portraits, I would add the Duchess of Queensberry, from apicture at Dalkeith which is alluded to in the letters; Lady Hervey andher beautiful friend, Mary Bellenden. They are in Walpole's works; LadyHervey rather mawkish, but the Bellenden charming. I dare say theseplates could now be bought cheap, and retouched from the originals, which would make them better than ever they were. Lady Vere (sister ofLady Temple, which latter is engraved in Park's edition of the "NobleAuthors") was a lively writer, and is much distinguished in thiscorrespondence. Of the men, I should propose Lord Peterborough, whoseportraits are little known; Lord Liverpool has one of him, not, however, very characteristic. Mr. Pulteney is also little known, but he has beenlately re-published in the Kit-cat Club. Of _our Horace_ there is not adecent engraving anywhere. I presume that there must be a good originalof him somewhere. Whatever you mean to do on this point, you should cometo an early determination and put the works in hand. 3rd. I mean, if you approve, to prefix a biographical sketch of Mrs. Howard and two or three of those beautiful characters with which, inprose and verse, the greatest wits of the last century honoured her andthemselves. To the first letter of each remarkable correspondent I wouldalso affix a slight notice, and I would add, at the foot of the page, notes in the style of those on Lady Hervey. Let me know whether thisplan suits your fancy. 4th. All the letters of Swift, except one or two, in this collection areprinted (though not always accurately) in Scott's edition of his works. Yet I think it would be proper to reprint them from the originals, because they elucidate much of Lady Suffolk's history, and hercorrespondence could not be said to be complete without them. Let meknow your wishes on this point. 5th. My materials are numerous, though perhaps the pieces of great meritare not many. I must therefore beg of you to set up, in the form andtype you wish to adopt, the sheet which I send you, and you must sayabout how many pages you wish your volume, or volumes, to be. I willthen select as much of the most interesting as will fill the space whichyou may desire to occupy. Yours truly, J. W. CROKER. Mr. Croker also consented to edit the letters of Mrs. Delany to Mr. Hamilton, 1779-88, containing many anecdotes relating to the RoyalFamily. _Mr. Croker to John Murray_. "I have shown Mrs. Delany's MS. Letters to the Prince Regent; he wasmuch entertained with this revival of old times in his recollection, and_he says that every word of it is true_. You know that H. R. H. Has awonderful memory, and particularly for things of that kind. Hiscertificate of Mrs. Delany's veracity will therefore be probably of someweight with you. As to the letter-writing powers of Mrs. Delany, thespecimen inclines me to doubt. Her style seems stiff and formal, andthough these two letters, which describe a peculiar kind of scene, havea good deal of interest in them, I do not hope for the same amusementfrom the rest of the collection. Poverty, obscurity, general ill-health, and blindness are but unpromising qualifications for making an agreeablevolume of letters. If a shopkeeper at Portsmouth were to write his life, the extracts of what relates to the two days of the Imperial and Royalvisit of 1814 would be amusing, though all the rest of the half centuryof his life would be intolerably tedious. I therefore counsel you not tobuy the pig in Miss Hamilton's bag (though she is a most respectablelady), but ask to see the whole collection before you bid. " The whole collection was obtained, and, with some corrections andelucidations, the volume of letters was given to the world by Mr. Murrayin 1821. In May 1820 Mr. Murray requested Mr. Croker to edit Horace Walpole's"Reminiscences. " Mr. Croker replied, saying: "I should certainly likethe task very well if I felt a little better satisfied of my ability toperform it. Something towards such a work I would certainly contribute, for I have always loved that kind of tea-table history. " Not being ableto undertake the work himself, Mr. Croker recommended Mr. Murray toapply to Miss Berry, the editor of Lady Russell's letters. "The Life, "he said, "by which those letters were preceded, is a beautiful piece ofbiography, and shows, besides higher qualities, much of that taste whicha commentator on the 'Reminiscences' ought to have. " The work wasaccordingly placed in the hands of Miss Berry, who edited itsatisfactorily, and it was published by Mr. Murray in the course of thefollowing year. Dr. Tomline, while Bishop of Winchester, entered into a correspondencewith Mr. Murray respecting the "Life of William Pitt. " In December1820, Dr. Tomline said he had brought the Memoirs down to theDeclaration of War by France against Great Britain on February I, 1793, and that the whole would make two volumes quarto. Until he became Bishopof Lincoln, Dr. Tomline had been Pitt's secretary, and from theopportunities he had possessed, there was promise here of a great work;but it was not well executed, and though a continuation was promised, itnever appeared. When the work was sent to Mr. Gifford, he wrote to Mr. Murray that it was not at all what he expected, for it contained nothingof Pitt's private history. "He seems to be uneasy until he gets back tohis Parliamentary papers. Yet it can hardly fail to be pretty widelyinteresting; but I would not have you make yourself too uneasy aboutthese things. Pitt's name, and the Bishop's, will make the work sell. "Gifford was right. The "Life" went to a fourth edition in the followingyear. Among Mr. Murray's devoted friends and adherents was Giovanni Belzoni, who, born at Padua in 1778, had, when a young man at Rome, intended todevote himself to the monastic life, but the French invasion of the cityaltered his purpose, and, instead of being a monk, he became an athlete. He was a man of gigantic physical power, and went from place to place, gaining his living in England, as elsewhere, as a posture-master, and byexhibiting at shows his great feats of strength. He made enough by thiswork to enable him to visit Egypt, where he erected hydraulic machinesfor the Pasha, and, through the influence of Mr. Salt, the BritishConsul, was employed to remove from Thebes, and ship for England, thecolossal bust commonly called the Young Memnon. His knowledge ofmechanics enabled him to accomplish this with great dexterity, and thehead, now in the British Museum, is one of the finest specimens ofEgyptian sculpture. Belzoni, after performing this task, made further investigations amongthe Egyptian tombs and temples. He was the first to open the greattemple of Ipsambul, cut in the side of a mountain, and at that time shutin by an accumulation of sand. Encouraged by these successes, he, in1817, made a second journey to Upper Egypt and Nubia, and brought tolight at Carnac several colossal heads of granite, now in the BritishMuseum. After some further explorations among the tombs and temples, forwhich he was liberally paid by Mr. Salt, Belzoni returned to Englandwith numerous drawings, casts, and many important works of Egyptian art. He called upon Mr. Murray, with the view of publishing the results ofhis investigations, which in due course were issued under the title of"Narrative of the Operations and recent Discoveries within the Pyramids, Temples, Tombs, and Excavations in Egypt and Nubia. " It was a very expensive book to arrange and publish, but nothing dauntedMr. Murray when a new and original work was brought under his notice. Although only 1, 000 copies were printed, the payments to Belzoni and histranslators, as well as for plates and engravings, amounted to over£2, 163. The preparation of the work gave rise to no little difficulty, for Belzoni declined all help beyond that of the individual who wasemployed to copy out or translate his manuscript and correct the press. "As I make my discoveries alone, " he said, "I have been anxious to writemy book by myself, though in so doing the reader will consider me, withgreat propriety, guilty of temerity; but the public will, perhaps, gainin the fidelity of my narration what it loses in elegance. " Lord Byron, to whom Mr. Murray sent a copy of his work, said: "Belzoni _is_ a grandtraveller, and his English is very prettily broken. " Belzoni was a very interesting character, and a man of great naturalrefinement. After the publication of his work, he became one of thefashionable lions of London, but was very sensitive about his earlycareer, and very sedulous to sink the posture-master in the traveller. He was often present at Mr. Murray's receptions; and on one particularoccasion he was invited to join the family circle in Albemarle Street onthe last evening of 1822, to see the Old Year out and the New Year in. All Mr. Murray's young people were present, as well as the entireD'Israeli family and Crofton Croker. After a merry game of Pope Joan, Mr. Murray presented each of the company with a pocket-book as a NewYear's gift. A special bowl of punch was brewed for the occasion, and, while it was being prepared, Mr. Isaac D'Israeli took up CroftonCroker's pocket-book, and with his pencil wrote the following impromptuwords: "Gigantic Belzoni at Pope Joan and tea. What a group of mere puppets we seem beside thee;Which, our kind host perceiving, with infinite zest, Gives us Punch at our supper, to keep up the jest. " The lines were pronounced to be excellent, and Belzoni, wishing to sharein the enjoyment, desired to see the words. He read the last line twiceover, and then, his eyes flashing fire, he exclaimed, "I am betrayed!"and suddenly left the room. Crofton Croker called upon Belzoni toascertain the reason for his abrupt departure from Mr. Murray's, and wasinformed that he considered the lines to be an insulting allusion to hisearly career as a showman. Croker assured him that neither Murray norD'Israeli knew anything of his former life; finally he prevailed uponBelzoni to accompany him to Mr. Murray's, who for the first time learntthat the celebrated Egyptian explorer had many years before been anitinerant exhibitor in England. In 1823 Belzoni set out for Morocco, intending to penetrate thence toEastern Africa; he wrote to Mr. Murray from Gibraltar, thanking him formany acts of kindness, and again from Tangier. _M. G. Belzoni to John Murray_. _April_ 10, 1823. "I have just received permission from H. M. The Emperor of Morocco to goto Fez, and am in hopes to obtain his approbation to enter the desertalong with the caravan to Soudan. The letter of introduction from Mr. Wilmot to Mr. Douglas has been of much importance to me; this gentlemanfortunately finds pleasure in affording me all the assistance in hispower to promote my wishes, a circumstance which I have not beenaccustomed to meet in some other parts of Africa. I shall do myself thepleasure to acquaint you of my further progress at Fez, if not from someother part of Morocco. " Belzoni would appear to have changed his intention, and endeavoured topenetrate to Timbuctoo from Benin, where, however, he was attacked bydysentery, and died a short time after the above letter was written. Like many other men of Herculean power, he was not eager to exhibit hisstrength; but on one occasion he gave proof of it in the followingcircumstances. Mr. Murray had asked him to accompany him to theCoronation of George IV. They had tickets of admittance to WestminsterHall, but on arriving there they found that the sudden advent of QueenCaroline, attended by a mob claiming admission to the Abbey, had alarmedthe authorities, who caused all the doors to be shut. That by which theyshould have entered was held close and guarded by several stalwartjanitors. Belzoni thereupon advanced to the door, and, in spite of theefforts of these guardians, including Tom Crib and others of thepugilistic corps who had been engaged as constables, opened it withease, and admitted himself and Mr. Murray. In 1820 Mr. Murray was invited to publish "The Fall of Jerusalem, aSacred Tragedy, " by the Rev. H. H. Milman, afterwards Dean of St. Paul's. As usual, he consulted Mr. Gifford, whose opinion was most favourable. "I have been more and more struck, " he said, "with the innumerablebeauties in Milman's 'Fall of Jerusalem. '" Mr. Murray requested the author to state his own price for thecopyright, and Mr. Milman wrote: "I am totally at a loss to fix one. I think I might decide whether anoffer were exceedingly high or exceedingly low, whether a Byron or Scottprice, or such as is given to the first essay of a new author. Thoughthe 'Fall of Jerusalem' might demand an Israelitish bargain, yet I shallnot be a Jew further than my poetry. Make a liberal offer, such as theprospect will warrant, and I will at once reply, but I am neither ablenor inclined to name a price.... As I am at present not very faradvanced in life, I may hereafter have further dealings with the Press, and, of course, where I meet with liberality shall hope to make a returnin the same way. It has been rather a favourite scheme of mine, thoughthis drama cannot appear on the boards, to show it before it ispublished to my friend Mrs. Siddons, who perhaps might like to read it, either at home or abroad. I have not even hinted at such a thing to her, so that this is mere uncertainty, and, before it is printed, it would bein vain to think of it, as the old lady's eyes and MS. Could never agreetogether. "P. S. --I ought to have said that I am very glad of Aristarchus'[Grifford's] approval. And, by the way, I think, if I help you inredeeming your character from 'Don Juan, ' the 'Hetaerse' in the_Quarterly_, [Footnote: Mitchell's article on "Female Society inGreece, " _Q. R. _ No. 43. ] etc. , you ought to estimate that very highly. " Mr. Murray offered Mr. Milman five hundred guineas for the copyright, to which the author replied: "Your offer appears to me very fair, and Ishall have no scruple in acceding to it. " Milman, in addition to numerous plays and poems, became a contributor tothe _Quarterly_, and one of Murray's historians. He wrote the "Historyof the Jews" and the "History of Christianity"; he edited Gibbon andHorace, and continued during his lifetime to be one of Mr. Murray's mostintimate and attached friends. In 1820 we find the first mention of a name afterwards to become ascelebrated as any of those with which Mr. Murray was associated. Owingto the warm friendship which existed between the Murrays and theD'Israelis, the younger members of both families were constantly broughttogether on the most intimate terms. Mr. Murray was among the first tomark the abilities of the boy, Benjamin Disraeli, and, as would appearfrom the subjoined letter, his confidence in his abilities was so firmthat he consulted him as to the merits of a MS. When he had scarcelyreached his eighteenth year. _Mr. Benjamin Disraeli to John Murray_. _August_ 1822. Dear Sir, I ran my eye over three acts of "Wallace, " [Footnote: "Wallace: aHistorical Tragedy, " in five acts, was published in 1820. Joanna Bailliespoke of the author, C. E. Walker, as "a very young and promisingdramatist. "] and, as far as I could form an opinion, I cannot conceivethese acts to be as effective on the stage as you seemed to expect. However, it is impossible to say what a very clever actor like Macreadymay make of some of the passages. Notwithstanding the many erasures thediction is still diffuse, and sometimes languishing, though notinelegant. I cannot imagine it a powerful work as far as I have read. But, indeed, running over a part of a thing with people talking aroundis too unfair. I shall be anxious to hear how it succeeds. Many thanks, dear sir, for lending it to me. Your note arrives. If on so slight aknowledge of the play I could venture to erase either of the words youset before me, I fear it would be _Yes_, but I feel cruel and wicked insaying so. I hope you got your dinner in comfort when you got rid of meand that gentle pyramid [Belzoni]. Yours truly, B. D. Mr. Southey was an indefatigable and elaborate correspondent, and, ashis letters have already been published, it is not necessary to quotethem. He rarely wrote to Mr. Gifford, who cut down his articles, and, asSouthey insisted, generally emasculated them by omitting the bestportions. Two extracts may be given from those written to Mr. Murray in1820, which do not seem yet to have been given to the world, the firstin reference to a proposed Life of Warren Hastings: "It appears to me that the proper plan will be to publish a selectionfrom Warren Hastings's papers and correspondence, accompanying it withhis Life. That Life requires a compendious view of our Indian historydown to the time of his administration, and in its progress it embracesthe preservation of our Indian empire and the establishment of theexisting system. Something must be interwoven concerning the history ofthe native powers, Mahomedan, Moor, Mahratta, etc. , and theirinstitutions. I see how all this is to be introduced, and see also thatno subject can afford materials more important or more various. And whata pleasure it will be to read the triumph of such a man as Hastings overthe tremendous combination of his persecutors at home! I had a noblecatastrophe in writing the Life of Nelson, but the latter days ofHastings afford a scene more touching, and perhaps more sublime, becauseit is more uncommon. Let me have the works of Orme and Bruce and Mill, and I will set apart a portion of every day to the course of reading, and begin my notes accordingly. " The second touches on his perennial grievance against Gifford: "You will really serve as well as oblige me, if you will let me have aduplicate set of proofs of my articles, that I may not _lose_ thepassages which Mr. Gifford, in spite of repeated promises, always willstrike out. In the last paper, among many other mutilations, the mostuseful _fact_ in the essay, for its immediate practical application, hasbeen omitted, and for no imaginable reason (the historical fact that itwas the reading a calumnious libel which induced Felton to murder theDuke of Buckingham). When next I touch upon public affairs for you, Iwill break the Whigs upon the wheel. " Mrs. Graham, afterwards Lady Callcott, then the wife of Captain Graham, R. N. , an authoress and friend of the Murray family, wrote to introduceMr. (afterwards Sir) Charles Eastlake, who had translated BaronBartholdy's "Memoirs of the Carbonari. " _Mrs. Graham to John Murray_. _February_ 24, 1821. All great men have to pay the penalty of their greatness, and you, _arch-bookseller_ as you are, must now and then be entreated to do manythings you only half like to do. I shall half break my heart if you andBartholdy do not agree. * * * * * Now, whether you publish "The Carbonari" or not, I bespeak youracquaintance for the translator, Mr. Eastlake. I want him to see thesort of thing that one only sees in your house, at your morning_levées_--the traffic of mind and literature, if I may call it so. To aman who has lived most of his grown-up life out of England, it is bothcurious and instructive, and I wish for this advantage for my friend. And in return for what I want you to benefit him, by giving him the_entrée_ to your rooms, I promise you great pleasure in having agentleman of as much modesty as real accomplishment, and whose taste andtalents as an artist must one day place him very high among our nativegeniuses. You and Mrs. Murray would, I am sure, love him as much asCaptain Graham and I do. We met him at Malta on his return from Athens, where he had been with Lord Ruthven's party. Thence he went to Sicilywith Lord Leven. In Rome, we lived in the same house. He was with us atPoli, and last summer at Ascoli with Lady Westmoreland. I have told himthat, when he goes to London, he must show you two beautiful pictures hehas done for Lord Guilford, views taken in Greece. You will see that hispictures and Lord Byron's poetry tell the same story of the "Land of theUnforgotten Brave. " I envy you your morning visitors. I am really hungryfor a new book. If you are so good as to send me any _provision freshfrom Murray's shambles_, as Mr. Rose says, address it to me, care of Wm. Eastlake, Esq. , Plymouth. Love to Mrs. Murray and children. Yours very gratefully and truly, MARIA GRAHAM. P. S. --If Graham has a ship given him at the time, and at the stationpromised, I shall be obliged to visit London towards the end of March orthe beginning of April. Mr. Murray accepted and published the book. Lord Byron's works continued to be in great demand at home, and weresoon pounced upon by the pirates in America and France. The Americanswere beyond Murray's reach, but the French were, to a certain extent, inhis power. Galignani, the Paris publisher, wrote to Lord Byron, requesting the assignment to him of the right of publishing his poetryin France. Byron replied that his poems belonged to Mr. Murray, and werehis "property by purchase, right, and justice, " and referred Galignanito him, "washing his hands of the business altogether. " M. Galignanithen applied to Mr. Murray, who sent him the following answer: _John Murray to M. Galignani_. _January_ 16, 1821. SIR, I have received your letter requesting me to assign to you exclusivelythe right of printing Lord Byron's works in France. In answer I shallstate what you do not seem to be aware of, that for the copyright ofthese works you are printing for nothing, I have given the authorupwards of £10, 000. Lord Byron has sent me the assignment, regularlymade, and dated April 20, 1818; and if you will send me £250 I will makeit over to you. I have just received a Tragedy by Lord Byron, for thecopyright of which I have paid £1, 050, and also three new cantos of "DonJuan, " for which I have paid £2, 100. What can you afford to give me forthe exclusive right of printing them in France upon condition that youreceive them before any other bookseller? Your early reply will oblige. Your obedient Servant, J. MURRAY. M. Galignani then informed Mr. Murray that a pirated edition of LordByron's works had been issued by another publisher, and was being soldfor 10 francs; and that, if he would assign him the new Tragedy and thenew cantos of "Don Juan, " he would pay him £100, and be at the expenseof the prosecution of the surreptitious publisher. But nothing was saidabout the payment of £250 for the issue of Lord Byron's previous work. Towards the end of 1821 Mr. Murray received a letter from Messrs. Longman & Co. , intimating, in a friendly way, "you will see in a day ortwo, in the newspapers, an advertisement of Mrs. Rundell's improvededition of her 'Cookery Book, ' which she has placed in our hands forpublication. " Now, the "Domestic Cookery, " as enlarged and improved byMr. Murray, was practically a new work, and one of his best properties. When he heard of Mrs. Rundell's intention to bring out her Cookery Bookthrough the Longmans, he consulted his legal adviser, Mr. Sharon Turner, who recommended that an injunction should at once be taken out torestrain the publication, and retained Mr. Littledale and Mr. SerjeantCopley for Mr. Murray. The injunction was duly granted. After some controversy and litigation the matter was arranged. Mr. Murray voluntarily agreed to pay to Mrs. Rundell £2, 000, in full of allclaims, and her costs and expenses. The Messrs. Longman delivered to Mr. Murray the stereotype plates of the Cookery Book, and stopped allfurther advertisements of Mrs. Rundell's work. Mr. Sharon Turner, whenwriting to tell Mr. Murray the result of his negotiations, concludeswith the recommendation: "As Home and Shadwell [Murray's counsel] tookmuch pains, I think if you were to send them each a copy of the CookeryBook, and (as a novelty) of 'Cain, ' it would please them. " Moore, in his Diary, notes: [Footnote: "Moore: Memoirs, Journal, andCorrespondence, " v. P. 119. ] "I called at Pickering's, in Chancery Lane, who showed me the original agreement between Milton and Symonds for thepayment of five pounds for 'Paradise Lost. ' The contrast of this sumwith the £2, 000 given by Mr. Murray for Mrs. Rundell's 'Cookery'comprises a history in itself. Pickering, too, gave forty-five guineasfor this agreement, nine times as much as the sum given for the poem. " CHAPTER XXII WASHINGTON IRVING--UGO FOSCOLO--LADY CAROLINE LAMB--"HAJJI BABA"--MRS. MARKHAM'S HISTORIES. The book trade between England and America was in its infancy at the, time of which we are now writing, and though Mr. Murray was frequentlyinvited to publish American books, he had considerable hesitation inaccepting such invitations. Mr. Washington Irving, who was already since 1807 favourably known as anauthor in America, called upon Mr. Murray, and was asked to dine, asdistinguished Americans usually were. He thus records his recollectionsof the event in a letter to his brother Peter at Liverpool: _Mr. Washington Irving to Mr. Peter Irving_. _August_ 19, 1817. "I had a very pleasant dinner at Murray's. I met there D'Israeli and anartist [Brockedon] just returned from Italy with an immense number ofbeautiful sketches of Italian scenery and architecture. D'Israeli's wifeand daughter came in in the course of the evening, and we did notadjourn until twelve o'clock. I had a long _tête-à-tête_ with oldD'Israeli in a corner. He is a very pleasant, cheerful old fellow, curious about America, and evidently tickled at the circulation hisworks have had there, though, like most authors just now, he groans atnot being able to participate in the profits. Murray was very merry andloquacious. He showed me a long letter from Lord Byron, who is in Italy. It is written with some flippancy, but is an odd jumble. His Lordshiphas written some 104 stanzas of the fourth canto ('Childe Harold'). Hesays it will be less metaphysical than the last canto, but thinks itwill be at least equal to either of the preceding. Murray left townyesterday for some watering-place, so that I have had no further talkwith him, but am to keep my eye on his advertisements and write to himwhen anything offers that I may think worth republishing in America. Ishall find him a most valuable acquaintance on my return to London. " A business in Liverpool, in which, with his brother, he was a partner, proved a failure, and in 1818 he was engaged on his famous "SketchBook, " which he wrote in England, and sent to his brother Ebenezer inNew York to be published there. The work appeared in three parts in thecourse of the year 1819. Several of the articles were copied in Englishperiodicals and were read with great admiration. A writer in _Blackwood_expressed surprise that Mr. Irving had thought fit to publish his"Sketch Book" in America earlier than in Britain, and predicted a largeand eager demand for such a work. On this encouragement, Irving, who wasstill in England, took the first three numbers, which had alreadyappeared in America, to Mr. Murray, and left them with him forexamination and approval. Murray excused himself on the ground that hedid not consider the work in question likely to form the basis of"satisfactory accounts, " and without this he had no "satisfaction" inundertaking to publish. Irving thereupon sought (but did not take) the advice of Sir W. Scott, and entered into an arrangement with Miller of the Burlington Arcade, and in February 1820 the first four numbers were published in a volume. Miller shortly after became bankrupt, the sale of the book (of which onethousand had been printed) was interrupted, and Irving's hopes of profitwere dashed to the ground. At this juncture, Walter Scott, who was thenin London, came to his help. "I called to him for help as I was sticking in the mire, and, morepropitious than Hercules, he put his own shoulder to the wheel. Throughhis favourable representations Murray was quickly induced to undertakethe future publication of the work which he had previously declined. Afurther edition of the first volume was put to press, and from that timeMurray became my publisher, conducting himself in all his dealings withthat fair, open, and liberal spirit which had obtained for him thewell-merited appellation of the Prince of Booksellers. " [Footnote:Preface to the revised edition of "The Sketch Book. "] Irving, being greatly in want of money, offered to dispose of the workentirely to the publisher, and Murray, though he had no legal protectionfor his purchase, not only gave him £200 for it, but two months laterhe wrote to Irving, stating that his volumes had succeeded so muchbeyond his commercial estimate that he begged he would do him the favourto draw on him at sixty-five days for one hundred guineas in addition tothe sum agreed upon. And again, eight months later, Murray made Irving asecond gratuitous contribution of a hundred pounds, to which the authorreplied, "I never knew any one convey so much meaning in so concise andagreeable a manner. " The author's "Bracebridge Hall" and other workswere also published by Mr. Murray. In 1822 Irving, who liked to help his literary fellow-countrymen, triedto induce Mr. Murray to republish James Fenimore Cooper's novels inEngland. Mr. Murray felt obliged to decline, as he found that theseworks were pirated by other publishers; American authors were thenbeginning to experience the same treatment in England which Englishauthors have suffered in America. The wonder was that WashingtonIrving's works so long escaped the same doom. In 1819 Mr. Murray first made the acquaintance of Ugo Foscolo. A nativeof Zante, descended from a Venetian family who had settled in the IonianIslands, Foscolo studied at Padua, and afterwards took up his residenceat Venice. The ancient aristocracy of that city had been banished byNapoleon Bonaparte, and the conqueror gave over Venice to Austria. Foscolo attacked Bonaparte in his "Lettere di Ortis. " After serving as avolunteer in the Lombard Legion through the disastrous campaign of 1799, Foscolo, on the capitulation of Genoa, retired to Milan, where hedevoted himself to literary pursuits. He once more took service--underNapoleon--and in 1805 formed part of the army of England assembled atBoulogne; but soon left the army, went to Pavia (where he had beenappointed Professor of Eloquence), and eventually at the age of fortytook refuge in England. Here he found many friends, who supported him inhis literary efforts. Among others he called upon Mr. Murray, whodesired his co-operation in writing for the _Quarterly_. An article, on"The Poems of the Italians" was his first contribution. Mr. ThomasMitchell, the translator of "Aristophanes, " desired Mr. Murray to giveFoscolo his congratulations upon his excellent essay, as well as on hisacquaintance with our language. _Mr. Thomas Mitchell to John Murray_. "The first time I had the pleasure of seeing M. Foscolo was at a _tabled'hôte_ at Berne. There was something in his physiognomy which very muchattracted nay notice; and, for some reason or another, I thought that Iseemed to be an object of his attention. At table, Foscolo was seatednext to a young Hanoverian, between whom and me a very learnedconversation had passed on the preceding evening, and a certain degreeof acquaintance was cemented in consequence. The table was that daygraced with the appearance of some of the Court ladies of Stuttgard, andall passed off with the decorum usually observed abroad, when suddenly, towards the conclusion of the feast a violent hubbub was heard betweenM. Foscolo and his Hanoverian neighbour, who, in angry terms and withviolent gestures, respectively asserted the superior harmonies of Greekand Latin. This ended with the former's suddenly producing a card, accompanied with the following annunciation: 'Sir, my name is UgoFoscolo; I am a native of Greece, and I have resided thirty years inItaly; I therefore think I ought to know something of the matter. Thiscard contains my address, and if you have anything further to say, youknow where I am to be found. ' Whether Foscolo's name or manner dauntedthe young Hanoverian, or whether he was only a bird of passage, I don'tknow, but we saw nothing more of him after that day. Foscolo, after theladies had retired, made an apology, directed a good deal to me, who, bythe forms of the place, happened to be at the head of the table; aconsiderable degree of intimacy took place between us, and an excellentman I believe him to be, in spite of these little ebullitions. " Ugo Foscolo, who was eccentric to an excess, and very extravagant, hadmany attached friends, though he tried them sorely. To Mr. Murray hebecame one of the troubles of private as well as publishing life. He hada mania for building, and a mania for ornamentation, but he was veryshort of money for carrying out his freaks. He thought himself at thesame time to be perfectly moderate, simple, and sweet-tempered. He tooka house in South Bank, Regent's Park, which he named DigammaCottage--from his having contributed to the _Quarterly Review_ anarticle on the Digamma--and fitted it up in extravagant style. Foscolo could scarcely live at peace with anybody, and, as the result ofone of his numerous altercations, he had to fight a duel. "We are, " LadyDacre wrote to Murray (December 1823), "to have the whole of Foscolo'sduel to-morrow. He tells me that it is not about a 'Fair lady': thankheaven!" Foscolo was one of Mr. Murray's inveterate correspondents--aboutlectures, about translations, about buildings, about debts, about loans, and about borrowings. On one occasion Mr. Murray received from him aletter of thirteen pages quarto. A few sentences of this may be worthquoting: _Mr. Foscolo to John Murray_. SOUTH BANK, _August_ 20, 1822. "During six years (for I landed in England the 10th September, 1816) Ihave constantly laboured under difficulties the most distressing; no oneknows them so well as yourself, because no one came to my assistancewith so warm a friendship or with cares so constant and delicate. Mydifficulties have become more perplexing since the Government both ofthe Ionian Islands and Italy have precluded even the possibility of myreturning to the countries where a slender income would be sufficient, and where I would not be under the necessity of making a degrading useof my faculties. I was born a racehorse; and after near forty years ofsuccessful racing, I am now drawing the waggon--nay, to be the teacherof French to my copyists, and the critic of English to mytranslators!-to write sophistry about criticism, which I alwaysconsidered a sort of literary quackery, and to put together paltryarticles for works which I never read. Indeed, if I have not undergonethe doom of almost all individuals whose situation becomes suddenlyopposed to their feelings and habits, and if I am not yet a lunatic, Imust thank the mechanical strength of my nerves. My nerves, however, will not withstand the threatenings of shame which I have alwayscontemplated with terror. Time and fortune have taught me to meet allother evils with fortitude; but I grow every day more and more a cowardat the idea of the approach of a stigma on my character; and as now Imust live and die in England, and get the greater part of my subsistencefrom my labour, I ought to reconcile, if not labour with literaryreputation, at least labour and life with a spotless name. " He then goes on to state that his debts amount to £600 or thereabouts, including a sum of £20 which he owed to Mr. Murray himself. Then he musthave the money necessary for his subsistence, and he "finds he cannotlive on less than £400 per annum. " "My apartments, " he continues, "decently furnished, encompass me with anatmosphere of ease and respectability; and I enjoy the illusion of nothaving fallen into the lowest circumstances. I always declare that I will die like a gentleman, on a decent bed, surrounded by casts (as I cannot buy the marbles) of the Venuses, of theApollos, and of the Graces, and the busts of great men; nay, even amongflowers, and, if possible, with some graceful innocent girl playing anold pianoforte in an adjoining room. And thus dies the hero of my novel. Far from courting the sympathy of mankind, I would rather be forgottenby posterity than give it the gratification of ejaculating preposteroussighs because I died like Camoens and Tasso on the bed of an hospital. And since I must be buried in your country, I am happy in having insuredfor me the possession during the remains of my life of a cottage builtafter my plan, surrounded by flowering shrubs, almost within thetumpikes of the town, and yet as quiet as a country-house, and open tothe free air. Whenever I can freely dispose of a hundred pounds, I willalso build a small dwelling for my corpse, under a beautiful Orientalplane-tree, which I mean to plant next November, and cultivate _conamore_. So far I am indeed an epicure; in all other things I am the mostmoderate of men. " The upshot of the letter is, that he wishes Mr. Murray to let him have£1, 000, to be repaid in five years, he meanwhile writing articles forthe _Quarterly_--one-half of the payment to be left with the publisher, and the remaining half to be added to his personal income. He concludes: "In seeking out a way of salvation, I think it incumbent on me toprevent the tyranny of necessity, that I might not be compelled by it toendanger my character and the interest of a friend whose kindness I havealways experienced, and whose assistance I am once more obliged tosolicit. " Mr. Murray paid off some of his more pressing embarrassments--£30 toMessrs. Bentley for bills not taken up; £33 7_s_. To Mr. Kelly theprinter; £14 to Mr. Antonini; and £50 to Foscolo's builder--besidesbecoming security for £300 to his bankers (with whom Foscolo didbusiness), in order to ensure him a respite for six months. On the otherhand, Foscolo agreed to insure his life for £600 as a sort of guarantee. "Was ever" impecunious author "so trusted before"? At this crisis in hisaffairs many friends came about him and took an interest in the patriot;Mr. Hallam and Mr. Wilbraham offered him money, but he would not accept"gratuities" from them, though he had no objection to accepting their"loans. " Arrangements were then made for Foscolo to deliver a series oflectures on Italian Literature. Everything was settled, the dayarrived, the room was crowded with a distinguished assembly, when at thelast moment Foscolo appeared without his MS. , which he had forgotten. The course of lectures, however, which had been designed to relieve himfrom the pressure of his debts, proved successful, and brought him in, it is said, as much as £1, 000; whereupon he immediately set to work tosquander his earnings by giving a public breakfast to his patrons, forwhich purpose he thought it incumbent on him, amongst other expenses, tomake a new approach and a gravelled carriage road to Digamma Cottage. Ugo Foscolo lived on credit to the end of his life, surrounded by allthat was luxurious and beautiful. How he contrived it, no one knew, forhis resources remained at the lowest ebb. Perhaps his friends helpedhim, for English Liberals of good means regarded him as a martyr in thecause of freedom, one who would never bow the knee to Baal, and who haddared the first Napoleon when his very word was law. But Foscolo'sfriends without doubt became tired of his extravagance and hislicentious habits, and fell away from him. Disease at last found himout; he died of dropsy at Turnham Green, near Hammersmith, in 1827, whenonly in the fiftieth year of his age, and was buried in Chiswickchurchyard; but in June 1871 his body was exhumed and conveyed toFlorence, where he was buried in Santa Croce, between the tomb ofAlfieri and the monument of Dante. Lady Caroline Lamb had continued to keep up her intimacy with Mr. Murray; and now that she was preparing a new work for the press, hercorrespondence increased. While he was at Wimbledon during summer, sheoccasionally met literary friends at his house. She had alreadypublished "Glenarvon, " the hero of which was supposed to represent LordByron, and was now ready with "Penruddock. " "I am in great anxiety, " shewrote to Mr. Murray, "about your not informing me what Gifford says. Ithink it might be a civil way of giving me my death-warrant--if'Penruddock' does not. " Whether the criticism of Mr. Gifford was too severe, or whether Mr. Murray was so much engaged in business and correspondence as to take nonotice of Lady Caroline Lamb's communication, does not appear; but shefelt the neglect, and immediately followed it up with another letter asfollows: _Lady Caroline Lamb to John Murray_. _December 8, 1822_. MY DEAR AND MOST OBSTINATELY SILENT SIR, From one until nine upon Tuesday I shall be at Melbourne House waitingfor you; but if you wish to see the prettiest woman in England, --besidesmyself and William--be at Melbourne House at quarter to six, at whichhour we dine; and if you will come at half-past one, or two, or three, to say you will dine and to ask me to forgive your inexorable andinhuman conduct, pray do, for I arrive at twelve in that said home andleave it at nine the ensuing morning. What can have happened to you thatyou will not write? The following letter from William Lamb (afterwards Lord Melbourne), thelong-suffering and generous husband of this wayward lady, refers to anovel entitled "Ada Reis. " _The Honble. William Lamb to John Murray_. _December 20, 1822_. "The incongruity of, and objections to, the story of 'Ada Reis' can onlybe got over by power of writing, beauty of sentiment, striking andeffective situation, etc. If Mr. Gifford thinks there is in the firsttwo volumes anything of excellence sufficient to overbalance theirmanifest faults, I still hope that he will press upon Lady Caroline theabsolute necessity of carefully reconsidering and revising the thirdvolume, and particularly the conclusion of the novel. "Mr. Gifford, I dare say, will agree with me that since the time ofLucian all the representations of the infernal regions, which have beenattempted by satirical writers, such as 'Fielding's Journey from thisWorld to the Next, ' have been feeble and flat. The sketch in "Ada Reis"is commonplace in its observations and altogether insufficient, and itwould not do now to come with a decisive failure in an attempt ofconsiderable boldness. I think, if it were thought that anything couldbe done with the novel, and that the faults of its design and structurecan be got over, that I could put her in the way of writing up this parta little, and giving it something of strength, spirit, and novelty, andof making it at once more moral and more interesting. I wish you wouldcommunicate these my hasty suggestions to Mr. Gifford, and he will seethe propriety of pressing Lady Caroline to take a little more time tothis part of the novel. She will be guided by his authority, and herfault at present is to be too hasty and too impatient of the trouble ofcorrecting and recasting what is faulty. " "Ada Reis" was published in March 1823. Another of England's Prime Ministers, Lord John Russell, had incontemplation a History of Europe, and consulted Mr. Murray on thesubject. A first volume, entitled "The Affairs of Europe, " was publishedwithout the author's name on the title-page, and a few years lateranother volume was published, but it remained an unfinished work. LordJohn was an ambitious and restless author; without steady perseverancein any branch of literature; he went from poems to tragedies, fromtragedies to memoirs, then to history, tales, translations of part ofthe "Odyssey, " essays (by the Gentleman who left his Lodgings), and thento memoirs and histories again. Mr. Croker said of his "Don Carlos": "Itis not easy to find any poetry, or even oratory, of the present daydelivered with such cold and heavy diction, such distorted tropes anddisjointed limbs of similes worn to the bones long ago. " Another work that excited greater interest than Lord John Russell'sanonymous history was Mr. James Morier's "Hajji Baba. " Mr. Morier had inhis youth travelled through the East, especially in Persia, where heheld a post under Sir Gore Ouseley, then English Ambassador. On hisreturn to England, he published accounts of his travels; but his "HajjiBaba" was more read than any other of his works. Sir Walter Scott wasespecially pleased with it, and remarked that "Hajji Baba" might betermed the Oriental "Gil Bias. " Mr. Morier afterwards published "TheAdventures of Hajji Baba in England, " as well as other works of anEastern character. The following letter, written by the Persian Envoy inEngland, Miiza Abul Hassan, shows the impression created by Englishsociety on a foreigner in April 1824: _Letter from the Persian Envoy, Mirza Abul Hassan, to the LondonGentleman without, who lately wrote letter to him and ask very much togive answer_. _April 3, 1824. _ SIR, MY LORD, When you write to me some time ago to give my thought of what I see goodand bad this country, that time I not speak English very well. Now Iread, I write much little better. Now I give to you my think. In thiscountry bad not too much, everything very good. But suppose I not tellsomething little bad, then you say I tell all flattery--therefore I tellmost bad thing. I not like such crowd in evening party every night. Incold weather not very good, now hot weather, much too bad. I very muchastonish every day now much hot than before, evening parties much crowdthan before. Pretty beautiful ladies come sweat, that not very good. Ialways afraid some old lady in crowd come dead, that not very good, andspoil my happiness. I think old ladies after 85 years not come toevening party, that much better. Why for take so much trouble? Someother thing rather bad. Very beautiful young lady she got ugly fellowfor husband, that not very good, very shocking. I ask Sr Gore [Sir GoreOuseley] why for this. He says me--"perhaps he very good man, nothandsome; no matter, perhaps he got too much money, perhaps got title. "I say I not like that, all very shocking. This all bad I know. Now I saygood. English people all very good people. All very happy. Do what theylike, say what like, write in newspaper what like. I love English peoplevery much, they very civil to me. I tell my King English love Persianvery much. English King best man in world, he love his people very goodmuch; he speak very kind to me, I love him very much. Queen very bestwoman I ever saw. Prince of Wales such a fine elegant beautiful man. Inot understand English enough proper to praise him, he too great for mylanguage. I respect him same as my own King. I love him much better, hismanner all same as talisman and charm. All the Princes very fine men, very handsome men, very sweet words, very affable. I like all too much. I think the ladies and gentlemen this country most high rank, highhonour, very rich, except two or three most good, very kind to inferiorpeoples. This very good. I go to see Chelsea. All old men sit on grassin shade of fine tree, fine river run by, beautiful place, plenty toeat, drink, good coat, everything very good. Sir Gore he tell me KingCharles and King Jame. I say Sir Gore, They not Musselman, but I thinkGod love them very much. I think God he love the King very well forkeeping up that charity. Then I see one small regiment of children go todinner, one small boy he say thanks to God for eat, for drink, forclothes, other little boys they all answer Amen. Then I cry a little, myheart too much pleased. This all very good for two things--one thing, God very much please; two things, soldiers fight much better, becausesee their good King take care of old wounded fathers and littlechildren. Then I go to Greenwich, that too good place, such a fine sightmake me a little sick for joy. All old men so happy, eat dinner, sowell, fine house, fine beds--all very good. This very good country. English ladies very handsome, very beautiful. I travel great deal. I goArabia, I go Calcutta, Hyderabad, Poonah, Bombay, Georgia, Armenia, Constantinople, Malta, Gibraltar. I see best Georgia, Circassian, Turkish, Greek ladies, but nothing not so beautiful as English ladies, all very clever, speak French, speak English, speak Italian, play musicvery well, sing very good. Very glad for me if Persian ladies like them. But English ladies speak such sweet words. I think tell a littlestory--that not very good. One thing more I see but I not understand that thing good or bad. LastThursday I see some fine horses, fine carriages, thousand people go tolook that carriages. I ask why for? They say me, that gentleman on boxesthey drive their own carriages. I say why for take so much trouble? Theysay me he drive very well; that very good thing. It rain very hard, somelord some gentleman he get very wet. I say why he not go inside? Theytell me good coachman not mind get wet every day, will be much ashamedif go inside; that I not understand. Sir, my Lord, good-night, ABUL HASSAN. Mr. Murray invariably consulted Mr. Barrow as to any works on voyages ortravels he was required to publish, and found him a faithful adviser. The following expression of opinion, from one with so large anexperience, is interesting: _Mr. J. Barrow to John Murray_. _March 28, 1823. _ "I need not tell you that caprice rather than merit governs the sale ofa work. If instances are wanting, I might quote those of Belzoni andHamilton. [Footnote: This reference probably refers to Walter Hamilton's"Description of Hindostan and adjacent Countries, " published a few yearsbefore. ] The first absolute trumpery when put in competition with thesecond; yet the former, I believe, sold about ten times the number ofthe latter. " Another little book published about this time has a curious history, andillustrates the lottery of book publishing. Mrs. Markham's [Footnote:This lady's real name was Mrs. Penrose. ] "History of England" was firstpublished by Constable, but it fell still-born from the press. Mr. Murray, discerning the merit of the work in 1824, bought the remainderof 333 copies from Constable, and had it revised, corrected, andenlarged, and brought out in an entirely new form. He placed it in hislist of school books, and pushed it among the teachers throughout thecountry, until at length it obtained a very large and regularcirculation. The book has subsequently undergone frequent revision, anddown to the present date it continues to be a great favourite, especially in ladies' schools. CHAPTER XXIII GIFFORD'S RETIREMENT FROM THE EDITORSHIP OF THE "QUARTERLY"--AND DEATH It had for some time been evident, as has been shown in a previouschapter, that Gifford was becoming physically incapable of carrying onthe Editorship of the _Quarterly Review_, but an occasional respite fromthe pressure of sickness, as well as his own unwillingness to abandonhis connection with a work which he regarded with paternal affection, and Murray's difficulty in finding a worthy successor, combined toinduce him to remain at his post. He accordingly undertook to carry on his editorial duties till thepublication of the 60th number, aided and supported by the active energyof Barrow and Croker, who, in conjunction with the publisher, did mostof the necessary drudgery. In December 1823 Canning had written to say that he was in bed with thegout; to this Gifford replied: MY DEAR CANNING, I wish you had a pleasanter bedfellow; but here am I on the sofa with acough, and a very disagreeable associate I find it. Old Moore, I think, died all but his voice, and my voice is nearly dead before me; in otherrespects, I am much as I was when you saw me, and this weather is in myfavour.... I have promised Murray to try to carry on the _Review_ to the60th number; the 58th is now nearly finished. This seems a desperatepromise, and beyond it I will not, cannot go; for, at best, as the oldphilosopher said, I am dying at my ease, as my complaint has taken aconsumptive turn. The vultures already scent the carcase, and three orfour _Quarterly Reviews_ are about to start. One is to be set up byHaygarth, whom I think I once mentioned to you as talked of to succeedme, but he is now in open hostility to Murray; another is to be calledthe _Westminster Quarterly Review_, and will, if I may judge from theprofessions of impartiality, be a decided Opposition Journal. They willall have their little day, perhaps, and then drop into the grave oftheir predecessors. The worst is that we cannot yet light upon a fit andpromising successor. Ever, my dear Canning, Faithfully and affectionately yours, WILLIAM GIFFORD. This state of matters could not be allowed to go on much longer;sometimes a quarter passed without a number appearing; in 1824 only two_Quarterlies_ appeared--No. 60, due in January, but only published inAugust; and No. 61, due in April, but published in December. Anexpostulation came from Croker to Murray (January 23, 1824): "Have you made up _your mind_ about an editor? Southey has written to meon the subject, as if you had, and as if he knew your choice; I do notlike to answer him before I know what I am to say. Will you dine atKensington on Sunday at 6?" Southey had long been meditating about the editorship. It never appearsto have been actually offered to him, but his name, as we have alreadyseen, was often mentioned in connection with it. He preferred, however, going on with his own works and remaining a contributor only. Politics, too, may have influenced him, for we find him writing to Mr. Murray onDecember 15, 1824: "The time cannot be far distant when the _Q. R. _ musttake its part upon a most momentous subject, and choose between Mr. Canning and the Church. I have always considered it as one of thegreatest errors in the management of the _Review_ that it should havebeen silent upon that subject so long. " So far as regarded his positionas a contributor, Southey expressed his opinion to Murray explicitly: _Mr. Southey to John Murray_. _October 25, 1824_. "No future Editor, be he who he may, must expect to exercise the samediscretion over my papers which Mr. Gifford has done. I will at any timecurtail what may be deemed too long, and consider any objections thatmay be made, with a disposition to defer to them when it can be donewithout sacrificing my own judgment upon points which may seem to meimportant. But my age and (I may add without arrogance) the rank which Ihold in literature entitle me to say that I will never again write underthe correction of any one. " Gifford's resignation is announced in the following letter to Canning(September 8, 1824): _Mr. W. Gifford to the Rt. Hon. G. Canning_. _September 8, 1824_. MY DEAR CANNING, I have laid aside my Regalia, and King Gifford, first of the name, isnow no more, as Sir Andrew Aguecheek says, "than an ordinary mortal or aChristian. " It is necessary to tell you this, for, with the exception ofa dark cloud which has come over Murray's brow, no prodigies in earth orair, as far as I have heard, have announced it. It is now exactly sixteen years ago since your letter invited orencouraged me to take the throne. I did not mount it without a tremblingfit; but I was promised support, and I have been nobly supported. As faras regards myself, I have borne my faculties soberly, if not meekly. Ihave resisted, with undeviating firmness, every attempt to encroach uponme, every solicitation of publisher, author, friend, or friend's friend, and turned not a jot aside for power or delight. In consequence of thisintegrity of purpose, the Review has long possessed a degree ofinfluence, not only in this, but in other countries hitherto unknown;and I have the satisfaction, at this late hour, of seeing it in its mostpalmy state. No number has sold better than the sixtieth. But there is a sad tale to tell. For the last three years I haveperceived the mastery which disease and age were acquiring over aconstitution battered and torn at the best, and have been perpetuallyurging Murray to look about for a successor, while I begged Coplestone, Blomfield, and others to assist the search. All has been ineffectual. Murray, indeed, has been foolishly flattering himself that I might becajoled on from number to number, and has not, therefore, exertedhimself as he ought to have done; but the rest have been in earnest. Doyou know any one? I once thought of Robert Grant; but he proved timid, and indeed his saintly propensities would render him suspected. ReginaldHeber, whom I should have preferred to any one, was snatched from me fora far higher object. I have been offered a Doctor's Degree, and when I declined it, onaccount of my inability to appear in public, my own college (Exeter)most kindly offered to confer it on me in private; that is, at theRector's lodgings. This, too, I declined, and begged the Dean ofWestminster, who has a living in the neighbourhood, to excuse me ashandsomely as he could. It might, for aught I know, be a hard racebetween a shroud and a gown which shall get me first; at any rate, itwas too late for honours. Faithfully and affectionately yours, WILLIAM GIFFORD. Mr. J. T. Coleridge had long been regarded as the most eligiblesuccessor to Mr. Gifford, and on him the choice now fell. Mr. Murrayforwarded the reply of Mr. Coleridge which contained his acceptance ofthe editorship to Mr. Gifford, accompanied by the following note: _John Murray to Mr. Gifford_. WHITEHALL PLACE, _December 11, 1824_. MY DEAR SIR, I shall not attempt to express the feelings with which I communicate theenclosed answer to the proposal which I suspect it would have beenthought contemptible in me any longer to have delayed, and all that Ican find to console myself with is the hope that I may be able to evincemy gratitude to you during life, and to your memory, if it so please theAlmighty that I am to be the survivor. I am your obliged and faithful Servant, JOHN MURRAY. Mr. Murray lost no time in informing his friends of the new arrangement. Gifford lived for about two years more, and continued to entertain manykind thoughts of his friends and fellow-contributors: his intercoursewith his publisher was as close and intimate as ever to the end. The last month of Gifford's life was but a slow dying. He was sleepless, feverish, oppressed by an extreme difficulty of breathing, which oftenentirely deprived him of speech; and his sight had failed. Towards theend of his life he would sometimes take up a pen, and after a vainattempt to write, would throw it down, saying, "No, my work is done!"Even thinking caused him pain. As his last hour drew near, his mindbegan to wander. "These books have driven me mad, " he once said, "I mustread my prayers. " He passed gradually away, his pulse ceasing to beatfive hours before his death. And then he slept out of life, on December31, 1826, in his 68th year--a few months before the death of Canning. Mr. Gifford desired that he should be buried in the ground attached toGrosvenor Chapel, South Audley Street, where he had interred AnnieDavies, his faithful old housekeeper, but his friends made applicationfor his interment in Westminster Abbey, which was acceded to, and he wasburied there accordingly on January 8, 1827, immediately under themonuments of Camden and Garrick. He was much richer at the time of hisdeath than he was at all aware of, for he was perfectly indifferentabout money. Indeed, he several times returned money to Mr. Murray, saying that "he had been too liberal. " He left £25, 000 of personalproperty, a considerable part of which he left to the relatives of Mr. Cookesley, the surgeon of Ashburton, who had been to him so faithful andself-denying a friend in his early life. To Mr. Murray he left £100 as amemorial, and also 500 guineas, to enable him to reimburse a militarygentleman, to whom, jointly with Mr. Cookesley, he appears to have beenbound for that sum at a former period. Gifford has earned, but it is now generally recognised that he hasunjustly earned, the character of a severe, if not a bitter critic. Possessing an unusually keen discernment of genuine excellence, and ascathing power of denunciation of what was false or bad in literature, he formed his judgments in accordance with a very high standard ofmerit. Sir Walter Scott said of his "Baviad and Mæviad, that "hesquashed at one blow a set of coxcombs who might have humbugged theworld long enough. " His critical temper, however, was in truthexceptionally equable; regarding it as his duty to encourage all thatwas good and elevating, and relentlessly to denounce all that was bad ortended to lower the tone of literature, he conscientiously acted up tothe standard by which he judged others, and never allowed personalfeeling to intrude upon his official judgments. It need scarcely be said that he proved himself an excellent editor, andthat he entertained a high idea of the duties of that office. WilliamJerdan, who was introduced to Gifford by Canning, said: "I speak of himas he always was to me--full of gentleness, a sagacious adviser andinstructor, upon so comprehensive a scale, that I never met his superioramong the men of the age most renowned for vast information, and hiscaptivating power in communicating it. " His sagacity and quickness ofapprehension were remarkable, as was also the extraordinary rapiditywith which he was able to eviscerate a work, and summarize its contentsin a few pages. The number of articles which he himself wrote was comparatively small, for he confined himself for the most part to revising and improving thecriticisms of others, and though in thus dealing with articles submittedto him he frequently erased what the writers considered some of theirbest criticisms, he never lost their friendship and support. He dislikedincurring any obligation which might in any degree shackle theexpression of his free opinions. In conjunction with Mr. Murray, he laiddown a rule, which as we have already seen was advocated by Scott, andto which no exception has ever been made, that every writer in the_Quarterly_ should receive payment for his contribution. On oneoccasion, when a gentleman in office would not receive the money, thearticle was returned. "I am not more certain of many conjectures, " saysJerdan, "than I am of this, that he never propagated a dishonest opinionnor did a dishonest act. " Gifford took no notice of the ferocious attacks made upon him by Huntand Hazlitt. Holding, as he did, that inviolable secrecy was one of theprime functions of an editor--though the practice has since become verydifferent--he never attempted to vindicate himself, or to reveal thesecret as to the writers of the reviews. In accordance with his plan ofsecrecy, he desired Dr. Ireland, his executor, to destroy allconfidential letters, especially those relating to the _Review_, so thatthe names of the authors, as well as the prices paid for each article, might never be known. In society, of which he saw but little, except at Mr. Murray's, he wasvery entertaining. He told a story remarkably well; and had aninexhaustible supply; the archness of his eyes and countenance makingthem all equally good. He had never been married; but although he had no children, he had anexceeding love for them. When well, he delighted in giving juvenileparties, and rejoiced at seeing the children frisking about in thehappiness of youth--a contrast which threw the misery of his own earlylife into strange relief. His domestic favourites were his dog and hiscat, both of which he dearly loved. He was also most kind and generousto his domestic servants; and all who knew him well, sorrowfullylamented his death. Many years after Gifford's death, a venomous article upon him appearedin a London periodical. The chief point of this anonymous attack wascontained in certain extracts from the writings of Sir W. Scott, Southey, and other eminent contemporaries of Mr. Gifford. Mr. R. W. Hay, one of the oldest contributors to the _Quarterly_, was at that timestill living, and, in allusion to the article in question, he wrote toMr. Murray's son: _Mr. R. W. Hay to Mr. Murray_. _July 7, 1856_. It is wholly worthless, excepting as it contains strictures of Sir W. Scott, Southey, and John Wilson on the critical character of the lateWm. Gifford. I by no means subscribe to all that is said by thesedistinguished individuals on the subject, and I cannot help suspectingthat the high station in literature which they occupied rendered themmore than commonly sensitive to the corrections and erasures which wereproposed by the editor. Sir Walter (great man as he was) was perfectlycapable of writing so carelessly as to require correction, and bothSouthey and John Wilson might occasionally have brought forth opinions, on political and other matters, which were not in keeping with thegeneral tone of the _Quarterly Review_. That poor Gifford was deformedin figure, feeble in health, unhappily for him there can be no denying, but that he had any pleasure in tormenting, as asserted by some, that heindulged in needless criticism without any regard to the feelings ofthose who were under his lash, I am quite satisfied cannot justly bemaintained. In my small dealings with the _Review_, I only found theeditor most kind and considerate. His amendments and alterations Igenerally at once concurred in, and I especially remember in one of theearly articles, that he diminished the number of Latin quotations verymuch to its advantage; that his heart was quite in the right place Ihave had perfect means of knowing from more than one circumstance, _e. G. _, his anxiety for the welfare of his friend Hoppner the painter'schildren was displayed in the variety of modes which he adopted toassist them, and when John Gait was sorely maltreated in the _Review_ inconsequence of his having attributed to me, incorrectly, an articlewhich occasioned his wrath and indignation, and afterwards was exposedto many embarrassments in life, Gifford most kindly took up his cause, and did all he could to further the promotion of his family. That ourpoor friend should have been exposed throughout the most part of hislife to the strong dislike of the greatest part of the community is notunnatural. As the _redacteur_ of the _Anti-Jacobin_, etc. , he, in thelatter part of the last century, drew upon himself the hostile attacksof all the modern philosophers of the age, and of all those who hailedwith applause the dawn of liberty in the French Revolution; as editor ofthe _Quarterly Review_, he acquired in addition to the former hosts ofenemies, the undisguised hatred of all the Whigs and Liberals, who werefor making peace with Bonaparte, and for destroying the settled order ofthings in this country. In the present generation, when the feeling ofnational hatred against France has entirely subsided, and party feelingshave so much gone by that no man can say to which party any public manbelongs, it is impossible for anyone to comprehend the state of publicfeeling which prevailed during the great war of the Revolution, and forsome years after its termination. Gifford was deeply imbued with all thesentiments on public matters which prevailed in his time, and, as somepeople have a hatred of a cat, and others of a toad, so our friend feltuneasy when a Frenchman was named; and buckled on his armour ofcriticism whenever a Liberal or even a Whig was brought under hisnotice; and although in the present day there appears to be a greaterindulgence to crime amongst judges and juries, and perhaps a morelenient system of criticism is adopted by reviewers, I am not sure thatany public advantage is gained by having Ticket of Leave men, who oughtto be in New South Wales, let loose upon the English world by theunchecked appearance of a vast deal of spurious literature, which oughtto have withered under the severe blasts of Criticism. Believe yours very truly, R. W. HAY. CHAPTER XXIV THE "REPRESENTATIVE" Mr. Murray had for long been desirous of publishing a journal whichshould appear more frequently than once a quarter, more especially afterthe discontinuance of his interest in Blackwood's magazine. In 1825 heconceived the more ambitious design of publishing a daily morning paper, a project now chiefly interesting from the fact that in this venture hehad the assistance of the future Lord Beaconsfield. The intimacy whichexisted between the Murrays and D'Israelis had afforded Mr. Murrayexceptional opportunities of forming an opinion of Benjamin's character, and he saw with delight the rapidly developing capacities of his oldfriend's son. Even in his eighteenth year Benjamin was consulted by Mr. Murray as to the merits of a MS. , and two years later he wrote a novelentitled "Aylmer Papillon, " which did not see the light. He also editeda "History of Paul Jones, Admiral in the Russian Navy, " written byTheophilus Smart, an American, and originally published in the UnitedStates. Young Disraeli was already gifted with a power of influencing others, unusual in a man of his age. He was eloquent, persuasive, and ingenious, and even then, as in future years, when he became a leading figure inthe political world, he had the power of drawing others over to theviews which he entertained, however different they might be from theirown. Looking merely to his literary career as a successful novel writer, his correspondence with Mr. Murray about his proposed work of "AylmerPapillon" is not without interest. _Mr. Benjamin Disraeli to John Murray_. _May_, 1824. MY DEAR SIR, Your very kind letter induces me to trouble you with this most trivialof trifles. My plan has been in these few pages so to mix up anyobservations which I had to make on the present state of society withthe bustle and hurry of a story, that my satire should never beprotruded on my reader. If you will look at the last chapter but one, entitled "Lady Modeley's, " you will see what I mean better than I canexpress it. The first pages of that chapter I have written in the samemanner as I would a common novel, but I have endeavoured to put in_action_ at the _end_, the present fashion of getting on in the world. Iwrite no humbug about "candidly giving your opinion, etc. , etc. " Youmust be aware that you cannot do me a greater favour than refusing topublish it, if you think _it won't do_; and who should be a better judgethan yourself? Believe me ever to be, my dear Sir, Your most faithful and obliged, B. DISRAELI. [Footnote: It will be observed that while the fathermaintained the older spelling of the name, the son invariably writes itthus. ] P. S. --The second and the last chapters are unfortunately mislaid, butthey have no particular connection with the story. They are both veryshort, the first contains an adventure on the road, and the last Mr. Papillon's banishment under the Alien Act from a ministerialmisconception of a metaphysical sonnet. Thursday morn. : Excuse want of seal, as we're doing a bit of summerto-day, and there is not a fire in the house. FREDERICK PLACE, _May_ 25, 1824. 1/2 past 1 o'clock A. M. MY DEAR SIR, The travels, to which I alluded this morning, would not bind up with"Parry, " since a moderate duodecimo would contain the adventures of acertain Mr. Aylmer Papillon in a _terra incognita_. I certainly shouldnever have mentioned them had I been aware that you were so very muchengaged, and I only allude to them once more that no confusion may arisefrom the half-explanations given this morning. You will oblige me by notmentioning this to anybody. Believe me to be, my dear Sir, Your very faithful and obliged Servant, B. DISRAELI. FREDERICK PLACE, _June_ 1824. MY DEAR SIR, Until I received your note this morning I had flattered myself that myindiscretion had been forgotten. It is to me a matter of great regretthat, as appears by your letter, any more trouble should be givenrespecting this unfortunate MS. , which will, most probably, beconsidered too crude a production for the public, and which, if it iseven imagined to possess any interest, is certainly too late for thisseason, and will be obsolete in the next. I think, therefore, that thesooner it be put behind the fire the better, and as you have some smallexperience in burning MSS. , [Footnote: Byron's Memoirs had been burnt atAlbemarle Street during the preceding month. ] you will be perhaps sokind as to consign it to the flames. Once more apologising for all thetrouble I have given you, I remain ever, my dear Sir, Yours very faithfully, B. DISRAELI. Murray had a special regard for the remarkable young man, and by degreeshad thoroughly taken him into his confidence; had related to him hisexperiences of men and affairs, and ere long began to consult him abouta variety of schemes and projects. These long confidentialcommunications led eventually to the suggestion of a much more ambitiousand hazardous scheme, the establishment of a daily paper in theConservative interest. Daring as this must appear, Murray was encouragedin it by the recollection of the success which had attended thefoundation of the _Quarterly_, and believed, rashly, that his personalenergy and resources, aided by the abilities displayed by his youngcounsellor, would lead to equal success. He evidently had toosuperficially weighed the enormous difficulties of this far greaterundertaking, and the vast difference between the conduct of a _QuarterlyReview_ and a daily newspaper. Intent upon gaining a position in the world, Benjamin Disraeli saw aprospect of advancing his own interests-by obtaining the influentialposition of director of a Conservative daily paper, which he fullyimagined was destined to equal the _Times_, and he succeeded in imbuingMurray with the like fallacious hopes. The emancipation of the Colonies of Spain in South America in 1824-25gave rise to much speculation in the money market in the expectation ofdeveloping the resources of that country, especially its mines. Shares, stocks, and loans were issued to an unlimited extent. Mr. Benjamin Disraeli seems to have thrown himself into the vortex, forhe became connected with at least one financial firm in the City, thatof Messrs. Powles, and employed his abilities in writing severalpamphlets on the subject. This led to his inducing Messrs. Powles toembark with him in the scheme of a daily paper. At length an arrangementwas entered into, by which John Murray, J. D. Powles, and BenjaminDisraeli were to become the joint proprietors of the proposed newjournal. The arrangement was as follows: MEMORANDUM. LONDON, _August_ 3, 1825. The undersigned parties agree to establish a Morning Paper, the propertyin which is to be in the following proportions, viz. : Mr. Murray.... One-half. Mr. Powles.... One-quarter. Mr. Disraeli.... One-quarter. Each party contributing to the expense, capital, and risk, in thoseproportions. The paper to be published by, and be under the management of Mr. Murray. JOHN MURRAY. J. D. POWLES. B. DISRAELI. Such was the memorandum of agreement entered into with a view to thepublication of the new morning paper, eventually called the_Representative_. As the first number was to appear in January 1826, there was little time to be lost in making the necessary arrangementsfor its publication. In the first place, an able editor had to be found;and, perhaps of almost equal importance, an able subeditor. Trustworthyreporters had to be engaged; foreign and home correspondents had also tobe selected with care; a printing office had to be taken; all thenecessary plant and apparatus had to be provided, and a staff of menbrought together preliminary to the opening day. The most important point in connection with the proposed journal was tofind the editor. Mr. Murray had been so ably assisted by Sir WalterScott in the projection of the _Quarterly Review_, that he resolved toconsult him on the subject; and this mission was undertaken by BenjaminDisraeli, part proprietor of the intended daily journal, though he wasthen only twenty years old. It was hoped that Mr. Lockhart, Sir WalterScott's son-in-law, might be induced to undertake the editorship. Thefollowing are Mr. Disraeli's letters to Mr. Murray, giving an account ofthe progress of his negotiations. It will be observed that he surroundsthe subject with a degree of mystery, through the names which he givesto the gentlemen whom he interviewed. Thus the Chevalier is Sir WalterScott; M. Is Mr. Lockhart; X. Is Mr. Canning; O. Is the political Puck(could this be himself?); and Chronometer is Mr. Barrow. On reaching Edinburgh, Mr. Disraeli wrote to Mr. Murray the followingaccount of his first journey across the Border: _Mr. B. Disraeli to John Murray_. ROYAL HOTEL, EDINBURGH. _September_ 21, 1825. MY DEAR SIR, I arrived in Edinburgh yesterday night at 11 o'clock. I slept atStamford, York, and Newcastle, and by so doing felt quite fresh at theend of my journey. I never preconceived a place better than Edinburgh. It is exactly what I fancied it, and certainly is the most beautifultown in the world. You can scarcely call it a city; at least, it haslittle of the roar of millions, and at this time is of course veryempty. I could not enter Scotland by the route you pointed out, andtherefore was unable to ascertain the fact of the Chevalier being at hisCastellum. I should in that case have gone by Carlisle. I called on thegentleman to whom Wright [Footnote: A solicitor in London, and friend ofboth parties, who had been consulted in the negotiations. ] gave me aletter this morning. He is at his country house; he will get a letterfrom me this morning. You see, therefore, that I have lost little time. I called at Oliver & Boyd's this morning, thinking that you might havewritten. You had not, however. When you write to me, enclose to them, asthey will forward, wherever I may be, and my stay at an hotel is alwaysuncertain. Mr. Boyd was most particularly civil. Their establishment isone of the completest I have ever seen. They are booksellers, bookbinders, and printers, all under the same roof; everything butmaking paper. I intend to examine the whole minutely before I leave, asit may be useful. I never thought of binding. Suppose you were to sew, etc. , your own publications? I arrived at York in the midst of the Grand [Musical] Festival. It waslate at night when I arrived, but the streets were crowded, andcontinued so for hours. I never witnessed a city in such an extremebustle, and so delightfully gay. It was a perfect carnival. I postponedmy journey from five in the morning to eleven, and by so doing got anhour for the Minster, where I witnessed a scene which must have farsurpassed, by all accounts, the celebrated commemoration in WestminsterAbbey. York Minster baffles all conception. Westminster Abbey is a toyto it. I think it is impossible to conceive of what Gothic architectureis susceptible until you see York. I speak with cathedrals of theNetherlands and the Rhine fresh in my memory. I witnessed in Yorkanother splendid sight--the pouring in of all the nobility and gentry ofthe neighbourhood and the neighbouring counties. The four-in-hands ofthe Yorkshire squires, the splendid rivalry in liveries and outriders, and the immense quantity of gorgeous equipages--numbers with fourhorses--formed a scene which you can only witness in the mighty andaristocratic county of York. It beat a Drawing Room hollow, as much asan oratorio in York Minster does a concert in the Opera House. Thisdelightful stay at York quite refreshed me, and I am not the leastfatigued by my journey. As I have only been in Edinburgh a few hours, of course I have little tosay. I shall write immediately that anything occurs. Kindestremembrances to Mrs. Murray and all. Ever yours, B. D. I find Froissart a most entertaining companion, just the fellow for atraveller's evening; and just the work too, for it needs neither booksof reference nor accumulations of MS. ROYAL HOTEL, EDINBURGH, _Sunday_. _September_ 22, 1825. MY DEAR SIR, I sent a despatch by Saturday night's post, directed to Mr. Barrow. Youhave doubtless received it safe. As I consider you are anxious to hearminutely of the state of my operations, I again send you a few lines. Ireceived this morning a very polite letter from L[ockhart]. He had justreceived that morning (Saturday) Wright's letter. I enclose you a copyof L. 's letter, as it will be interesting to you to see or judge whateffect was produced on his mind by its perusal. I have written to-day tosay that I will call at Chiefswood [Footnote: Chiefswood, where Lockhartthen lived, is about two miles distant from Abbotsford. Sir Walter Scottdescribes it as "a nice little cottage, in a glen belonging to thisproperty, with a rivulet in front, and a grove of trees on the east sideto keep away the cold wind. "] on Tuesday. I intend to go to Melrosetomorrow, but as I will not take the chance of meeting him the leasttired, I shall sleep at Melrose and call on the following morning. Ishall, of course, accept his offer of staying there. I shall call againat B[oyd]'s before my departure to-morrow, to see if there is anydespatch from you.... I shall continue to give you advice of all mymovements. You will agree with me that I have at least not lost anytime, but that all things have gone very well as yet. There is of courseno danger in our communications of anything unfairly transpiring; butfrom the very delicate nature of names interested, it will be expedientto adopt some cloak. _The Chevalier_ will speak for itself. M. , from Melrose, for Mr. L. X. For a certain personage on whom we called one day, who lives a slightdistance from town, and who was then unwell. O. For the political Puck. MR. CHRONOMETER will speak for itself, at least to all those who giveAfrican dinners. I think this necessary, and try to remember it. I am quite delightedwith Edinburgh, Its beauties become every moment more apparent. The viewfrom the Calton Hill finds me a frequent votary. In the present state ofaffairs, I suppose it will not be expedient to leave the letter for Mrs. Bruce. It will seem odd; p. P. C. At the same moment I bring a letter ofintroduction. If I return to Edinburgh, I can avail myself of it. If theletter contains anything which would otherwise make Mrs. Murray wish itto be left, let me know. I revel in the various beauties of a Scotchbreakfast. Cold grouse and marmalade find me, however, constant. Ever yours, B. D. The letter of Mr. Lockhart, to which Mr. Disraeli refers, ran asfollows: _Mr. J. G. Lockhart to Mr. B. Disraeli_. "The business to which the letter [of Mr. Wright] refers entitles it tomuch consideration. As yet I have had no leisure nor means to form evenan approximation towards any opinion as to the proposal Mr. W. Mentions, far less to commit my friend. In a word, I am perfectly in the dark asto everything else, except that I am sure it will give Mrs. Lockhart andmyself very great pleasure to see Mr. Disraeli under this roof.... Ifyou had no other object in view, I flatter myself that thisneighbourhood has, in Melrose and Abbotsford, some attractions notunworthy of your notice. " Mr. Disraeli paid his promised visit to Chiefswood. It appeared that Mr. Lockhart expected to receive Mr. Isaac D'Israeli, the well-known authorof "The Curiosities of Literature"; instead of which, the person whoappeared before him was Mr. D'Israeli's then unknown son Benjamin. _Mr. B, Disraeli to John Murray_. CHIEFSWOOD, _September_ 25, 1825. MY DEAR SIR, I arrived at Chiefswood yesterday. M. [Lockhart] had conceived that itwas my father who was coming. He was led to believe this throughWright's letter. In addition, therefore, to his natural reserve, therewas, of course, an evident disappointment at seeing me. Everythinglooked as black as possible. I shall not detain you now by informing youof fresh particulars. I leave them for when we meet. Suffice it to saythat in a few hours we completely understood each other, and were uponthe most intimate terms. M. Enters into our views with a facility andreadiness which were capital. He thinks that nothing can be moremagnificent or excellent; but two points immediately occurred: First, the difficulty of his leaving Edinburgh without any ostensible purpose;and, secondly, the losing caste in society by so doing. He is fullyaware that he may end by making his situation as important as any in theempire, but the primary difficulty is insurmountable. As regards his interest, I mentioned that he should be guaranteed, forthree years, £1, 000 per annum, and should take an eighth of every paperwhich was established, without risk, his income ceasing on his so doing. These are much better terms than we had imagined we could have made. Theagreement is thought extremely handsome, both by him and the Chevalier;but the income is not imagined to be too large. However, I dropped thatpoint, as it should be arranged with you when we all meet. The Chevalier breakfasted here to-day, and afterwards we were all threecloseted together. The Chevalier entered into it excellently. Hethought, however, that we could not depend upon Malcolm, Barrow, etc. , _keeping to it_; but this I do not fear. He, of course, has no idea ofyour influence or connections. With regard to the delicate point Imentioned, the Chevalier is willing to make any sacrifice in hispersonal comforts for Lockhart's advancement; but he feels that hisson-in-law will "lose caste" by going to town without anythingostensible. He agrees with me that M. Cannot accept an officialsituation of any kind, as it would compromise his independence, but hethinks _Parliament for M. Indispensable_, and also very much to _ourinterest_. I dine at Abbotsford to-day, and we shall most probably againdiscuss matters. Now, these are the points which occur to me. When M. Comes to town, itwill be most important that it should be distinctly proved to him thathe _will_ be supported by the great interests I have mentioned to him. He must see that, through Powles, all America and the CommercialInterest is at our beck; that Wilmot H. , etc. , not as mereunder-secretary, but as our private friend, is most staunch; that theChevalier is firm; that the West India Interest will pledge themselvesthat such men and in such situations as Barrow, etc. , etc. , are_distinctly in our power_; and finally, that he is coming to London, notto be an Editor of a Newspaper, but the Director-General of an immenseorgan, and at the head of a band of high-bred gentlemen and importantinterests. The Chevalier and M. Have unburthened themselves to me in a manner the_most confidential_ that you can possibly conceive. Of M. 's capability, _perfect complete capability_, there is no manner of doubt. Of his soundprinciples, and of his real views in life, I could in a moment satisfyyou. Rest assured, however, that you are dealing with a _perfectgentleman_. There has been no disguise to me of what has been done, andthe Chevalier had a private conversation with me on the subject, of anature _the most satisfactory_. With regard to other plans of ours, ifwe could get him up, we should find him invaluable. I have a mostsingular and secret history on this subject when we meet. Now, on the grand point--Parliament. M. Cannot be a representative of aGovernment borough. It is impossible. He must be free as air. I am surethat if this could be arranged, all would be settled; but it is"_indispensable_, " without you can suggest anything else. M. Was twodays in company with X. This summer, as well as X. 's and our friend, butnothing transpired of our views. This is a most favourable time to makea parliamentary arrangement. What do you think of making a confidant ofWilmot H[orton]? He is the kind of man who would be right pleased bysuch conduct. There is no harm of Lockhart's coming in for a Toryborough, because he is a Tory; but a Ministerial borough is impossibleto be managed. If this point could be arranged, I have no doubt that I shall be able toorganise, in the interest with which I am now engaged, a most _immenseparty_, and a _most serviceable one_. Be so kind as not to leave thevicinity of London, in case M. And myself come up _suddenly_; but I prayyou, if you have any real desire to establish a mighty engine, to exertyourself at this present moment, and assist me to your very utmost. Write as soon as possible, to give me some idea of your movements, anddirect to me here, as I shall then be sure to obtain your communication. The Chevalier and all here have the highest idea of Wright's _nous_, andthink it most important that he should be at the head of the legaldepartment. I write this despatch in the most extreme haste. Ever yours, B. D. On receiving the above letter and the previous communications, Mr. Murray sent them to Mr. Isaac D'Israeli for his perusal. _Mr. Isaac D'Israeli to Mr. Murray_. HYDE HOUSE, AMERSHAM, _September_ 29, 1825. MY DEAR FRIEND, How deeply I feel obliged and gratified by your confidentialcommunication! I read repeatedly the third letter of our youngplenipotentiary. I know nothing against him but his youth--a fault whicha few seasons of experience will infallibly correct; but I have observedthat the habits and experience he has acquired as a lawyer often greatlyserve him in matters o£ business. His views are vast, but they are baaedon good sense, and he is most determinedly serious when he sets to work. The Chevalier and M. Seem to have received him with all the openconfidence of men struck by a stranger, yet a stranger not whollystrange, and known enough to them to deserve their confidence if hecould inspire it. I flatter myself he has fully--he must, if he hasreally had confidential intercourse with the Chevalier, and soconfidently impresses you with so high and favourable a character of M. On your side, my dear Murray, no ordinary exertions will avail. You, too, have faith and confidence to inspire in them. You observe how thewary Northern Genius attempted to probe whether certain friends of yourswould stand together; no doubt they wish to ascertain that point. Pardonme if I add, that in satisfying their cautious and anxious inquiries asto your influence with these persons, it may be wise to throw a littleshade of mystery, and not to tell everything too openly at first;because, when objects are clearly defined, they do not affect ourimaginations as when they are somewhat concealed.... Vast as the projectseems, held up as it will be by personages of wealth, interests, politics, etc. , whenever it is once set up, I should have no fears forthe results, which are indeed the most important that one can wellconceive.... Had the editor of "Paul Jones" consulted me a little, Icould probably have furnished him with the account of the miserable endof his hero; and I am astonished it is not found, as you tell me, inyour American biography. [Footnote: The last paragraph in Mr. D'Israeli's letter refers to "The Life of Paul Jones, " which has beenalready mentioned. As the novel "Aylmer Papillon, " written in 1824, wasnever published, the preface to "Paul Jones" was Benjamin's firstappearance as an author. ] Meanwhile, young Disraeli still remained with Mr. Lockhart atChiefswood. _Mr. B, Disraeli to John Murray_. _September_, 1825. MY DEAR SIR, I am quite sure, that upon the business I am upon now every line will beacceptable, and I therefore make no apology for this hurried despatch. Ihave just received a parcel from Oliver & Boyd. I transmitted a letterfrom M. To Wright, and which [Footnote: This is an ungrammaticalconstruction which Lord Beaconsfield to the end of his days neverabandoned. _Vide_ letter on p. 318 and Lothair _passim_. --T. M. ] was foryour mutual consideration, to you, _viá Chronometer_, last Friday. Iafterwards received a note from you, dated Chichester, and fearing fromthat circumstance that some confusion would arise, I wrote a few linesto you at Mr. Holland's. [Footnote: The Rev. W. Holland, Mr. Murray'sbrother-in-law, was a minor canon of Chichester. ] I now find that youwill be in town on Monday, on which day I rather imagine the saidletter from M. To Wright will arrive. I therefore trust that thesuspected confusion will not arise. I am very much obliged to you for your letters; but I am very sorry thatyou have incurred any trouble, when it is most probable that I shall notuse them. The Abbotsford and Chiefswood families have placed me on sucha friendly and familiar footing, that it is utterly impossible for me toleave them while there exists any chance of M. 's going to England. M. Has introduced me to most of the neighbouring gentry, and receives witha loud laugh any mention of my return to Edinburgh. I dined with Dr. Brewster the other day. He has a pretty place near Melrose. It isimpossible for me to give to you any written idea of the beauty andunique character of Abbotsford. _Adio!_ B. D. Mr. Murray continued to transmit the correspondence to Mr. IsaacD'Israeli, whose delight may be conceived from the following: _Mr. D'Israeli to John Murray_. _October_ 9, 1825. MY DEAR FRIEND, Thanks! My warmest ones are poor returns for the ardent note you have soaffectionately conveyed to me by him on whom we now both alike rest ourhopes and our confidence. The more I think of this whole affair, fromits obscure beginnings, the more I am quite overcome by what he hasalready achieved; never did the finest season of blossoms promise aricher gathering. But he has not the sole merit, for you share it withhim, in the grand view you take of the capability of this newintellectual steam engine. In the following letter Lockhart definitely declined the editorship ofthe _Representative_. _Mr. Lockhart to John Murray_. _October_ 7, 1825. "I am afraid, that in spite of my earnest desire to be clear andexplicit, you have not after all fully understood the inexpressiblefeeling I entertain in regard to the _impossibility_ of my ever enteringinto the career of London in the capacity of a newspaper editor. Iconfess that you, who have adorned and raised your own profession sohighly, may feel inclined, and justly perhaps, to smile at some of myscruples; but it is enough to say that every hour that has elapsed sincethe idea was first started has only served to deepen and confirm thefeeling with which I at the first moment regarded it; and, in short, that if such a game _ought_ to be played, I am neither young nor poorenough to be the man that takes the hazard. " Sir Walter Scott also expressed his views on the subject as follows: _Sir W. Scott to John Murray_. ABBOTSFORD, _Sunday_, MY DEAR SIR, Lockhart seems to wish that I would express my opinion of the plan whichyou have had the kindness to submit to him, and I am myself glad of anopportunity to express my sincere thanks for the great confidence youare willing to repose in one so near to me, and whom I value so highly. There is nothing in life that can be more interesting to me than hisprosperity, and should there eventually appear a serious prospect of hisbettering his fortunes by quitting Scotland, I have too much regard forhim to desire him to remain, notwithstanding all the happiness I mustlose by his absence and that of my daughter. The present state, however, of the negotiation leaves me little or no reason to think that I will besubjected to this deprivation, for I cannot conceive it advisable thathe should leave Scotland on the speculation of becoming editor of anewspaper. It is very true that this department of literature may andought to be rendered more respectable than it is at present, but I thinkthis is a reformation more to be wished than hoped for, and should thinkit rash for any young man, of whatever talent, to sacrifice, nominallyat least, a considerable portion of his respectability in society inhopes of being submitted as an exception to a rule which is at presentpretty general. This might open the door to love of money, but it wouldeffectually shut it against ambition. To leave Scotland, Lockhart must make very great sacrifices, for hisviews here, though moderate, are certain, his situation in publicestimation and in private society is as high as that of any one at ourBar, and his road to the public open, if he chooses to assist his incomeby literary resources. But of the extent and value of these sacrificeshe must himself be a judge, and a more unprejudiced one, probably, thanI am. I am very glad he meets your wishes by going up to town, as this, thoughit should bear no further consequences, cannot but serve to show agrateful sense of the confidence and kindness of the parties concerned, and yours in particular. I beg kind compliments to Mr. D'Israeli, and am, dear sir, with bestwishes for the success of your great national plan. Yours very truly, WALTER SCOTT. Although Mr. Lockhart hung back from the proposed editorship, henevertheless carried out his intention of visiting Mr. Murray in Londona few weeks after the date of the above letter. Mr. J. T. Coleridge hadexpressed his desire to resign the editorship of the _Quarterly_, inconsequence of his rapidly increasing practice on the western circuit, and Mr. Lockhart was sounded as to his willingness to become hissuccessor. Mr. Murray entertained the hope that he might be able to givea portion of his time to rendering some assistance in the management ofthe proposed newspaper. As Sir Walter Scott had been taken into theircounsels, through the medium of Mr. Disraeli, Mr. Murray proceeded tocorrespond with him on the subject. From the draft of one of Mr. Murray's letters we extract the following: _John Murray to Sir Walter Scott_. _October_ 13, 1825. MY DEAR SIR WALTER, I feel greatly obliged by the favour of your kind letter, and for thegood opinion which you are disposed to entertain of certain plans, ofwhich you will by degrees be enabled to form, I hope, a still moresatisfactory estimate. At present, I will take the liberty of assuringyou, that after your confidence in me, I will neither propose nor thinkof anything respecting Mr. Lockhart that has not clearly for its basisthe honour of his family. With regard to our Great Plan--which reallyought not to be designated a newspaper, as that department of literaturehas hitherto been conducted--Mr. Lockhart was never intended to haveanything to do as editor: for we have already secured two most efficientand respectable persons to fill that department. I merely wished toreceive his general advice and assistance. And Mr. Lockhart would onlybe known or suspected to be the author of certain papers of gravenational importance. The more we have thought and talked over our plans, the more certain are we of their inevitable success, and of theirleading us to certain power, reputation, and fortune. For myself, theheyday of my youth is passed, though I may be allowed certain experiencein my profession. I have acquired a moderate fortune, and have a certaincharacter, and move now in the first circles of society; and I have afamily: these, I hope, may be some fair pledge to you that I would notengage in this venture with any hazard, when all that is dearest to manwould be my loss. In order, however, to completely obviate any difficulties which havebeen urged, I have proposed to Mr. Lockhart to come to London as theeditor of the _Quarterly_--an appointment which, I verily believe, iscoveted by many of the highest literary characters in the country, andwhich, of itself, would entitle its possessor to enter into and mix withthe first classes of society. For this, and without writing a line, butmerely for performing the duties of an editor, I shall have the pleasureof allowing him a thousand pounds a year; and this, with contributionsof his own, might easily become £1, 500, and take no serious portion ofhis time either. Then, for his connection with the paper, he will becomepermanently interested in a share we can guarantee to him for threeyears, and which, I am confident, will be worth, at the end of thatperiod, at least £3, 000; and the profits from that share will not beless than £1, 500 per annum. I have lately heard, from good authority, that the annual profit of the _Times_ is £40, 000, and that a share inthe _Courier_ sold last week (wretchedly conducted, it seems) at therate of £100, 000 for the property. But this is not all. You know well enough that the business of apublishing bookseller is not in his shop or even his connection, but inhis brains; and we can put forward together a series of valuableliterary works, and without, observe me, in any of these plans, theslightest risk to Mr. Lockhart. And I do most solemnly assure you thatif I may take any credit to myself for possessing anything like soundjudgment in my profession, the things which we shall immediately beginupon, as Mr. Lockhart will explain to you, are as perfectly certain ofcommanding a great sale as anything I ever had the good fortune toengage in. Lockhart finally accepted the editorship of the _Quarterly_, afternegotiations which brought Mr. Disraeli on a second visit to Scotland, but he undertook no formal responsibility for the new daily paper. In London Disraeli was indefatigable. He visited City men, for thepurpose of obtaining articles on commercial subjects. He employed anarchitect, Mr. G. Basevi, jun. , his cousin, with a view to the planningof offices and printing premises. A large house was eventually taken inGreat George Street, Westminster, and duly fitted up as a printingoffice. He then proceeded, in common with Mr. Murray, to make arrangements forthe foreign correspondence. In the summer of 1824--before the newenterprise was thought of--he had travelled in the Rhine country, andmade some pleasant acquaintances, of whom he now bethought himself whenmaking arrangements for the new paper. One of them was Mr. Maas, of theTrierscher Hof, Coblentz, and Mr. Disraeli addressed him as follows: _Mr. B. Disraeli to Mr. Maas_. _October_ 25, 1825. DEAR SIR, Your hospitality, which I have twice enjoyed, convinces me that you willnot consider this as an intrusion. My friend, Mr. Murray, of AlbemarleStreet, London, the most eminent publisher that we have, is about toestablish a daily journal of the first importance. With his greatinfluence and connections, there is no doubt that he will succeed in hisendeavour to make it the focus of the information of the whole world. Among other places at which he wishes to have correspondents is theRhine, and he has applied to me for my advice upon this point. It hasstruck me that Coblentz is a very good situation for intelligence. Itsproximity to the Rhine and the Moselle, its contiguity to the beautifulbaths of the Taunus, and the innumerable travellers who pass through it, and spread everywhere the fame of your admirable hotel, all conduce tomake it a place from which much interesting intelligence might beprocured. The most celebrated men in Europe have promised their assistance to Mr. Murray in his great project. I wish to know whether you can point outany one to him who will occasionally write him a letter from your city. Intelligence as to the company at Wiesbaden and Ems, and of the personsof eminence, particularly English, who pass through Coblentz, of thetravellers down the Rhine, and such topics, are very interesting to us. You yourself would make a most admirable correspondent. The labour wouldbe very light and very agreeable; and Mr. Murray would take care toacknowledge your kindness by various courtesies. If you object to sayanything about politics you can omit mentioning the subject. I wish youwould undertake it, as I am sure you would write most agreeable letters. Once a month would be sufficient, or rather write whenever you haveanything that you think interesting. Will you be so kind as to write mein answer what you think of this proposal? The communication may becarried on in any language you please. Last year when I was at Coblentz you were kind enough to show me a verypretty collection of ancient glass. Pray is it yet to be purchased? Ithink I know an English gentleman who would be happy to possess it. Ihope this will not be the last letter which passes between us. I am, dear Sir, Yours most truly, B. DISRAELI. Mr. Maas agreed to Mr. Disraeli's proposal, and his letter was handed toMr. Murray, who gave him further instructions as to the foreigncorrespondence which he required. Mr. Murray himself wrote tocorrespondents at Hamburg, Maestricht, Genoa, Trieste, Gibraltar, andother places, with the same object. The time for the publication of the newspaper was rapidly approaching, and Mr. B. Disraeli's correspondence on the subject of the engagement ofa staff became fast and furious. By the end of December Mr. Lockhart had arrived in London, for thepurpose of commencing his editorship of the _Quarterly Review_. The nameof the new morning paper had not then been yet fixed on; from thecorrespondence respecting it, we find that some spoke of it as the_Daily Review_, others as the _Morning News_, and so on; but that Mr. Benjamin Disraeli settled the matter appears from the following letterof Mr. Lockhart to Mr. Murray: _Mr. Lockhart to John Murray_. _December_ 21, 1825. MY DEAR SIR, I am delighted, and, what is more, satisfied with Disraeli's title--the_Representative_. If Mr. Powles does not produce some thunderingobjection, let this be fixed, in God's name. Strange to say, from this time forward nothing more is heard of Mr. Benjamin Disraeli in connection with the _Representative_. After his twoJourneys to Scotland, his interviews with Sir Walter Scott and Mr. Lockhart, his activity in making arrangements previous to the startingof the daily paper, his communications with the architect as to thepurchase and fitting up of the premises in Great George Street, and withthe solicitors as to the proposed deed of partnership, he suddenly dropsout of sight; and nothing more is heard of him in connection with thebusiness. It would appear that when the time arrived for the proprietors of thenew paper to provide the necessary capital under the terms of thememorandum of agreement dated August 3, 1825, both Mr. Disraeli and Mr. Powles failed to contribute their several proportions. Mr. Murray hadindeed already spent a considerable sum, and entered into agreements forthe purchase of printing-offices, printing-machines, types, and all theparaphernalia of a newspaper establishment. He had engaged reporters, correspondents, printers, sub-editors, though he still wanted anefficient editor. He was greatly disappointed at not being able toobtain the services of Mr. Lockhart. Mr. Disraeli was too young--beingthen only twenty-one, and entirely inexperienced in the work ofconducting a daily paper--to be entrusted with the editorship. Indeed, it is doubtful whether he ever contemplated occupying that position, though he had engaged himself most sedulously in the preliminaryarrangements in one department, his endeavours to obtain the assistanceof men of commerce in the City; however, he was by no means successful. Nevertheless, Mr. Murray was so far committed that he felt bound to goon with the enterprise, and he advertised the publication of the newmorning paper. Some of his friends congratulated him on theannouncement, trusting that they might see on their breakfast-table apaper which their wives and daughters might read without a blush. The first number of the _Representative_ accordingly appeared on January25, 1826, price 7_d_. ; the Stamp Tax was then 4_d_. In politics it was asupporter of Lord Liverpool's Government; but public distress, thecurrency, trade and commerce were subjects of independent comment. Notwithstanding the pains which had been taken, and the money which hadbeen spent, the _Representative_ was a failure from the beginning. Itwas badly organized, badly edited, and its contents--leading articles, home and foreign news--were ill-balanced. Failing Lockhart, an editor, named Tyndale, had been appointed on short notice, though he was anobscure and uninfluential person. He soon disappeared in favour ofothers, who were no better. Dr. Maginn [Footnote: Dr. Maginn's papers in_Blackwood_ are or should be known to the reader. The Murraycorrespondence contains many characteristic letters from this jovial andimpecunious Irishman. He is generally supposed to have been theprototype of Thackeray's Captain Shandon. --T. M. ] had been engaged--theMorgan O'Doherty of _Blackwood's Magazine_--wit, scholar, and Bohemian. He was sent to Paris, where he evidently enjoyed himself; but theresults, as regarded the _Representative_, were by no meanssatisfactory. He was better at borrowing money than at writing articles. Mr. S. C. Hall, one of the parliamentary reporters of the paper, says, in his "Retrospect of a Long Life, " that: "The day preceding the issue of the first number, Mr. Murray might haveobtained a very large sum for a shore of the copyright, of which he wasthe sole proprietor; the day after that issue, the copyright was worthcomparatively nothing.... Editor there was literally none, from thebeginning to the end. The first number supplied conclusive evidence ofthe utter ignorance of editorial tact on the part of the personentrusted with the duty.... In short, the work was badly done; if not asnare, it was a delusion; and the reputation of the new journal fellbelow zero in twenty-four hours. " [Footnote: "Retrospect of a Long Life, from 1815 to 1883. " By S. C. Hall, F. S. A. , i. P. 126. ] An inspection of the file of the _Representative_ justifies Mr. Hall'sremarks. The first number contained an article by Lockhart, four columnsin length, on the affairs of Europe. It was correct and scholar-like, but tame and colourless. Incorrectness in a leading article may betolerated, but dulness amounts to a literary crime. The foreigncorrespondence consisted of a letter from Valetta, and a communicationfrom Paris, more than a column in length, relating to French opera. Inthe matter of news, for which the dailies are principally purchased, thefirst number was exceedingly defective. It is hard to judge of themerits of a new journal from the first number, which must necessarilylabour under many disadvantages, but the _Representative_ did not fromthe first exhibit any element of success. Mr. Murray found his new enterprise an increasing source of annoyanceand worry. His health broke down under the strain, and when he wasconfined to his bed by illness things went worse from day to day. Theusual publishing business was neglected; letters remained unanswered, manuscripts remained unread, and some correspondents became excessivelyangry at their communications being neglected. Mr. Murray's worries were increased by the commercial crisis thenprevailing, and by the downfall of many large publishing houses. It wasfeared that Mr. Murray might be implicated in the failures. At the endof January, the great firm of Archibald Constable & Co. , of Edinburghpublishers of Sir Walter Scott's novels, was declared bankrupt; shortlyafter, the failure was announced of James Ballantyne & Co. , in which SirWalter Scott was a partner; and with these houses, that of Hurst, Kobinson & Co. , of London, was hopelessly involved. The market wasflooded with the dishonoured paper of all these concerns, and mercantileconfidence in the great publishing houses was almost at an end. We findWashington Irving communicating the following intelligence to A. H. Everett, United States Minister at Madrid (January 31, 1826): "You will perceive by the papers the failure of Constable & Co. , atEdinburgh, and Hurst, Robinson & Co. , at London. These are severe shocksin the trading world of literature. Pray Heaven, Murray may standunmoved, and not go into the _Gazette_, instead of publishing one!" Mr. Murray held his ground. He was not only able to pay his way, but toassist some of the best-known London publishers through the pressure oftheir difficulties. One of these was Mr. Robert Baldwin, of PaternosterRow, who expressed his repeated obligations to Mr. Murray for his helpin time of need. The events of this crisis clearly demonstrated thewisdom and foresight of Murray in breaking loose from the Ballantyne andConstable connection, in spite of the promising advantages which it hadoffered him. Murray still went on with the _Representative_, though the result wasincreasing annoyance and vexation. Mr. Milman wrote to him, "Do get anew editor for the lighter part of your paper, and look well to the_Quarterly_. " The advice was taken, and Dr. Maginn was brought over fromParis to take charge of the lighter part of the paper at a salary of£700 a year, with a house. The result was, that a number of clever _jeuxd'esprit_ were inserted by him, but these were intermingled with somebiting articles, which gave considerable offence. At length the strain became more than he could bear, and he sought thefirst opportunity for stopping the further publication of the paper. This occurred at the end of the general election, and the_Representative_ ceased to exist on July 29, 1826, after a career ofonly six months, during which brief period it had involved Mr. Murray ina loss of not less than £26, 000. [Footnote: The _Representative_ wasafterwards incorporated with the _New Times_, another unfortunatepaper. ] Mr. Murray bore his loss with much equanimity, and found it aninexpressible relief to be rid of the _Representative_ even at such asacrifice. To Washington Irving he wrote: _John Murray to Mr. Irving_. "One cause of my not writing to you during one whole year was my'entanglement, ' as Lady G---- says, with a newspaper, which absorbed mymoney, and distracted and depressed my mind; but I have cut the knot ofevil, which I could not untie, and am now, by the blessing of God, againreturned to reason and the shop. " One of the unfortunate results of the initiation and publication of the_Representative_ was that it disturbed the friendship which had so longexisted between Mr. Murray and Mr. Isaac D'Israeli. The real cause ofBenjamin's sudden dissociation from an enterprise of which in itsearlier stages he had been the moving spirit, can only be matter ofconjecture. The only mention of his name in the later correspondenceregarding the newspaper occurs in the following letter: _Mr. Lockhart to John Murray_. THURSDAY, _February_ 14, 1826. I think Mr. B. Disraeli ought to tell you what it is that he wishes tosay to Mr. Croker on a business _of yours_ ere he asks of you a letterto the Secretary. If there really be something worth saying, I certainlyknow nobody that would say it better, but I confess I think, all thingsconsidered, you have no need of anybody to come between you and Mr. Croker. What can it be? Yours, J. G. L. But after the _Representative_, had ceased to be published, the elderD'Israeli thought he had a cause of quarrel with Mr. Murray, andproposed to publish a pamphlet on the subject. The matter was broughtunder the notice of Mr. Sharon Turner, the historian and solicitor, andthe friend of both. Mr. Turner strongly advised Mr. Isaac D'Israeli toabstain from issuing any such publication. _Mr. Sharon Turner to Mr. D'Israeli. _ _October_ 6, 1826. "Fame is pleasant, if it arise from what will give credit or do good. But to make oneself notorious only to be the football of all thedinner-tables, tea-tables, and gossiping visits of the country, will beso great a weakness, that until I see you actually committing yourselfto it, I shall not believe that you, at an age like my own, can wilfullyand deliberately do anything that will bring the evil on you. ThereforeI earnestly advise that whatever has passed be left as it is.... If yougive it any further publicity, you will, I think, cast a shade over aname that at present stands quite fair before the public eye. Andnothing can dim it to you that will not injure all who belong to you. Therefore, as I have said to Murray, I say to you: Let Oblivion absorbthe whole question as soon as possible, and do not stir a step to rescueit from her salutary power.... If I did not gee your words before me, Icould not have supposed that after your experience of these things andof the world, you could deliberately intend to write--that is, topublish in print--anything on the differences between you, Murray, andthe _Representative_, and your son.... If you do, Murray will be drivento answer. To him the worst that can befall will be the public smilethat he could have embarked in a speculation that has cost him manythousand pounds, and a criticism on what led to it.... The public knowit, and talk as they please about it, but in a short time will say nomore upon it. It is now dying away. Very few at present know that youwere in any way concerned about it. To you, therefore, all that resultswill be new matter for the public discussion and censure. And, afterreading Benjamin's agreement of the 3rd August, 1825, and your lettersto Murray on him and the business, of the 27th September, the 29thSeptember, and the 9th October, my sincere opinion is that you cannot, with a due regard to your own reputation, _write_ or _publish_ anythingabout it. I send you hastily my immediate thoughts, that he whom I havealways respected may not, by publishing what will be immediatelycontradicted, diminish or destroy in others that respect which atpresent he possesses, and which I hope he will continue to enjoy. " Mr. D'Israeli did not write his proposed pamphlet. What Mr. Murraythought of his intention may be inferred from the following extract fromhis letter to Mr. Sharon Turner: _John Murray to Mr. Sharon Turner_. _October_ 16, 1826. "Mr. D'Israeli is totally wrong in supposing that my indignation againsthis son arises in the smallest degree from the sum which I have lost byyielding to that son's unrelenting excitement and importunity; thisloss, whilst it was in weekly operation, may be supposed, and naturallyenough, to have been sufficiently painful, [Footnote: See note at theend of the chapter. ] but now that it has ceased, I solemnly declare thatI neither care nor think about it, more than one does of thelong-suffered agonies of an aching tooth the day after we have summonedresolution enough to have it extracted. On the contrary, I am disposedto consider this apparent misfortune as one of that chastening classwhich, if suffered wisely, may be productive of greater good, and I feelconfidently that, as it has re-kindled my ancient ardour in business, avery few months will enable me to replace this temporary loss, and makeme infinitely the gainer, if I profit by the prudential lesson whichthis whole affair is calculated to teach.... From me his son hadreceived nothing but the most unbounded confidence and parentalattachment; my fault was in having loved, not wisely, but too well. " To conclude the story, as far as Mr. Disraeli was concerned, we mayprint here a letter written some time later. Mr. Powles had availedhimself of Disraeli's literary skill to recommend his miningspeculations to the public. In March 1825, Mr. Murray had published, oncommission, "American Mining Companies, " and the same year "PresentState of Mexico, " and "Lawyers and Legislators, " all of them written by, or under the superintendence of, Mr. Disraeli. Mr. Powles, however, again proved faithless, and although the money for the printing had beendue for some time, he paid nothing; and at length Mr. Disraeli addressedMr. Murray in the following letter: _Mr. Benjamin Disraeli to John Murray_. 6 BLOOMSBURY SQUARE, _March_ 19, 1827. SIR, I beg to enclose you the sum of one hundred and fifty pounds, which Ibelieve to be the amount due to you for certain pamphlets publishedrespecting the American Mining Companies, as stated in accounts sent insome time since. I have never been able to obtain a settlement of theseaccounts from the parties originally responsible, and it has hithertobeen quite out of my power to exempt myself from the liability, which, Ihave ever been conscious, on their incompetency, resulted from thepeculiar circumstances of the case to myself. In now enclosing you whatI consider to be the amount, I beg also to state that I have fixed uponit from memory, having been unsuccessful in my endeavours to obtain evena return of the accounts from the original parties, and being unwillingto trouble you again for a second set of accounts, which had been solong and so improperly kept unsettled. In the event, therefore, of therebeing any mistake, I will be obliged by your clerk instantly informingme of it, and it will be as instantly rectified; and I will also thankyou to enclose me a receipt, in order to substantiate my claims andenforce my demands against the parties originally responsible. I have toexpress my sense of your courtesy in this business, and I am, sir, yours truly, BENJAMIN DISRAELI. Fortunately, the misunderstanding between the two old friends did notlast long, for towards the end of the year we find Mr. Isaac D'Israelicommunicating with Mr. Murray respecting Wool's "Life of Joseph Warton, "and certain selected letters by Warton which he thought worthy ofrepublication; and with respect to his son, Mr. Benjamin Disraeli, although he published his first work, "Vivian Grey, " through Colburn, he returned to Albemarle Street a few years later, and published his"Contarini Fleming" through Mr. Murray. NOTE. --It appears from the correspondence that Mr. Murray had been ledby the "unrelenting excitement and importunity" of his young friend tomake some joint speculation in South American mines. The same financialcrisis which prevented Mr. Powles from fulfilling his obligationsprobably swept away all chance of profit from this investment. Thefinancial loss involved in the failure of the _Representative_ was moreserious, but Mr. Murray's resentment against young Mr. Disraeli was notdue to any such considerations. Justly or unjustly he felt bitterlyaggrieved at certain personalities which, he thought, were to bedetected in "Vivian Grey. " Mr. Disraeli was also suspected of beingconcerned in an ephemeral publication called _The Star Chamber_, towhich he undoubtedly contributed certain articles, and in whichparagraphs appeared giving offence in Albemarle Street. The story ofVivian Grey (as it appeared in the first edition) is transposed from theliterary to the political key. It is undoubtedly autobiographical, butthe identification of Mr. Murray with the Marquis of Carabas must seemvery far-fetched. It is, at all times, difficult to say within whatlimits the novelist is entitled to resort to portraiture in order tobuild up the fabric of his romance. Intention of offence was vehementlydenied by the D'Israeli family, which, as the correspondence shows, rushed with one accord to the defence of the future Lord Beaconsfield. It was really a storm in a teacup, and but for the future eminence ofone of the friends concerned would call for no remark. Mr. Disraeli'sbitter disappointment at the failure of his great journalisticcombination sharpened the keen edge of his wit and perhaps magnified theirksomeness of the restraint which his older fellow-adventurer tried toput on his "unrelenting excitement, " and it is possible that hisfeelings found vent in the novel which he then was composing. It ispleasing to remark that at a later date his confidence and esteem forhis father's old friend returned to him, and that the incident ended ina way honourable to all concerned. --T. M. CHAPTER XXV MR. LOCKHART AS EDITOR OF THE "QUARTERLY"--HALLAM--WORDSWORTH--DEATH OFCONSTABLE The appointment of a new editor naturally excited much interest amongthe contributors and supporters of the _Quarterly Review_. Comments weremade, and drew from Scott the following letter: _Sir Walter Scott to John Murray_. ABBOTSFORD, _November_ 17, 1825. My Dear Sir, I was much surprised to-day to learn from Lockhart by letter that somescruples were in circulation among some of the respectable among thesupporters of the _Quarterly Review_ concerning his capacity toundertake that highly responsible task. In most cases I might not beconsidered as a disinterested witness on behalf of so near a connection, but in the present instance I have some claim to call myself so. Theplan (I need not remind you) of calling Lockhart to this distinguishedsituation, far from being favoured by me, or in any respect advanced orfurthered by such interest as I might have urged, was not communicatedto me until it was formed; and as it involved the removal of my daughterand of her husband, who has always loved and honoured me as a son, fromtheir native country and from my vicinity, my private wish and that ofall the members of my family was that such a change should not takeplace. But the advantages proposed were so considerable, that it removedall title on my part to state my own strong desire that he should remainin Scotland. Now I do assure you that if in these circumstances I hadseen anything in Lockhart's habits, cast of mind, or mode of thinking orcomposition which made him unfit for the duty he had to undertake, Ishould have been the last man in the world to permit, without thestrongest expostulation not with him alone but with you, his exchangingan easy and increasing income in his own country and amongst his ownfriends for a larger income perhaps, but a highly responsible situationin London. I considered this matter very attentively, and recalled to myrecollection all I had known of Mr. Lockhart both before and since hisconnection with my family. I have no hesitation in saying that when hewas paying his addresses in my family I fairly stated to him thathowever I might be pleased with his general talents and accomplishments, with his family, which is highly respectable, and his views in life, which I thought satisfactory, I did decidedly object to the use he andothers had made of their wit and satirical talent in _Blackwood'sMagazine_, which, though a work of considerable power, I thought toopersonal to be in good taste or to be quite respectable. Mr. Lockhartthen pledged his word to me that he would withdraw from this species ofwarfare, and I have every reason to believe that he has kept his wordwith me. In particular I _know_ that he had not the least concern withthe _Beacon_ newspaper, though strongly urged by his young friends atthe Bar, and I also know that while he has sometimes contributed anessay to _Blackwood_ on general literature, or politics, which can bereferred to if necessary, he has no connection whatever with thesatirical part of the work or with its general management, nor was he atany time the Editor of the publication. It seems extremely hard (though not perhaps to be wondered at) that thefollies of three--or four and twenty should be remembered against a manof thirty, who has abstained during the interval from giving the leastcause of offence. There are few men of any rank in letters who have notat some time or other been guilty of some abuse of their satiricalpowers, and very few who have not seen reason to wish that they hadrestrained their vein of pleasantry. Thinking over Lockhart's offenceswith my own, and other men's whom either politics or literarycontroversy has led into such effusions, I cannot help thinking thatfive years' proscription ought to obtain a full immunity on theiraccount. There were none of them which could be ascribed to any worsemotive than a wicked wit, and many of the individuals against whom theywere directed were worthy of more severe chastisement. The blame was inmeddling with such men at all. Lockhart is reckoned an excellentscholar, and Oxford has said so. He is born a gentleman, has always keptthe best society, and his personal character is without a shadow ofblame. In the most unfortunate affair of his life he did all that mancould do, and the unhappy tragedy was the result of the poor sufferer'safter-thought to get out of a scrape. [Footnote: This refers, withoutdoubt, to the unfortunate death of John Scott, the editor of the _LondonMagazine_, in a duel with Lockhart's friend Christie, the result of aquarrel in which Lockhart himself had been concerned. ] Of his generaltalents I will not presume to speak, but they are generally allowed tobe of the first order. This, however, I _will_ say, that I have knownthe most able men of my time, and I never met any one who had such readycommand of his own mind, or possessed in a greater degree the power ofmaking his talents available upon the shortest notice, and upon anysubject. He is also remarkably docile and willing to receive advice oradmonition from the old and experienced. He is a fond husband and almosta doating father, seeks no amusement out of his own family, and is notonly addicted to no bad habits, but averse to spending time in societyor the dissipations connected with it. Speaking upon my honour as agentleman and my credit as a man of letters, I do not know a person sowell qualified for the very difficult and responsible task he hasundertaken, and I think the distinct testimony of one who must know theindividual well ought to bear weight against all vague rumours, whetherarising from idle squibs he may have been guilty of when he came fromCollege--and I know none of these which indicate a bad heart in thejester--or, as is much more likely, from those which have been rashlyand falsely ascribed to him. Had any shadow of this want of confidence been expressed in thebeginning of the business I for one would have advised Lockhart to havenothing to do with a concern for which his capacity was called inquestion. But _now_ what can be done? A liberal offer, handsomely made, has been accepted with the same confidence with which it was offered. Lockhart has resigned his office in Edinburgh, given up his business, taken a house in London, and has let, or is on the eve of letting, hishouse here. The thing is so public, that about thirty of the mostrespectable gentlemen in Edinburgh have proposed to me that a dinnershould be given in his honour. The ground is cut away behind him for aretreat, nor can such a thing be proposed as matters now stand. Upon what grounds or by whom Lockhart was first recommended to you Ihave no right or wish to inquire, having no access whatsoever to thenegotiation, the result of which must be in every wise painful enough tome. But as their advice must in addition to your own judgment have hadgreat weight with you, I conceive they will join with me in theexpectation that the other respectable friends of this important workwill not form any decision to Lockhart's prejudice till they shall seehow the business is conducted. By a different conduct they may do harmto the Editor, Publisher, and the work itself, as far as the withdrawingof their countenance must necessarily be prejudicial to its currency. But if it shall prove that their suspicions prove unfounded, I am sureit will give pain to them to have listened to them for a moment. It has been my lot twice before now to stand forward to the best of mypower as the assistant of two individuals against whom a party run wasmade. The one case was that of Wilson, to whom a thousand idle prankswere imputed of a character very different and far more eccentric thananything that ever attached to Lockhart. We carried him through upon thefair principle that in the case of good morals and perfect talents for asituation, where vice or crimes are not alleged, the follies of youthshould not obstruct the fair prospects of advanced manhood. God help usall if some such modification of censure is not extended to us, sincemost men have sown wild oats enough! Wilson was made a professor, as youknow, has one of the fullest classes in the University, lectures mosteloquently, and is much beloved by his pupils. The other was the case ofJohn Williams, now Rector of our new Academy here, who was opposed mostviolently upon what on examination proved to be exaggerated rumours ofold Winchester stories. He got the situation chiefly, I think, by myown standing firm and keeping others together. And the gentlemen whoopposed him most violently have repeatedly told me that I did the utmostservice to the Academy by bringing him in, for never was a man in such asituation so eminently qualified for the task of education. I only mention these things to show that it is not in my son-in-law'saffairs alone that I would endeavour to remove that sort of prejudicewhich envy and party zeal are always ready to throw in the way of risingtalent. Those who are interested in the matter may be well assured thatwith whatever prejudice they may receive Lockhart at first, all who havecandour enough to wait till he can afford them the means of judging willbe of opinion that they have got a person possibly as well situated forthe duties of such an office as any man that England could afford them. I would rather have written a letter of this kind concerning any otherperson than one connected with myself, but it is every word true, werethere neither son nor daughter in the case; but as such I leave it atyour discretion to show it, not generally, but to such friends andpatrons of the _Review_ as in your opinion have a title to know thecontents. Believe me, dear Sir, Your most obedient Servant, WALTER SCOTT. Mr. Lockhart himself addressed the two following letters to Mr. Murray: _Mr. Lockhart to John Murray_. Chiefswood, _November_ 19, 1825. My Dear Sir, I am deeply indebted to Disraeli for the trouble he hastaken to come hither again at a time when he has so many matters of realimportance to attend to in London. The sort of stuff that certain gravegentlemen have been mincing at, was of course thoroughly foreseen by SirW. Scott and by myself from the beginning of the business. Suchprejudices I cannot hope to overcome, except by doing well what has beenentrusted to me, and after all I should like to know what man could havebeen put at the head of the _Quarterly Review_ at my time of lifewithout having the Doctors uttering doctorisms on the occasion. If youbut knew it, you yourself personally could in one moment overcome andsilence for ever the whole of these people. As for me, nobody has moresincere respect for them in their own different walks of excellence thanmyself; and if there be one thing that I may promise for myself, it is, that age, experience, and eminence, shall never find fair reason toaccuse me of treating them with presumption. I am much more afraid offalling into the opposite error. I have written at some length on thesematters to Mr. Croker, Mr. Ellis, and Mr. Rose--and to no one else; norwill I again put pen to paper, unless someone, having a right to put adistinct question to me, does put it. _Mr. Lockhart to John Murray_. _Sunday_, CHIEFSWOOD, _November_ 27, 1825. My Dear Murray, I have read the letter I received yesterday evening with the greatestinterest, and closed it with the sincerest pleasure. I think we nowbegin to understand each other, and if we do that I am sure _I_ have nosort of apprehension as to the result of the whole business. But inwriting one must come to the point, therefore I proceed at once to yourtopics in their order, and rely on it I shall speak as openly on everyone of them as I would _to my brother_. Mr. Croker's behaviour has indeed distressed me, for I had alwaysconsidered him as one of those bad enemies who make excellent friends. Ihad not the least idea that he had ever ceased to regard you personallywith friendship, even affection, until B. D. Told me about histrafficking with Knight; for as to the little hints you gave me when intown, I set all that down to his aversion for the notion of your settingup a paper, and thereby dethroning him from his invisible predominanceover the Tory daily press, and of course attached little importance toit. I am now satisfied, more particularly after hearing how he behavedhimself in the interview with you, that there is some deeper feeling inhis mind. The correspondence that has been passing between him and memay have been somewhat imprudently managed on my part. I may have_committed_ myself to a certain extent in it in more ways than one. Itis needless to regret what cannot be undone; at all events, I perceivethat it is now over with us for the present. I do not, however, believebut that he will continue to do what he has been used to do for the_Review_; indeed, unless he makes the newspaper business his excuse, hestands completely pledged to me to adhere to that. But with reverence be it spoken, even this does not seem to me a matterof very great moment. On the contrary, I believe that his papers in the_Review_ have (with a few exceptions) done the work a great deal moreharm than good. I cannot express what I feel; but there was always thebitterness of Gifford without his dignity, and the bigotry of Southeywithout his _bonne-foi. _ His scourging of such poor deer as Lady Morganwas unworthy of a work of that rank. If we can get the same_information_ elsewhere, no fear that we need equally regret thesecretary's quill. As it is, we must be contented to watch the course ofthings and recollect the Roman's maxim, "quae casus obtullerint adsapientiam vertenda. " I an vexed not a little at Mr. Barrow's imprudence in mentioning my nameto Croker and to Rose as in connection with the paper; and for thisreason that I was most anxious to have produced at least one number ofthe _Review_ ere that matter should have been at all suspected. As itis, I hope you will still find means to make Barrow, Rose, and Croker(at all events the two last) completely understand that you had, indeed, wished me to edit the paper, but that I had declined that, and that_then_ you had offered me the _Review_. No matter what you say as to the firm belief I have expressed that thepaper _will_ answer, and the resolutions I have made to assist you bywriting political articles in it. It is of the highest importance thatin our anxiety about a new affair one should not lose sight of the oldand established one, and I _can_ believe that if the real state of thecase were known at the outset of my career in London, a considerablefeeling detrimental to the _Quarterly might_ be excited. We have enoughof adverse feelings to meet, without unnecessarily swelling their numberand aggravating their quality. I beg you to have a serious conversation with Mr. Barrow on this head, and in the course of it take care to make him thoroughly understand thatthe prejudices or doubts he gave utterance to in regard to me were heardof by me without surprise, and excited no sort of angry feelingwhatever. He could know nothing of me but from flying rumours, for thenature of which _he_ could in no shape be answerable. As for poor Rose'swell-meant hints about my "identifying myself perhaps in the mind ofsociety with the scavengers of the press, " "the folly of _your_ riskingyour name on a _paper_, " etc. , etc. , of course we shall equallyappreciate all this. Rose is a timid dandy, and a bit of a Whig to boot. I shall make some explanation to him when I next have occasion to writeto him, but that sort of thing would come surely with a better gracefrom you than from me. I have not a doubt that he will be a dailyscribbler in your paper ere it is a week old. To all these people--Croker as well as the rest--John Murray is of muchmore importance than they ever can be to him if he will only _believe_what I _know_, viz. That his own name in _society_ stands miles aboveany of theirs. Croker _cannot_ form the nucleus of a literaryassociation which you have any reason to dread. He is hated by thehigher Tories quite as sincerely as by the Whigs: besides, he has not_now-a-days_ courage to strike an effective blow; he will not comeforward. I come to pleasanter matters. Nothing, indeed, can be more handsome, more generous than Mr. Coleridge's whole behaviour. I beg of you toexpress to him the sense I have of the civility with which he has beenpleased to remember and allude to _me_, and assure him that I am mostgrateful for the assistance he offers, and accept of it to any extent hechooses. In this way Mr. Lockhart succeeded to the control of what his friendJohn Wilson called "a National Work"; and he justified the selectionwhich Mr. Murray had made of him as editor: not only maintaining andenhancing the reputation of the _Review_, by securing the friendship ofthe old contributors, but enlisting the assistance of many new ones. SirWalter Scott, though "working himself to pieces" to free himself fromdebt, came to his help, and to the first number which Lockhart edited hecontributed an interesting article on "Pepys' Memoirs. " Lockhart's literary taste and discernment were of the highest order; andhe displayed a moderation and gentleness, even in his adversecriticism, for which those who knew him but slightly, or by reputationonly, scarce gave him credit. There soon sprang up between him and hispublisher an intimacy and mutual confidence which lasted till Murray'sdeath; and Lockhart continued to edit the _Quarterly_ till his own deathin 1854. In truth there was need of mutual confidence between editor andpublisher, for they were called upon to deal with not a few personswhose deep interest in the _Quarterly_ tempted them at times to assume asomewhat dictatorial tone in their comments on and advice for themanagement of the _Review_. When an article written by Croker, onLamennais' "Paroles d'un Croyant, " [Footnote: The article by J. W. Croker was afterwards published in No. 104 of the _Quarterly_. ] wasunder consideration, Lockhart wrote to the publisher: _Mr. Lockhart to John Murray_. _November 8_, 1826. My Dear Murray, It is always agreeable and often useful for us to hear what you think ofthe articles in progress. Croker and I both differ from you as to thegeneral affair, for this reason simply, that Lamennais is to Paris whatBenson or Lonsdale is to London. His book has produced and is producinga very great effect. Even religious people there applaud him, and theyare re-echoed here by old Jerdan, who pronounces that, be he right orwrong, he has produced "a noble sacred poem. " It is needful to cautionthe English against the course of France by showing up the audaciousextent of her horrors, political, moral, and religious; and you knowwhat _was_ the result of our article on those vile tragedies, theextracts of which were more likely to offend a family circle thananything in the "Paroles d'un Croyant, " and which even I was afraid of. Mr. Croker, however, will modify and curtail the paper so as to get ridof your specific objections. It had already been judged advisable to putthe last and only blasphemous extract in French in place of English. Depend upon it, if we were to lower our scale so as to run no risk ofoffending any good people's delicate feelings, we should soon lowerourselves so as to rival "My Grandmother the British" in want ofinterest to the world at large, and even (though they would not say so)to the saints themselves. --_Verb. Sap_. Like most sagacious publishers, Murray was free from prejudice, and wasready to publish for all parties and for men of opposite opinions. Forinstance, he published Malthus's "Essay on Population, " and Sadler'scontradiction of the theory. He published Byron's attack on Southey, and Southey's two letters against Lord Byron. He published Nugent's"Memorials of Hampden, " and the _Quarterly Review's_ attack upon it. Southey's "Book of the Church" evoked a huge number of works on theRoman Catholic controversy, most of which were published by Mr. Murray. Mr. Charles Butler followed with his "Book on the Roman CatholicChurch. " And the Rev. Joseph Blanco White's "Practical and InternalEvidence against Catholicism, " with occasional strictures on Mr. Butler's "Book on the Roman Catholic Church. " Another answer to Mr. Butler came from Dr. George Townsend, in his "Accusations of Historyagainst the Church of Rome. " Then followed the Divines, of whom therewere many: the Rev. Dr. Henry Phillpotts (then of Stanhope Rectory, Durham, but afterwards Bishop of Exeter), in his "Letter to CharlesButler on the Theological Parts of his Book on the Roman CatholicChurch"; the Rev. G. S. Faber's "Difficulties of Romanism"; and manyothers. While most authors are ready to take "cash down" for their manuscripts, there are others who desire to be remunerated in proportion to the saleof their works. This is especially the case with works of history orbiography, which are likely to have a permanent circulation. Hence, whenthe judicious Mr. Hallam--who had sold the first three editions of"Europe during the Middle Ages" to Mr. Murray for £1, 400--had completedhis "Constitutional History of England, " he made proposals whichresulted in Mr. Murray's agreeing to print and publish at his own costand risk the "Constitutional History of England, " and pay to the authortwo-thirds of the net profits. And these were the terms on which Mr. Murray published all Mr. Hallam's subsequent works. Mr. Wordsworth about this time desired to republish his Poems, and madeapplication with that object to Mr. Murray, who thereupon consultedLockhart. _Mr. Lockhart to John Murray_. _July_ 9, 1826. "In regard to Wordsworth I certainly cannot doubt that it must becreditable to any publisher to publish the works _of_ one who is andmust continue to be a classic Poet of England. Your adventure withCrabbe, however, ought to be a lesson of much caution. On the otherhand, again, W. 's poems _must_ become more popular, else why so manyeditions in the course of the last few years. There have been _two_ ofthe 'Excursion' alone, and I know that those have not satisfied thepublic. Everything, I should humbly say, depends on the terms proposedby the great Laker, whose vanity, be it whispered, is nearly asremarkable as his genius. " The following is the letter in which Mr. Wordsworth made his formalproposal to Mr. Murray to publish his collected poems: _Mr. Wordsworth to John Murray_. RYDAL MOUNT, NEAR AMBLESIDE _December_ 4, 1826. Dear Sir, I have at last determined to go to the Press with my Poems as early aspossible. Twelve months ago the were to have been put into the hands ofMessrs. Robinson & Hurst, upon the terms of payment of a certain sum, independent of expense on my part; but the failure of that houseprevented the thing going forward. Before I offer the publication to anyone but yourself, upon the different principle agreed on between you andme, as you may recollect, viz. ; the author to meet two-thirds of theexpenses and risk, and to share two-thirds of the profit, I think itproper to renew that proposal to you. If you are not inclined to acceptit, I shall infer so from your silence; if such an arrangement suitsyou, pray let me _immediately_ know; and all I have to request is, thatwithout loss of time, when I have informed you of the intended quantityof letter-press, you will then let me know what my share of the expensewill amount to. I am, dear Sir, Your obedient servant, WM. WORDSWORTH. As Mr. Murray did not answer this letter promptly, Mr. H. Crabb Robinsoncalled upon him to receive his decision, and subsequently wrote: _Mr. H. G. Robinson to John Murray_. _February_ 1827. "I wrote to Mr. Wordsworth the day after I had the pleasure of seeingyou. I am sorry to say that my letter came too late. Mr. Wordsworthinterpreted your silence into a rejection of his offer; and his workswill unfortunately lose the benefit of appearing under you auspices. They have been under the press some weeks. " For about fifteen years there had been no business transactions betweenMurray and Constable. On the eve of the failure of the Constables, thehead of the firm, Mr. Archibald Constable (October 1825), was paying avisit at Wimbledon, when Mr. Murray addressed his host--Mr. Wright, whose name has already occurred in the _Representative_correspondence--as follows: My Dear Wright, Although I intend to do myself the pleasure of calling upon Mr. Constable at your house tomorrow immediately after church (for it is ourcharity sermon at Wimbledon, and I must attend), yet I should be mosthappy, if it were agreeable to you and to him, to favour us with yourcompany at dinner at, I will say, five tomorrow. Mr. Constable isgodfather to my son, who will be at home, and I am anxious to introducehim to Mr. C. , who may not be long in town. Mr. Constable and his friend accordingly dined with Murray, and that themeeting was very pleasant may be inferred from Mr. Constable's letter ofa few days later, in which he wrote to Murray, "It made my heart glad tobe once more happy together as we were the other evening. " The rest ofMr. Constable's letter referred to Hume's Philosophical Writings, whichwere tendered to Murray, but which he declined to publish. Constable died two years later, John Ballantyne, Scott's partner, a fewyears earlier; and Scott entered in his diary, "It is written thatnothing shall flourish under my shadow. " CHAPTER XXVI SIR WALTER'S LAST YEARS Owing to the intimate relations which were now established betweenMurray and Lockhart, the correspondence is full of references to SirWalter Scott and to the last phases of his illustrious career. Lockhart had often occasion to be at Abbotsford to see Sir Walter Scott, who was then carrying on, single-handed, that terrible struggle withadversity, which has never been equalled in the annals of literature. His son-in-law went down in February 1827 to see him about furtherarticles, but wrote to Murray: "I fear we must not now expect Sir W. S. 's assistance ere 'Napoleon' be out of hand. " In the following monthof June Lockhart wrote from Portobello: "Sir W. Scott has got 'Napoleon'out of his hands, and I have made arrangements for three or fourarticles; and I think we may count for a paper of his every quarter. "Articles accordingly appeared from Sir Walter Scott on diverse subjects, one in No. 71, June 1827, on the "Works of John Home "; another in No. 72, October 1827, on "Planting Waste Lands "; a third in No. 74, March1828, on "Plantation and Landscape Gardening "; and a fourth in No. 76, October 1828, on Sir H. Davy's "Salmonia, or Days of Fly-Fishing. " Thelast article was cordial and generous, like everything proceeding fromSir Walter's pen. Lady Davy was greatly pleased with it. "It must alwaysbe a proud and gratifying distinction, " she said, "to have the name ofSir Walter Scott associated with that of my husband in the review of'Salmonia. ' I am sure Sir Humphry will like his bairn the better for thepublic opinion given of it by one whose immortality renders praise asdurable as it seems truly felt. " With respect to "Salmonia" the following anecdote may be mentioned, asrelated to Mr. Murray by Dr. Gooch, a valued contributor to the_Quarterly_. "At page 6 of Salmonia, " said Dr. Gooch, "it is stated that 'Nelson wasa good fly-fisher, and continued the pursuit even with his left hand. ' Ican add that one of his reasons for regretting the loss of his right armwas that it deprived him of the power of pursuing this amusementefficiently, as is shown by the following incident, which is, I think, worth preserving in that part of his history which relates to histalents as a fly-fisher. I was at the Naval Hospital at Yarmouth on themorning when Nelson, after the battle of Copenhagen (having sent thewounded before him), arrived in the Roads and landed on the Jetty. Thepopulace soon surrounded him, and the military were drawn up in themarketplace ready to receive him; but making his way through the crowd, and the dust and the clamour, he went straight to the Hospital. I wentround the wards with him, and was much interested in observing hisdemeanour to the sailors. He stopped at every bed, and to every man hehad something kind and cheering to say. At length he stopped opposite abed in which a sailor was lying who had lost his right arm close to theshoulder joint, and the following short dialogue passed between them. _Nelson_: 'Well, Jack, what's the matter with you?' _Sailor_: 'Lost myright arm, your Honour. ' Nelson paused, looked down at his own emptysleeve, then at the sailor, and then said playfully, 'Well, Jack, thenyou and I are spoiled for fishermen; but cheer up, my brave fellow. ' Hethen passed quickly on to the next bed, but these few words had amagical effect upon the poor fellow, for I saw his eyes sparkle withdelight as Nelson turned away and pursued his course through the wards. This was the only occasion on which I ever saw Lord Nelson. " In the summer of 1828 Mr. Lockhart went down to Brighton, accompanied bySir Walter Scott, Miss Scott, Mrs. Lockhart and her son John--theLittlejohn to whom Scott's charming "Tales of a Grandfather, " whichwere at that time in course of publication, had been addressed. It wason the boy's account the party went to Brighton; he was very ill andgradually sinking. While at Brighton, Lockhart had an interview with the Duke ofWellington, and wrote to Murray on the subject. _Mr. Lockhart to John Murray_. _May_ 18, 1828. "I have a message from the D. Of W. To say that he, on the whole, highlyapproves the paper on foreign politics, but has some criticisms tooffer on particular points, and will send for me some day soon to hearthem. I have of course signified my readiness to attend him any time heis pleased to appoint, and expect it will be next week. " That the Duke maintained his interest in the _Quarterly_ is shown by asubsequent extract: _Mr. Lockhart to John Murray_. AUCHENRAITH, _January_ 19, 1829. "Sir Walter met me here yesterday, and he considered the Duke's epistleas an effort of the deepest moment to the _Quarterly_ and all concerned. He is sure no minister ever gave a more distinguished proof of hisfeeling than by this readiness to second the efforts of a literaryorgan. Therefore, no matter about a week sooner or later, let us do thething justice. " Before his departure for Brighton, Mr. Lockhart had been commissioned byMurray to offer Sir Walter Scott £1, 250 for the copyright of his"History of Scotland, " a transaction concerning which some informalcommunications had already passed. _Mr. Lockhart to John Murray_. MY DEAR _SIR_, Sir W. Scott has already agreed to furnish Dr. Lardner's "Cyclopaedia"with one vol. --"History of Scotland"--for £1, 000, and he is now at thiswork. This is grievous, but you must not blame me, for he has acted inthe full knowledge of my connection with and anxiety about the FamilyLibrary. I answered him, expressing my great regret and reminding him ofPeterborough. I suppose, as I never mentioned, nor well could, _money_, that Dr. Lardner's matter appeared more a piece of business. Perhaps youmay think of something to be done. It is a great loss to us and gain tothem. Yours truly, J. G. L. After the failure of Ballantyne and Constable, Cadell, who had in formeryears been a partner in Constable's house, became Scott's publisher, andat the close of 1827 the principal copyrights of Scott's works, including the novels from "Waverley" to "Quentin Durward, " and most ofthe poems, were put up to auction, and purchased by Cadell and Scottjointly for £8, 500. At this time the "Tales of a Grandfather" wereappearing by instalments, and Murray wrote to the author, begging to beallowed to become the London publisher of this work. Scott replied: _Sir W. Scott to John Murray. _ 6, Shandwick Place, Edinburgh, _November _26, 1828. My Dear Sir, I was favoured with your note some time since, but could not answer itat the moment till I knew whether I was like to publish at Edinburgh ornot. The motives for doing so are very strong, for I need not tell youthat in literary affairs a frequent and ready communication with thebookseller is a very necessary thing. As we have settled, with advice of those who have given me theirassistance in extricating my affairs, to publish in Edinburgh, I do notfeel myself at liberty to dictate to Cadell any particular selection ofa London publisher. If I did so, I should be certainly involved in anydiscussions or differences which might occur between my London andEdinburgh friends, which would be adding an additional degree ofperplexity to my affairs. I feel and know the value of your name as apublisher, but if we should at any time have the pleasure of beingconnected with you in that way, it must be when it is entirely on yourown account. The little history designed for Johnnie Lockhart was longsince promised to Cadell. I do not, in my conscience, think that I deprive you of anything ofconsequence in not being at present connected with you in literarybusiness. My reputation with the world is something like a high-pressureengine, which does very well while all lasts stout and tight, but issubject to sudden explosion, and I would rather that another than an oldfriend stood the risk of suffering by the splinters. I feel all the delicacy of the time and mode of your application, andyou cannot doubt I would greatly prefer you personally to men of whom Iknow nothing. But they are not of my choosing, nor are they in any wayresponsible to me. I transact with the Edinburgh bookseller alone, andas I must neglect no becoming mode of securing myself, my terms areharder than I think you, in possession of so well established a trade, would like to enter upon, though they may suit one who gives up his timeto them as almost his sole object of expense and attention. I hope thisnecessary arrangement will make no difference betwixt us, being, withregard, Your faithful, humble Servant, Walter Scott. On his return to London, Lockhart proceeded to take a house, No. 24, Sussex Place, Regent's Park; for he had been heretofore living in thefurnished apartments provided for him in Pall Mall. Mr. Murray wrote tohim on the subject: _John Murray to Mr. Lockhart_. _July_ 31, 1828. As you are about taking or retaking a house, I think it right to informyou now that the editor's dividend on the _Quarterly Review_ will be infuture £325 on the publication of each number; and I think it very hardif you do not get £200 or £300 more for your own contributions. Most truly yours, JOHN MURRAY. At the beginning of the following year Lockhart went down to Abbotsford, where he found his father-in-law working as hard as ever. _Mr. Lockhart to John Murray_. _January_ 4, 1820. "I have found Sir Walter Scott in grand health and spirits, and have hadmuch conversation with him on his hill-side about all our concerns. Ishall keep a world of his hints and suggestions till we meet; butmeanwhile he has agreed to write _almost immediately_ a one volumebiography of the great Earl of Peterborough, and I think you will agreewith me in considering the choice of this, perhaps the last of ourromantic heroes, as in all respects happy. ... He will also write _now_an article on some recent works of Scottish History (Tytler's, etc. )giving, he promises, a complete and gay summary of all that controversy;and next Nov. A general review of the Scots ballads, whereof some twentyvolumes have been published within these ten years, and many notpublished but only printed by the Bannatyne club of Edinburgh, andanother club of the same order at Glasgow.... I am coaxing him to make aselection from Crabbe, with a preface, and think he will be persuaded. " _January_ 8, 1829. "Sir Walter Scott suggests overhauling Caulfield's portraits ofremarkable characters (3 vols. , 1816), and having roughish woodcutstaken from that book and from others, and the biographies newly done, whenever they are not in the words of the old original writers. He saysthe march of intellect will never put women with beards and men withhorns out of fashion--Old Parr, Jenkins, Venner, Muggleton, and MotherSouse, are immortal, all in their several ways. " By 1829 Scott and Cadell had been enabled to obtain possession of allthe principal copyrights, with the exception of two one-fourth sharesof "Marmion, " held by Murray and Longman respectively. Sir Walter Scottapplied to Murray through Lockhart, respecting this fourth share. Thefollowing was Murray's reply to Sir Walter Scott: _John Murray to Sir Walter Scott_. _June_ 8, 1829. My Dear Sir, Mr. Lockhart has at this moment communicated to me your letterrespecting my fourth share of the copyright of "Marmion. " I have alreadybeen applied to by Messrs. Constable and by Messrs. Longman, to knowwhat sum I would sell this share for; but so highly do I estimate thehonour of being, even in so small a degree, the publisher of the authorof the poem, that no pecuniary consideration whatever can induce me topart with it. But there is a consideration of another kind, which, untilnow, I was not aware of, which would make it painful to me if I were toretain it a moment longer. I mean, the knowledge of its being requiredby the author, into whose hands it was spontaneously resigned in thesame instant that I read his request. This share has been profitable tome fifty-fold beyond what either publisher or author could haveanticipated; and, therefore, my returning it on such an occasion, youwill, I trust, do me the favour to consider in no other light than as amere act of grateful acknowledgment for benefits already received by, mydear sir, Your obliged and faithful Servant, JOHN MURRAY. P. S. --It will be proper for your man of business to prepare a regulardeed to carry this into effect, which I will sign with the greatestself-satisfaction, as soon as I receive it. _Sir W. Scott to John Murray_. EDINBURGH, _June_ 12, 1829. My Dear Sir, Nothing can be more obliging or gratifying to me than the very kindmanner in which you have resigned to me the share you held in "Marmion, "which, as I am circumstanced, is a favour of real value and mosthandsomely rendered. I hope an opportunity may occur in which I may moreeffectually express my sense of the obligation than by mere words. Iwill send the document of transference when it can be made out. In themeantime I am, with sincere regard and thanks, Your most obedient and obliged Servant, WALTER SCOTT. At the end of August 1829 Lockhart was again at Abbotsford; and sendingthe slips of Sir Walter's new article for the next _Quarterly_. He hadalready written for No. 77 the article on "Hajji Baba, " and for No. 81an article on the "Ancient History of Scotland. " The slips for the newarticle were to be a continuation of the last, in a review of Tytler's"History of Scotland. " The only other articles he wrote for the_Quarterly_ were his review of Southey's "Life of John Bunyan, " No. 86, in October 1830; and his review--the very last--of Pitcairn's "CriminalTrials of Scotland, " No. 88, in February 1831. His last letter to Mr. Murray refers to the payment for one of thesearticles: _Sir W. Scott to John Murray_. ABBOTSFORD, _Monday_, 1830. My Dear Sir, I acknowledge with thanks your remittance of £100, and I will be happyto light on some subject which will suit the _Review_, which may beinteresting and present some novelty. But I have to look forward to avery busy period betwixt this month and January, which may prevent mycontribution being ready before that time. You may be assured that formany reasons I have every wish to assist the _Quarterly_, and will bealways happy to give any support which is in my power. I have inclosed for Moore a copy of one of Byron's letters to me. Ireceived another of considerable interest, but I do not think it rightto give publicity without the permission of a person whose name isrepeatedly mentioned. I hope the token of my good wishes will not cometoo late. These letters have been only recovered after a long searchthrough my correspondence, which, as usual with literary folks, is sadlyconfused. I beg my kind compliments to Mrs. Murray and the young ladies, and am, yours truly, WALTER SCOTT. Scott now began to decline rapidly, and was suffering much from hisusual spasmodic attacks; yet he had Turner with him, making drawings forthe new edition of his poems. Referring to his last article in the_Quarterly_ on Pitcairn's "Criminal Trials, " he bids Lockhart to informMr. Murray that "no one knows better your liberal disposition, and he isaware that £50 is more than his paper is worth. " Scott's illnessincreased, and Lockhart rarely left his side. _Mr. Lockhart to John Murray_. CHIEFSWOOD, _September_ 16, 1831. "Yesterday determined Sir W. Scott's motions. He owes to Croker theoffer of a passage to Naples in a frigate which sails in about afortnight. He will therefore proceed southwards by land next week, halting at Rokeby, and with his son at Notts, by the way. We shall leaveEdinburgh by next Tuesday's steamer, so as to be in town before him, andready for his reception. We are all deeply obliged to Croker on thisoccasion, for Sir Walter is quite unfit for the fatigues of a long landjourney, and the annoyances innumerable of Continental inns; and, aboveall, he will have a good surgeon at hand, in case of need. Thearrangement has relieved us all of a great burden of annoyances andperplexities and fears. " Another, and the last of Lockhart's letters on this subject, may begiven: _Mr. Lockhart to John Murray_. CHIEFSWOOD, _September_ 19, 1831. DEAR MURRAY, In consequence of my sister-in-law, Annie Scott, being taken unwell, with frequent fainting fits, the result no doubt of over anxieties oflate, I have been obliged to let my wife and children depart bytomorrow's steamer without me, and I remain to attend to Sir Walterthro' his land progress, which will begin on Friday, and end, I hopewell, on Wednesday. If this should give any inconvenience to you, Godknows I regret it, and God knows also I couldn't do otherwise withoutexposing Sir W. And his daughter to a feeling that I had not done myduty to them. On the whole, public affairs seem to be so dark, that I aminclined to think our best course, in the _Quarterly_, may turn out tohave been and to be, that of not again appearing until the fate of thisBill has been quite settled. My wife will, if you are in town, be muchrejoiced with a visit; and if you write to me, so as to catch me atRokeby Park, Greta Bridge, next Saturday, 'tis well. Yours, J. G. LOCKHART. P. S. --But I see Rokeby Park would not do. I shall be at Major Scott's, 15th Hussars, Nottingham, on Monday night. It would be beyond our province to describe in these pages the closingscenes of Sir Walter Scott's life: his journey to Naples, his attempt towrite more novels, his failure, and his return home to Abbotsford todie. His biography, by his son-in-law Lockhart, one of the best in thewhole range of English literature, is familiar to all our readers; andperhaps never was a more faithful memorial erected, in the shape of abook, to the beauty, goodness, and faithfulness of a noble literarycharacter. In this work we are only concerned with Sir Walter's friendship anddealings with Mr. Murray, and on these the foregoing correspondence, extending over nearly a quarter of a century, is sufficient comment. When a committee was formed in Sir Walter's closing years to organizeand carry out some public act of homage and respect to the great genius, Mr. Murray strongly urged that the money collected, with whichAbbotsford was eventually redeemed, should be devoted to the purchase ofall the copyrights for the benefit of Scott and his family: it cannotbut be matter of regret that this admirable suggestion was not adopted. During the year 1827 Mr. Murray's son, John Murray the Third, wasresiding in Edinburgh as a student at the University, and attended thememorable dinner at which Scott was forced to declare himself the authorof the "Waverley Novels. " His account of the scene, as given in a letter to his father, forms afitting conclusion to this chapter. "I believe I mentioned to you that Mr. Allan had kindly offered to takeme with him to a Theatrical Fund dinner, which took place on Fridaylast. There were present about 300 persons--a mixed company, many ofthem not of the most respectable order. Sir Walter Scott took the chair, and there was scarcely another person of any note to support him exceptthe actors. The dinner, therefore, would have been little better thanendurable, had it not been remarkable for the confession of Sir WalterScott that he was the author of the 'Waverley Novels. ' "This acknowledgment was forced from him, I believe, contrary to his ownwish, in this manner. Lord Meadowbank, who sat on his left hand, proposed his health, and after paying him many compliments, ended hisspeech by saying that the clouds and mists which had so long surroundedthe Great Unknown were now revealed, and he appeared in his truecharacter (probably alluding to the _expose_ made before Constable'screditors, for I do not think there was any preconcerted plan). Uponthis Sir Walter rose, and said, 'I did not expect on coming here todaythat I should have to disclose before 300 people a secret which, considering it had already been made known to about thirty persons, hadbeen tolerably well kept. I am not prepared to give my reasons forpreserving it a secret, caprice had certainly a great share in thematter. Now that it is out, I beg leave to observe that I am sole andundivided author of those novels. Every part of them has originated withme, or has been suggested to me in the course of my reading. I confessI am guilty, and am almost afraid to examine the extent of mydelinquency. "Look on't again, I dare not!" The wand of Prospero is nowbroken, and my book is buried, but before I retire I shall propose thehealth of a person who has given so much delight to all now present, TheBailie Nicol Jarvie. ' "I report this from memory. Of course it is not quite accurate in words, but you will find a tolerable report of it in the _Caledonian Mercury_of Saturday. This declaration was received with loud and long applause. As this was gradually subsiding, a voice from the end of the room washeard [Footnote: The speaker on this occasion was the actor Mackay, whohad attained considerable celebrity by his representation of Scottishcharacters, and especially of that of the famous Bailie in "Rob Roy. "]exclaiming in character, ' Ma conscience! if my father the Bailie hadbeen alive to hear that ma health had been proposed by the Author ofWaverley, ' etc. , which, as you may suppose, had a most excellenteffect. " CHAPTER XXVII NAPIER'S "PENINSULAR WAR"--CHOKER'S "BOSWELL"--"THE FAMILY LIBRARY, "ETC. The public has long since made up its mind as to the merits of ColonelNapier's "History of the Peninsular War. " It is a work which none but asoldier who had served through the war as he had done, and who, moreover, combined with practical experience a thorough knowledge of thescience of war, could have written. At the outset of his work he applied to the Duke of Wellington for hispapers. This rather abrupt request took the Duke by surprise. Thedocuments in his possession were so momentous, and the great part ofthem so confidential in their nature, that he felt it to be impossibleto entrust them indiscriminately to any man living. He, however, promised Napier to put in his hands any specified paper or document hemight ask for, provided no confidence would be broken by itsexamination. He also offered to answer any question Napier might put tohim, and with this object invited him to Stratfieldsaye, where the twoGenerals discussed many points connected with the campaign. _Colonel W. Napier to John Murray_. BROMHAM, WILTS, _December_ 5, 1828. Dear Sir, My first volume is now nearly ready for the press, and as I think thatin matters of business a plain straightforward course is best, I will atonce say what I conceive to be the valuable part of my work, and leaveyou to make a proposition relative to publication of the single volume, reserving further discussion about the whole until the other volumesshall be in a more forward state. The volume in question commences with the secret treaty ofFontainebleau concluded in 1809, and ends with the battle of Corunna. Itwill have an appendix of original documents, many of which are extremelyinteresting, and there will also be some plans of the battles. Myauthorities have been: 1. All the original papers of Sir Hew Dalrymple. 2. Those of Sir John Moore. 3. King Joseph's correspondence taken at the battle of Vittoria, andplaced at my disposal by the Duke of Wellington. Among other papers areseveral notes and detailed instructions by Napoleon which throw acomplete light upon his views and proceedings in the early part of thewar. 4. Notes of conversations held with the Duke of Wellington for theespecial purpose of connecting my account of his operations. 5. Notes of conversation with officers of high rank in the French, English, and Spanish services. 6. Original journals, and the most unreserved communications withMarshal Soult. 7. My own notes of affairs in which I have been present. 8. Journals of regimental officers of talent, and last but not least, copies taken by myself from the original muster rolls of the French armyas they were transmitted to the Emperor. Having thus distributed all my best wares in the bow window, I shallleave you to judge for yourself; and, as the diplomatists say, will behappy to treat upon a suitable basis. In the meantime, I remain, your very obedient Servant, W. NAPIER. About a fortnight later (December 25, 1827) he again wrote that he wouldhave the pleasure of putting a portion of his work into Mr. Murray'shands in a few days; but that "it would be disagreeable to him to haveit referred to Mr. Southey for an opinion. " Murray, it should bementioned, had published Southey's "History of the War in Spain. " Somenegotiations ensued, in the course of which Mr. Murray offered 500guineas for the volume. This proposal, however, was declined by ColonelNapier. Murray after fuller consideration offered a thousand guineas, whichColonel Napier accepted, and the volume was accordingly published in thecourse of 1828. Notwithstanding the beauty of its style and the grandeurof its descriptions, the book gave great offence by the severity of itscriticism, and called forth a multitude of replies and animadversions. More than a dozen of these appeared in the shape of pamphlets bearingtheir authors' names, added to which the _Quarterly Review_, departingfrom the general rule, gave no less than four criticisms in succession. This innovation greatly disgusted the publisher, who regarded them as somuch lead weighing down his _Review_, although they proceeded from thepen of the Duke's right-hand man, the Rt. Hon. Sir George Murray. Theywere unreadable and produced no effect. It is needless to add the Dukehad nothing to do with them. Mr. Murray published no further volumes of the "History of thePeninsular War, " but at his suggestion Colonel Napier brought out thesecond and succeeding volumes on his own account. In illustration of theloss which occurred to Mr. Murray in publishing the first volume of thehistory, the following letter may be given, as addressed to the editorof the _Morning Chronicle_: _John Murray to the Editor of the Morning Chronicle_. ALBEMARLE STREET, _February_ 13, 1837. SIR, My attention has been called to an article in your paper of the 14th ofJanuary, containing the following extract from Colonel Napier's reply tothe third article in the _Quarterly Review_, on his "History of thePeninsular War. " [Footnote: The article appeared in No. 111 of_Quarterly_, April 1836. ] "Sir George Murray only has thrown obstacles in my way, and if I amrightly informed of the following circumstances, his opposition has notbeen confined to what I have stated above. Mr. Murray, the bookseller, purchased my first volume, with the right of refusal for the secondvolume. When the latter was nearly ready, a friend informed me that hedid not think Murray would purchase, because he had heard him say thatSir George Murray had declared it was not 'The Book. ' He did not pointout any particular error, but it was not 'The Book, ' meaning, doubtless, that his own production, when it appeared, would be 'The Book. ' Myfriend's prognostic was not false. I was offered just half of the sumgiven for the first volume. I declined it, and published on my ownaccount, and certainly I have had no reason to regret that Mr. Bookseller Murray waited for 'The Book, ' indeed, he has since told mevery frankly that he had mistaken his own interest. " In answer to the first part of this statement, I beg leave to say, thatI had not, at the time to which Colonel Napier refers, the honour of anyacquaintance with Sir George Murray, nor have I held any conversation orcorrespondence with him on the subject of Colonel Napier's book, or ofany other book on the Peninsular War. In reply to the second part of thestatement, regarding the offer for Colonel Napier's second volume ofhalf the sum (viz. 500 guineas) that I gave for the first volume(namely, 1, 000 guineas), I have only to beg the favour of your insertionof the following letter, written by me to Colonel Napier, upon theoccasion referred to. ALBEMARLE STREET, _May_ 13, 1829. MY DEAR SIR, Upon making up the account of the sale of the first volume of "TheHistory of the War in the Peninsula" I find that I am at this time minus£545 12s. At this loss I do by no means in the present instance repine, for I have derived much gratification from being the publisher of a workwhich is so intrinsically valuable, and which has been so generallyadmired, and it is some satisfaction to me to find by this result thatmy own proposal to you was perfectly just. I will not, however, ventureto offer you a less sum for the second volume, but recommend that youshould, in justice to yourself, apply to some other publishers; if youshould obtain from them the sum which you are right in expecting, itwill afford me great pleasure, and, if you do not, you will find meperfectly ready to negotiate; and in any case I shall continue to be, with the highest esteem, dear Sir, Your obliged and faithful servant, JOHN MURRAY. I am confident you will do me the justice to insert this letter, andhave no doubt its contents will convince Colonel Napier that hisrecollection of the circumstances has been incomplete. I have the honour to be, sir, Your obedient humble Servant, JOHN MURRAY. It may not be generally known that we owe to Colonel Napier's work thepublication of the Duke of Wellington's immortal "Despatches. " The Duke, upon principle, refused to read Napier's work; not wishing, as he said, to quarrel with its author. But he was made sufficiently acquainted withthe contents from friends who had perused it, and who, having made thecampaigns with him, could point to praise and blame equally undeserved, to designs misunderstood and misrepresented, as well as to superciliouscriticism and patronizing approval, which could not but be painful tothe great commander. His nature was too noble to resent this; but heresolved, in self-defence, to give the public the means of ascertainingthe truth, by publishing all his most important and secret despatches, in order, he said, to give the world a correct account not only of whathe did, but of what he intended to do. Colonel Gurwood was appointed editor of the "Despatches" and, duringtheir preparation, not a page escaped the Duke's eye, or his own carefulrevision. Mr. Murray, who was honoured by being chosen as the publisher, compared this wonderful collection of documents to a watch: hitherto thegeneral public had only seen in the successful and orderly developmentof his campaigns, as it were the hands moving over the dial withoutfault or failure, but now the Duke opened the works, and they wereenabled to inspect the complicated machinery--the wheels withinwheels--which had produced this admirable result. It is enough to statethat in these despatches the _whole_ truth relating to the PeninsularWar is fully and elaborately set forth. At the beginning of 1829 Croker consulted Murray on the subject of anannotated edition of "Boswell's Johnson. " Murray was greatly pleasedwith the idea of a new edition of the work by his laborious friend, andclosing at once with Croker's proposal, wrote, "I shall be happy togive, as something in the way of remuneration, the sum of one thousandguineas. " Mr. Croker accepted the offer, and proceeded immediately withthe work. Mr. Murray communicated to Mr. Lockhart the arrangement he had made withCroker. His answer was: _Mr. Lockhart to John Murray_. _January_ 19, 1829. "I am heartily rejoiced that this 'Johnson, ' of which we had so oftentalked, is in such hands at whatever cost. Pray ask Croker whetherBoswell's account of the Hebridean Tour ought not to be melted into thebook. Sir Walter has many MS. Annotations in his 'Boswell, ' both 'Life'and 'Tour, ' and will, I am sure, give them with hearty good will.... Hewill write down all that he has heard about Johnson when in Scotland;and, in particular, about the amusing intercourse between him and LordAuchinleck--Boswell's father--if Croker considers it worth his while. " Sir Walter Scott's offer of information, [Footnote: Sir Walter's letterto Croker on the subject will be found in the "Croker Correspondence, "ii. 28. ] to a certain extent, delayed Croker's progress with the work. He wrote to Mr. Murray (November 17, 1829): "The reference to SirWalter Scott delays us a little as to the revises, but his name is wellworth the delay. My share of the next volume (the 2nd) is quite done;and I could complete the other two in a fortnight. " While the work was passing through the press Lockhart again wrote: _Mr. Lockhart to John Murray_. "I am reading the new 'Boswell' with great pleasure, though, I think, the editor is often wrong. A prodigious flood of light is thrown on thebook assuredly; and the incorporation of the 'Tour' is a greatadvantage. Now, do have a really good Index. That to the former editionI have continually found inadequate and faulty. The book is a dictionaryof wisdom and wit, and one should know exactly where to find the _dictummagistri_. Many of Croker's own remarks and little disquisitions willalso be hereafter among the choicest of _quotabilia_. " Croker carried out the work with great industry and vigour, and itappeared in 1831. It contained numerous additions, notes, explanations, and memoranda, and, as the first attempt to explain the difficulties andenigmas which lapse of time had created, it may not unfairly be said tohave been admirably edited; and though Macaulay, according to his ownaccount, "smashed" it in the _Edinburgh_, [Footnote: The correspondenceon the subject, and the criticism on the work by Macaulay, will be foundin the "Croker Correspondence, " vol. Ii. Pp. 24-49. ] some fifty thousandof the "Life" have been sold. It has been the fashion with certain recent editors of "Boswell'sJohnson" to depreciate Croker's edition; but to any one who has takenthe pains to make himself familiar with that work, and to study the vastamount of information there collected, such criticism cannot but appearmost ungenerous. Croker was acquainted with, or sought out, all thedistinguished survivors of Dr. Johnson's own generation, and by hisindefatigable efforts was enabled to add to the results of his ownliterary research, oral traditions and personal reminiscences, which butfor him would have been irrevocably lost. The additions of subsequent editors are but of trifling value comparedwith the information collected by Mr. Croker, and one of his successorsat least has not hesitated slightly to transpose or alter many of Mr. Croker's notes, and mark them as his own. Mrs. Shelley, widow of the poet, on receiving a present of Croker's"Boswell, " from Mr. Murray, said: _Mrs. Shelley to John Murray_. "I have read 'Boswell's Journal' ten times: I hope to read it many more. It is the most amusing book in the world. Beside that, I do love thekind-hearted, wise, and gentle Bear, and think him as lovable and kind afriend as a profound philosopher. " Mr. Henry Taylor submitted his play of "Isaac Comnenus"--his firstwork--to Mr. Murray, in February 1827. Lockhart was consulted, and, after perusing the play, he wrote to Mr. Murray: _Mr. Lockhart to John Murray_. "There can be no sort of doubt that this play is everyway worthy ofcoming out from Albemarle Street. That the author might greatly improveit by shortening its dialogue often, and, once at least, leaving out ascene, and by dramatizing the scene at the Synod, instead of narratingit, I think sufficiently clear: but, probably, the author has followedhis own course, upon deliberation, in all these matters. I am ofopinion, certainly, that _no poem_ has been lately published of anythinglike the power or promise of this. " Lockhart's suggestion was submitted to Mr. Taylor, who gratefullyacknowledged his criticism, and amended his play. Mr. Taylor made a very unusual request. He proposed to divide the losson his drama with the publisher! He wrote to Mr. Murray: "I have been pretty well convinced, for some time past, that my bookwill never sell, and, under these circumstances, I cannot think itproper that you should be the sole sufferer. Whenever, therefore, youare of opinion that the book has had a fair trial, I beg you tounderstand that I shall be ready to divide the loss equally with you, that being, I conceive, the just arrangement in the case. " Though Mr. Lockhart gave an interesting review of "Isaac Comnenus" inthe _Quarterly_, it still hung fire, and did not sell. A few yearslater, however, Henry Taylor showed what he could do, as a poet, by his"Philip van Artevelde, " which raised his reputation to the highestpoint. Moore, after the publication of this drama, wrote in his "Diary":"I breakfasted in the morning at Rogers's, to meet the new poet, Mr. Taylor, author of 'Philip van Artevelde': our company, besides, beingSydney Smith and Southey. 'Van Artevelde' is a tall, handsome youngfellow. Conversation chiefly about the profits booksellers make of usscribblers. I remember Peter Pindar saying, one of the few times I evermet him, that the booksellers drank their wine in the manner of theheroes in the hall of Odin, out of authors' skulls. " This was a sharpsaying; but Rogers, if he had chosen to relate his own experiences whenhe negotiated with Mr. Murray about the sale of Crabbe's works, and theresult of that negotiation, might have proved that the rule was not ofuniversal application. "The Family Library" has already been mentioned. Mr. Murray had longcontemplated a serial publication, by means of which good literature andcopyright works might be rendered cheaper and accessible to a widercircle of readers than they had hitherto been. The Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge was established in1828, with Henry Brougham as Chairman. Mr. Murray subscribed £10 to thissociety, and agreed to publish their "Library of EntertainingKnowledge. " Shortly afterwards, however, he withdrew from thisundertaking, which was transferred to Mr. Knight, and reverted to hisown proposed publication of cheap works. The first volume of "The Family Library" appeared in April 1829. Murraysent a copy to Charles Knight, who returned him the first volume of the"Library of Entertaining Knowledge. " _Mr. Charles Knight to John Murray_. "We each launch our vessels on the same day, and I most earnestly hopethat both will succeed, for good must come of that success. We haveplenty of sea-room and need never run foul of each other. My belief isthat, in a very few years, scarcely any other description of books willbe published, and in that case we that are first in the field may hopeto win the race. " Mr. Murray's intention was to include in the Library works on a varietyof subjects, including History, Biography, Voyages and Travels, NaturalHistory, Science, and general literature. They were to be written by thebest-known authors of the day--Sir Walter Scott, Southey, Milman, Lockhart, Washington Irving, Barrow, Allan Cunningham, Dr. Brewster, Captain Head, G. R. Gleig, Palgrave, and others. The collection washeaded by an admirable "Life of Napoleon, " by J. G. Lockhart, partlycondensed from Scott's "Life of Napoleon Bonaparte, " and illustrated byGeorge Cruikshank. When Lockhart was first invited to undertake thisbiography he consulted Sir Walter Scott as to the propriety of his doingso. Sir Walter replied: _Sir W. Scott to Mr. Lockhart_. _October_ 30, 1828. "Your scruples about doing an epitome of the 'Life of Boney' for theFamily Library that is to be, are a great deal over delicate. My book innine thick volumes can never fill the place which our friend Murraywants you to fill, and which if you don't some one else will right soon. Moreover, you took much pains in helping me when I was beginning mytask, and I afterwards greatly regretted that Constable had no means ofremunerating you, as no doubt he intended when you were giving him somuch good advice in laying down his grand plans about the Miscellany. Byall means do what the Emperor [Footnote: From the time of his removal toAlbemarle Street, Mr. Murray was universally known among "the Trade" as"The Emperor of the West. "] asks. He is what the Emperor Napoleon wasnot, much a gentleman, and knowing our footing in all things, would nothave proposed anything that ought to have excited scruples on yourside. " [Footnote: Lockhart's "Life of Scott. "] The book met with a warm reception from the public, and went throughmany editions. Among other works published in "The Family Library" was the Rev. H. H. Milman's "History of the Jews, " in three vols. , which occasioned muchadverse criticism and controversy. It is difficult for us who live insuch different times to understand or account for the tempest ofdisapprobation with which a work, which now appears so innocent, wasgreeted, or the obloquy with which its author was assailed. The "Historyof the Jews" was pronounced _unsound_; it was alleged that the miracleshad been too summarily disposed of; Abraham was referred to as an Arabsheik, and Jewish history was too sacred to be submitted to the laws ofordinary investigation. Hence Milman was preached against, from Sundayto Sunday, from the University and other pulpits. Even Mr. Sharon Turnerexpostulated with Mr. Murray as to the publication of the book. He saidhe had seen it in the window of Carlile, the infidel bookseller, "as ifhe thought it suited his purpose. " The following letter is interestingas indicating what the Jews themselves thought of the history. _Mr. Magnus to John Murray_. _March_ 17, 1834. Sir, Will you have the goodness to inform me of the Christian name of theRev. Mr. Milman, and the correct manner of spelling his name; as asubscription is about to be opened by individuals of the Jewish nationfor the purpose of presenting him with a piece of plate for the liberalmanner in which he has written their history. The piece of plate was duly subscribed for and presented, with everydemonstration of acknowledgment and thanks. Milman's "History of theJews" did not prevent his preferment, as he was promoted from thevicarage of St. Mary's, Reading, to the rectorship of St. Margaret's, Westminster, and a canonry in the Collegiate Church of St. Peter; afterwhich, in 1849, he was made Dean of St. Paul's. CHAPTER XXVIII MOORE'S "LIFE OF BYRON" In 1827 or 1828 Mr. Hanson, the late Lord Byron's solicitor, wrote toMurray, enquiring, on behalf of the executors, whether he would bewilling to dispose of his interest in the first five cantos of "DonJuan. " Mr. Murray, however, had long been desirous of publishing acomplete edition of the works of Lord Byron, "for the public, " he wrote, "are absolutely indignant at not being able to obtain a complete editionof Lord Byron's works in this country; and at least 15, 000 copies havebeen brought here from France. " Murray proposed that those copyrights ofLord Byron, which were the property of his executors, should be valuedby three respectable publishers, and that he should purchase them attheir valuation. Mr. Hobhouse, to whom as one of the executors thisproposal was made, was anxious that the complete edition should bepublished in England with as little delay as possible, but he statedthat "some obstacles have arisen in consequence of the Messrs. Hunthaving upon hand some hundred copies of their two volumes, which theyhave asked a little time to get rid of, and for which they are nowaccounting to the executors. " Murray requested Mr. Hanson to apply to the executors, and inform himwhat sum they required for the works of Lord Byron, the copyrights ofwhich were in their possession. This they refused to state, but afterconsiderable delay, during which the Hunts were disposing of the twovolumes, the whole of the works of Lord Byron which were not in Mr. Murray's possession were put up to auction, and bought by him for thesum of £3, 885. These included the "Hours of Idleness, " eleven cantos of"Don Juan, " the "Age of Bronze, " and other works--all of which hadalready been published. Notwithstanding the destruction of Lord Byron's Memoirs, described in aprevious chapter, Murray had never abandoned the intention of bringingout a Biography of his old friend the poet, for which he possessedplenteous materials in the mass of correspondence which had passedbetween them. Although his arrangement with Thomas Moore had beencancelled by that event, his eye rested on him as the fittest person, from his long intimacy with the poet, to be entrusted with the task, forwhich, indeed, Lord Byron had himself selected him. Accordingly in 1826 author and publisher seem to have drawn togetheragain, and begun the collection of materials, which was carried on in aleisurely way, until Leigh Hunt's scandalous attack on his old patronand benefactor [Footnote: "Recollections of Lord Byron and some of hisContemporaries, " 1828. 4to. ] roused Murray's ardour into immediateaction. It was eventually resolved to publish the Life and Correspondencetogether; and many letters passed between Murray and Moore on thesubject. From the voluminous correspondence we retain the following extract froma letter from Moore to Murray: "One of my great objects, as you will see in reading me, is to keep mystyle down to as much simplicity as I am capable of; for nothing couldbe imagined more discordant than the mixture of any of ourAsiatico-Hibernian eloquence with the simple English diction of Byron'sletters. " Murray showed the early part of "Byron's Life" to Lockhart, who repliedto him at once: _Mr. Lockhart to John Murray_. _February_ 23, 1829. "I can't wait till tomorrow to say that I think the beginning of 'Byron'quite perfect in every way--the style simple, and unaffected, as thematerials are rich, and how sad. It will be Moore's greatest work--atleast, next to the 'Melodies, ' and will be a fortune to you. My wifesays it is divine. By all means engrave the early miniature. Never wasanything so drearily satisfactory to the imagination as the wholepicture of the lame boy's start in life. " Moore was greatly touched by this letter. He wrote from Sloperton: _Mr. Moore to John Murray_. "Lockhart's praise has given me great pleasure, and his wife's evenstill greater; but, after all, the merit is in my subject--in the man, not in me. He must be a sad bungler who would spoil such a story. " As the work advanced, Sir Walter Scott's opinion also was asked. _Mr. Lockhart to John Murray_. _September_ 29, 1829. "Sir Walter has read the first 120 pages of Moore's 'Life of Byron'; andhe says they are charming, and not a syllable _de trop_. He is now busyat a grand rummage among his papers, and has already found one of LordByron's letters which shall be at Mr. Moore's service forthwith. Heexpects to find more of them. This is curious, as being the first of'Byron' to Scott. " The first volume of "Lord Byron's Life and Letters, " published onJanuary 1, 1830, was read with enthusiasm, and met with a veryfavourable reception. Moore says in his Diary that "Lady Byron washighly pleased with the 'Life, '" but among the letters received by Mr. Murray, one of the most interesting was from Mrs. Shelley, to whom apresentation copy had been sent. _Mrs. Shelley to John Murray_. _January_ 19, 1830. Except the occupation of one or two annoyances, I have done nothing butread, since I got "Lord Byron's Life. " I have no pretensions to being acritic, yet I know infinitely well what pleases me. Not to mention thejudicious arrangement and happy _tact_ displayed by Mr. Moore, whichdistinguish the book, I must say a word concerning the style, which iselegant and forcible. I was particularly struck by the observations onLord Byron's character before his departure to Greece, and on hisreturn. There is strength and richness, as well as sweetness. The great charm of the work to me, and it will have the same to you, isthat the Lord Byron I find there is _our_ Lord Byron--the fascinating, faulty, philosophical being--daring the world, docile to a privatecircle, impetuous and indolent, gloomy, and yet more gay than any other. I live with him again in these pages--getting reconciled (as I used inhis lifetime) to those waywardnesses which annoyed me when he was away, through the delightful tone of his conversation and manners. His own letters and journals mirror himself as he was, and areinvaluable. There is something cruelly kind in this single volume. Whenwill the next come? Impatient before, how tenfold more so am I now. Among its many other virtues, this book is accurate to a miracle. I havenot stumbled on one mistake with regard either to time, place, orfeeling. I am, dear Sir, Your obedient and obliged Servant, MARY SHELLEY. The preparation of the second volume proceeded more rapidly than thefirst, for Lord Byron's letters to Murray and Moore during the lateryears of his life covered the whole period, and gave to the record analmost autobiographical character. It appeared in January 1831, andamongst many other readers of it Mrs. Somerville, to whom Mr. Murraysent a present of the book, was full of unstinted praise. _Mrs. Somerville to John Murray_. _January_ 13, 1831. You have kindly afforded me a source of very great interest and pleasurein the perusal of the second volume of Moore's "Life of Byron. " In myopinion, it is very superior to the first; there is less repetition ofthe letters; they are better written, abound more in criticism andobservation, and make the reader better acquainted with Lord Byron'sprinciples and character. His morality was certainly more suited to themeridian of Italy than England; but with all his faults there is a charmabout him that excites the deepest interest and admiration. His letterto Lady Byron is more affecting and beautiful than anything I have read;it must ever be a subject of regret that it was not sent; it seemsimpossible that it should not have made a lasting impression, and mightpossibly have changed the destinies of both. With kind remembrances toMrs. Murray and the young people, Believe me, truly yours, MARY SOMERVILLE. Mr. Croker's opinion was as follows: "As to what you say of Byron's volume, no doubt there are _longueurs_, but really not many. The most teasing part is the blanks, which perplexwithout concealing. I also think that Moore went on a wrong principle, when, publishing _any_ personality, he did not publish _all_. It is likea suppression of evidence. When such horrors are published of Sir S. Romilly, it would have been justice to his memory to show that, on the_slightest_ provocation, Byron would treat his dearest friend in thesame style. When his sneers against Lady Byron and her mother arerecorded, it would lessen their effect if it were shown that he sneeredat all man and womankind in turn; and that the friend of his choicestselection, or the mistress of his maddest love, were served no better, when the maggot (selfishness) bit, than his wife or his mother-in-law. " The appearance of the Life induced Captain Medwin to publish his"Conversations with Lord Byron, " a work now chiefly remembered as havingcalled forth from Murray, who was attacked in it, a reply which, as acrashing refutation of personal charges, has seldom been surpassed. [Footnote: Mr. Murray's answer to Medwin's fabrications is published inthe Appendix to the 8vo edition of "Lord Byron's Poems. "] Amongst the reviews of the biography was one by Lockhart in the_Quarterly_ (No. 87), which was very favourable; but an article, by Mr. Croker in No. 91, on another of Moore's works--the "Life of Lord EdwardFitzgerald"--was of a very different character. Murray told Moore of theapproaching appearance of the article in the next number, and Mooreenters in his Diary, "Saw my 'Lord Edward Fitzgerald' announced as oneof the articles in the _Quarterly_, to be abused of course; and this tooimmediately after my dinings and junketings with both author andpublisher. " _Mr. Moore to John Murray_. _October_ 25, 1831. ... I see that what I took for a joke of yours is true, and that you are_at_ me in this number of the _Quarterly_. I have desired Power to sendyou back my copy when it comes, not liking to read it just now forreasons. In the meantime, here's some _good_-humoured doggerel for you: THOUGHTS ON EDITORS. _Editur et edit_. No! Editors don't care a button, What false and faithless things they do;They'll let you come and cut their mutton, And then, they'll have a cut at you. With Barnes I oft my dinner took, Nay, met e'en Horace Twiss to please him:Yet Mister Barnes traduc'd my Book, For which may his own devils seize him! With Doctor Bowring I drank tea, Nor of his cakes consumed a particle;And yet th' ungrateful LL. D. Let fly at me, next week, an article! John Wilson gave me suppers hot, With bards of fame, like Hogg and Packwood;A dose of black-strap then I got, And after a still worse of Blackwood. Alas! and must I close the list With thee, my Lockhart of the _Quarterly?_So kind, with bumper in thy fist, -- With pen, so very gruff and tartarly. Now in thy parlour feasting me, Now scribbling at me from your garret, --Till, 'twixt the two, in doubt I be, Which sourest is, thy wit or claret? Should you again see the Noble Scott before he goes, remember me mostaffectionately to him. Ever yours, Thomas Moore. Mr. Murray now found himself at liberty to proceed with his cherishedscheme of a complete edition of Lord Byron's works. _John Murray to Mr. Moore. _ February 28, 1832. When I commenced this complete edition of Byron's works I was so out ofheart by the loss upon the first edition of the "Life, " and by thesimultaneous losses from the failure of three booksellers very largelyin my debt, that I had little if any hopes of its success, and I feltmyself under the necessity of declining your kind offer to edit it, because I did not think that I should have had it in my power to offeryou an adequate remuneration. But now that the success of thisspeculation is established, if you will do me the favour to do what youpropose, I shall have great satisfaction in giving you 500 guineas foryour labours. Most sincerely yours, John Murray. In 1837, the year in which the work now in contemplation was published, the Countess Guiccioli was in London, and received much kindness fromMr. Murray. After her return to Rome, she wrote to him a long letter, acknowledging the beautifully bound volume of the landscape and portraitillustrations of Lord Byron's works. She complained, however, ofBrockedon's portrait of herself. _Countess Guiccioli to John Murray_. "It is not resembling, and to tell you the truth, my dear Mr. Murray, Iwish it was so; not on account of the ugliness of features (which isalso remarkable), but particularly for having this portrait anexpression of _stupidity_, and for its being _molto antipatico_, as wesay in our language. But perhaps it is not the fault of the painter, butof the original, and I am sorry for that. What is certain is thattowards such a creature nobody may feel inclined to be indulgent; and ifshe has faults and errors to be pardoned for, she will never be so onaccount of her _antipatia_! But pray don't say that to Mr. Brockedon. " A copy was likewise sent to Sir R. Peel with the following letter: ALBEMARLE STREET, _April_ 17, 1837. DEAR SIR, As the invaluable instructions which you addressed to the students ofthe University of Glasgow have as completely associated your name withthe literature of this country, as your political conduct has with itsgreatest statesmen, I trust that I shall be pardoned for havinginscribed to you (without soliciting permission) the present edition ofthe works of one of our greatest poets, "your own school-andform-fellow, " _Byron_. I have the honour to be, etc. , JOHN MURRAY. _The Right Hon. Sir R. Peel to John Murray_. WHITEHALL, _April_ 18, 1837. MY DEAR SIR, I am much flattered by the compliment which you have paid to me indedicating to me a beautiful edition of the works of my distinguished"school-and form-fellow. " I was the next boy to Lord Byron at Harrow for three or four years, andwas always on very friendly terms with him, though not living inparticular intimacy out of school. I do not recollect ever having a single angry word with him, or thatthere ever was any the slightest jealousy or coldness between us. It is a gratification to me to have my name associated with his in themanner in which you have placed it in friendly connection; and I do notbelieve, if he could have foreseen, when we were boys together atschool, this continuance of a sort of amicable relation between us afterhis death, the idea would have been otherwise than pleasing to him. Believe me, My dear Sir, Very faithfully yours, ROBERT PEEL. A few words remain to be added respecting the statue of Lord Byron, which had been so splendidly executed by Thorwaldsen at Rome. Mr. Hobhouse wrote to Murray: "Thorwaldsen offers the completed work for£1, 000, together with a bas-relief for the pedestal, suitable for thesubject of the monument. " The sculptor's offer was accepted, and thestatue was forwarded from Rome to London. Murray then applied to theDean of Westminster, on behalf of the subscribers, requesting to know"upon what terms the statue now completed could be placed in somesuitable spot in Westminster Abbey. " The Dean's answer was as follows: _The Dean of Westminster to John Murray_. DEANERY, WESTMINSTER, _December_ 17, 1834. DEAR SIR, I have not had the opportunity, till this morning, of consulting withthe Chapter on the subject of your note. When you formerly applied to mefor leave to inter the remains of Lord Byron within this Abbey, I statedto you the principle on which, as Churchmen, we were compelled todecline the proposal. The erection of a monument in honour of his memorywhich you now desire is, in its proportion, subject to the sameobjection. I do indeed greatly wish for a figure by Thorwaldsen here;but no taste ought to be indulged to the prejudice of a duty. With my respectful compliments to the Committee, I beg you to believeme, Yours truly, JOHN IRELAND. The statue was for some time laid up in a shed on a Thames wharf. Anattempt was made in the House of Commons to alter the decision of theDean and Chapter, but it proved of no avail. "I would do my best, " saidMr. Hobhouse, "to prevail upon Sir Robert Peel to use his influence withthe Dean. It is a national disgrace that the statue should lie neglectedin a carrier's ware-house, and it is so felt by men of all parties. Ihave had a formal application from Trinity College, Cambridge, for leaveto place the monument in their great library, and it has been intimatedto me that the French Government desire to have it for the Louvre. " Theresult was that the subscribers, in order to retain the statue inEngland, forwarded it to Trinity College, Cambridge, whose noble libraryit now adorns. The only memorial to Byron in London is the contemptible leaning bronzestatue in Apsley House Gardens, nearly opposite the statue of Achilles. Its pedestal is a block of Parian marble, presented by the GreekGovernment as a national tribute to the memory of Byron. CHAPTER XXIX BENJAMIN DISRAELI--THOMAS CARLYLE--AND OTHERS Me. Disraeli's earliest appearance as an author had been with the novelof "Vivian Grey, " published after a brief visit to Germany while he wasstill in his eighteenth year. Two volumes were published in 1826, and athird volume, or continuation, in the following year. The work broughtthe author some notoriety, but, as already noticed, it contained matterwhich gave offence in Albemarle Street. After the publication of thefirst part, which was contemporaneous with the calamitous affair of the_Representative_, Mr. Murray saw but little of the Disraeli family, butat the commencement of 1830, Mr. Benjamin Disraeli once more applied tohim for an interview. Mr. Murray, however, in whose mind the formerepisode was still fresh, was unwilling to accede to this request, andreplied in the third person. _John Murray to Mr. B. Disraeli_. "Mr. Murray is obliged to decline at present any personal interview; butif Mr. Benjamin Disraeli is disposed to confide his MS. To Mr. Murray asa man of business, Mr. Disraeli is assured that the proposal will beentertained in every respect with the strictest honour andimpartiality. " _Mr. B. Disraeli to John Murray_. UNION HOTEL, COCKSPUR STREET, 1830. The object of my interview with you is _purely literary_. It has alwaysbeen my wish, if it ever were my fate to write anything calculated toarrest public attention, that you should be the organ of introducing itto public notice. A letter I received this morning from my electedcritic was the reason of my addressing myself to you. I am sorry that Mr. Mitchell is out of town, because he is a person inwhom you rightly have confidence; but from some observations he made tome the other day it is perhaps not to be regretted that he does notinterfere in this business. As he has overrated some juvenileindiscretions of mine, I fear he is too friendly a critic. I am thus explicit because I think that candour, for all reasons, ishighly desirable. If you feel any inclination to pursue this affair, actas you like, and fix upon any critic you please. I have no objection toMr. Lockhart, who is certainly an able one, and is, I believe, influenced by no undue partiality towards me. At all events, this is an affair of no great importance--and whatevermay be your determination, it will not change the feelings which, on mypart, influenced this application. I have the honour to be, Sir, Your obedient Servant, BENJ. DISRAELI. P. S. --I think it proper to observe that I cannot crudely deliver my MS. To any one. I must have the honour of seeing you or your critic. I shallkeep this negotiation open for a couple of days--that is, I shall waitfor your answer till Tuesday morning, although, from particularcircumstances, time is important to me. Mr. Disraeli was about to make a prolonged journey abroad. Before he setout he again wrote to Mr. Murray: _Mr. Disraeli to John Murray_. BRADENHAM, BERKS, _May_ 27, 1830. SIR, I am unwilling to leave England, which I do on Saturday, withoutnoticing your last communication, because I should regret very much ifyou were to misconceive the motives which actuated me in not complyingwith the suggestion therein contained. I can assure you I leave inperfect confidence both in your "honour" and your "impartiality, " forthe first I have never doubted, and the second it is your interest toexercise. The truth is, my friend and myself differed in the estimate of the MS. Alluded to, and while I felt justified, from his opinion, in submittingit to your judgment, I felt it due to my own to explain verbally thecontending views of the case, for reasons which must be obvious. As you forced me to decide, I decided as I thought most prudently. Thework is one which, I dare say, would neither disgrace you to publish, nor me to write; but it is not the kind of production which shouldrecommence our connection, or be introduced to the world by thepublisher of Byron and Anastasius. I am now about to leave England for an indefinite, perhaps a longperiod. When I return, if I do return, I trust it will be in my powerfor the _third time_ to endeavour that you should be the means ofsubmitting my works to the public. For this I shall be ever ready tomake great sacrifices, and let me therefore hope that when I next offermy volumes to your examination, like the Sibylline books, theirinspiration may at length be recognised. I am, Sir, Your obedient Servant, B. DISRAELI. _John Murray to Mr. Disraeli_. _May_ 29, 1830. Mr. Murray acknowledges the receipt of Mr. Benjamin Disraeli's politeletter of the 27th. Mr. Murray will be ready at all times to receive anyMS. Which Mr. B. Disraeli may think proper to confide to him. Mr. Murrayhopes the result of Mr. Disraeli's travels will complete the restorationof his health, and the gratification of his expectations. " Nearly two years passed before Mr. Disraeli returned to England fromthose travels in Spain, the Mediterranean and the Levant, which are soadmirably described in his "Home Letters, " [Footnote: "Home Letters, "written by the late Earl of Beaconsfield in 1830 and 1831. London, 1885. ] and which appear to have exercised so powerful an influence onhis own character, and his subsequent career. Shortly after his return, he wrote to Mr. Murray: _Mr. Disraeli to John Murray_. BRADENHAM HOUSE, WYCOMBE, _February_ 10, 1832. Sir, I have at length completed a work which I wish to submit to yourconsideration. In so doing, I am influenced by the feelings I havealready communicated to you. If you retain the wish expressed in a note which I received at Athens inthe autumn of 1830, I shall have the honour of forwarding the MS, toyou. Believe me, Sir, whatever may be the result, Very cordially yours, BENJ. DISRAELI. The MS. Of the work was at once forwarded to Mr. Murray, who was, however, averse to publishing it without taking the advice of hisfriends. He first sent it to Mr. Lockhart, requesting him to read it andpronounce his opinion. _Mr. Lockhart to John Murray_. _March_ 3, 1832. "I can't say what ought to be done with this book. To me, knowing whoseit is, it is full of interest; but the affectations and absurdities aresuch that I can't but think they would disgust others more than the lifeand brilliancy of many of the descriptions would please them. You shouldsend it to Milman without saying who is the author. --J. G. L. " The MS. Was accordingly sent to Mr. Milman, but as he was very ill atthe time, and could not read it himself, but transferred it to his wife, much delay occurred in its perusal. Meanwhile, Mr. Disraeli became veryimpatient about the publication, and again wrote: _Mr. Disraeli to John Murray_. _March_ 4, 1832. MY DEAR SIR, I wish that I could simplify our arrangements by a stroke by making youa present of "The Psychological Romance"; but at present you must indeedtake the will for the deed, although I hope the future will allow us toget on more swimmingly. That work has, in all probability, cost me morethan I shall ever obtain by it, and indeed I may truly say that to writethat work I have thrown to the winds all the obvious worldly prospectsof life. I am ready to make every possible sacrifice on my part to range myselfunder your colours. I will willingly give up the immediate and positivereceipt of a large sum of money for the copyright, and by publishing thework anonymously renounce that certain sale which, as a successful, although I confess not very worthy author, I can command. But inquitting my present publisher, I incur, from the terms of our lastagreement, a _virtual penalty_, which I have no means to pay exceptingfrom the proceeds of my pen. Have you, therefore, any objection toadvance me a sum on the anticipated profits of the edition, notexceeding two hundred pounds? It grieves me much to appear exacting to you, but I frankly tell you thereason, and, as it will enable me to place myself at your disposal, Ihope you will not consider me mercenary, when I am indeed influenced bythe most sincere desire to meet your views. If this modification of your arrangement will suit you, as I ferventlytrust it will, I shall be delighted to accede to your wishes. In thatcase let me know without loss of time, and pray let us meet to talk overminor points, as to the mode of publication, etc. I shall be at home allthe morning; my time is very much occupied, and on Thursday or Friday Imust run down, for a day or two, to Wycombe to attend a public meeting. [Footnote: Mr. Disraeli was then a candidate, on the Radical side, forthe borough of Wycombe. ] Fervently trusting that this arrangement will meet your wishes, Believe me, yours, BENJ. DISRAELI. While the MS. Was still in Mr. Milman's hands, Mr. Disraeli followedthis up with another letter: _Mr. Disraeli to John Murray_ 35 DUKE STREET, ST. JAMES'S. MY DEAR SIR, I am very sensible that you have conducted yourself, withregard to my MS. , in the most honourable, kind, and judicious manner;and I very much regret the result of your exertions, which neither of usdeserve. I can wait no longer. The delay is most injurious to me, and in everyrespect very annoying. I am therefore under the painful necessity ofrequesting you to require from your friend the return of my work withouta moment's delay, but I shall not deny myself the gratification ofthanking you for your kindness and subscribing myself, with regard, Your faithful Servant, BENJ. DISRAELI. At length Mr. Milman's letter arrived, expressing his judgment on thework, which was much more satisfactory than that of Mr. Lockhart. _The Rev. H. H. Milman to John Murray_. READING, _March_ 5, 1832. MY DEAR SIR, I have been utterly inefficient for the last week, in a state of almostcomplete blindness; but am now, I trust, nearly restored. Mrs. Milman, however, has read to me the whole of the MS. It is a very remarkableproduction--very wild, very extravagant, very German, very powerful, very poetical. It will, I think, be much read--as far as one darepredict anything of the capricious taste of the day--much admired, andmuch abused. It is much more in the Macaulay than in the Croker line, and the former is evidently in the ascendant. Some passages will startlethe rigidly orthodox; the phrenologists will be in rapture. I tell youall this, that you may judge for yourself. One thing insist upon, if youpublish it-that the title be changed. The whole beauty, of the latterpart especially, is its truth. It is a rapid volume of travels, a"Childe Harold" in prose; therefore do not let it be called "a Romance"on any account. Let those who will, believe it to be a real history, andthose who are not taken in, dispute whether it is truth or fiction. Ifit makes any sensation, this will add to its notoriety. "A PsychologicalAuto-Biography" would be too sesquipedalian a title; but "My LifePsychologically Related, " or "The Psychology of my Life, " or some suchtitle, might be substituted. H. H. MILMAN. Before Mr. Milman's communication had been received, another pressingletter arrived from Mr. Disraeli. _Mr. Disraeli to John Murray_. MY DEAR SIR, It is with deep regret and some mortification that I appear to pressyou. It is of the highest importance to me that the "P. R. " shouldappear without loss of time. I have an impending election in thecountry, which a single and not improbable event may precipitate. It isa great object with me, that my work should be published before thatelection. Its rejection by you will only cause me sorrow. I have no desire thatyou should become its publisher, unless you conceive it may be the firstof a series of works, which may support your name, and sustain yourfortunes. There is no question of pecuniary matters between us; I leaveall these with you, with illimitable trust. Pray, pray, my dear Sir, do not let me repent the feelings which impelme to seek this renewal of our connection. I entreat therefore yourattention to this subject, and request that you will communicate yourdecision. Believe me, as I have already said, that whatever that decision may be, I shall not the less consider myself, Very cordially yours, B. DISRAELI. And again, in a subsequent letter, Mr. Disraeli said: "There is no work of fiction on whose character I could not decide infour-and-twenty hours, and your critic ought not to be less able thanyour author. Pray, therefore, to communicate without loss of time toyour obedient faithful servant. "B. D. " On receiving Mr. Milman's approval, Mr. Murray immediately made up hismind to publish the work. He wrote to Mr. Disraeli: _John Murray to Mr. Disraeli_. _March_ 6, 1832. MY DEAR SIR, Your MS. Has this moment been returned to me, accompanied by acommendation which enables me to say that I should be proud of being itspublisher. But in these times I am obliged to refrain from speculation, and I cannot offer any sum for it that is likely to be equal to itsprobable value. I would, however, if it so please you, print at my expense an edition of1, 200 or 1, 500 copies, and give you half the profits; and after the saleof this edition, the copyright shall be entirely your own; so that ifthe work prove as successful as I anticipate, you will ensure all theadvantages of it without incurring any risque. If this proposal shouldnot suit you, I beg to add that I shall, for the handsome offer of yourwork in the first instance, still remain, Your obedient Servant, JOHN MURRAY. Some further correspondence took place as to the title of the work. "What do you think, " said Mr. Disraeli, "of the 'Psychological Memoir'?I hesitate between this and 'Narrative, ' but discard 'History' or'Biography. ' On survey, I conceive the MS. Will make four Byronic tomes, according to the pattern you were kind enough to show me. " The work wasat length published in 4 vols. , foolscap 8vo, with the title of"Contarini Fleming: a Psychological Biography. " Before the appearance of the work, Mr. Disraeli wrote to Mr. Murray asfollows: _Mr. Disraeli to John Murray_. BRADENHAM HOUSE, _May_ 6, 1832. DEAR SIR, From the notice of "C. F. " in the _Literary Gazette_, which I receivedthis morning, I imagine that Jerdan has either bribed the printer, orpurloined some sheets. It is evident that he has only seen the lastvolume. It is unnecessary for me to observe that such premature notice, written in such complete ignorance of the work, can do no good. I thinkthat he should be reprimanded, and his petty larceny arrested. I shallbe in town on Tuesday. Yours, B. D. The work, when it appeared in 1833, excited considerable sensation, andwas very popular at the time of its publication. It is now included inthe uniform edition of Lord Beaconsfield's works. During his travels in the East, Mr. Disraeli was attended by LordByron's faithful gondolier, who had accompanied his master toMissolonghi, and remained with him till his death. _Mr. Disraeli to John Murray_. DUKE STREET, _July 5_, 1832. DEAR SIR, I have just returned to town, and will call in Albemarle Street as soonas I can. Tita, Lord Byron's faithful servant, and [Footnote: See note, p. 259. ] who was also my travelling companion in the East, called uponme this morning. I thought you might wish to see one so intimatelyconnected with the lost bard, and who is himself one of the mostdeserving creatures in the world. Yours faithfully, B. DISRAELI. At the same time that Mr. Disraeli was engaged on his novel, he was busywith another, but this time a political work entitled "England andFrance: a Cure for the Ministerial Gallomania, " dedicated to Lord Grey. The first letter on the subject--after Mr. Murray had agreed to publishthe work--appears to have been the following, from Bradenham, Mondaynight, but without date: _Mr. Disraeli to John Murray_. DEAR SIR, By to-morrow's coach, at your desire, I send you one-half of the volume, which, however, is not in the finished state I could have wished. I havematerials for any length, but it is desirable to get out without amoment's loss of time. It has been suggested to publish a volumeperiodically, and let this come out as No. 1; so as to establish ajournal of general foreign politics, for which there are ample means offirst-rate information. I have not been able even to revise what issent, but it will sufficiently indicate the work. I am to meet a personage on Thursday evening in town, and read over thewhole to him. It is therefore absolutely necessary that the MS. Shouldbe returned to you on Thursday morning, and I will call in AlbemarleStreet the moment of my arrival, which will be about four o'clock. If intime, acknowledge the receipt by return of post. The remaining portion of the volume consists of several more dramaticscenes in Paris, a view of the character and career of L. P. , [Footnote:Louis Philippe. ] a most curious chapter on the conduct of theDiplomatists, and a general view of the state of Europe at the moment ofpublication. Pray be cautious, and above all let me depend upon yourhaving the MS. On Thursday, otherwise, as Liston says in "Love, Law andPhysic, " "_we shall get all shot_. " B. D. _Mr. Disraeli to John Murray_, _Friday_, 11 o'clock. MY DEAR SIR, I much regret that I missed you yesterday, but I called upon you theinstant I arrived. I very much wish to talk over the "Gallomania, " andwill come on to you, if it be really impossible for you to pay me avisit. I have so much at this moment on my hands, that I should esteemsuch an incident, not only an honour, but a convenience. B. D. There seems to have been a difference of opinion between the author andthe publisher respecting the title of the book: _Mr. Disraeli to John Murray_. DEAR SIR, I have a great respect for your judgment, especially on the subject oftitles, as I have shown in another instance, one which I shall everregret. In the present, I shall be happy to receive from you anysuggestion, but I can offer none. To me the _Gallomania_ (or _mania_ forwhat is French) appears to be one of the most felicitous titles everdevised. It is comprehensive, it is explicit, it is poignant andintelligible, as I should suppose, to learned and unlearned. The word_Anglomania_ is one of the commonest on the other side of the channel, is repeated daily in almost every newspaper; has been the title of oneor two works; and of the best farce in the French language. It is herealso common and intelligible. There is no objection to erasing the epithet "New, " if you think itloads the title. Yours truly, B. D. The three following letters were written on the same day: _Mr. Disraeli to John Murray_. DUKE STREET, _March_ 30, 1832. DEAR SIR, I am going to dine with Baron D'Haussez, Baron de Haber, _et hoc genus_, today, and must report progress, otherwise they will think I am triflingwith them. Have you determined on a title? What think you of "A Cure forthe Ministerial Gallomania, " and advertise, dedicated to Lord Grey? Praydecide. You are aware I have not yet received a proof. Affairs lookawkward in France. Beware lest we are a day after the fair, and onlyannalists instead of prophets. Your very faithful Servant, B. DISRAELI. _March_ 30. DEAR SIR, I think it does very well, and I hope you are also satisfied. I shallsend you the rest of the MS. Tomorrow morning. There is a veryremarkable chapter on Louis Philippe which is at present with BaronD'Haussez; and this is the reason I have not forwarded it to you. I keepthe advertisement to show them. B. D. MY DEAR SIR, In further answer to your note received this evening, I think it properto observe that I entirely agree with you that I "am bound to make asfew alterations as possible, " coming as they do from such a quarter; andI have acted throughout in such a spirit. All alterations and omissionsof consequence are in this first sheet, and I have retained in theothers many things of which I do not approve, merely on account of myrespect for the source from whence they are derived. While you remind me of what I observed to your son, let me also remindyou of the condition with which my permission was accompanied, viz. :that everything was to be submitted to my approval, and subject to mysatisfaction. On this condition I have placed the proofs in the hands ofseveral persons not less distinguished than your friend, [Footnote: Mr. Croker, with Mr. B. Disraeli's knowledge, revised the proofs. ] andsuperior even in rank and recent office. Their papers are on my table, and I shall be happy to show them to you. I will mention one: thechapter on Belgium was originally written by the Plenipotentiary of theKing of Holland to the Conference, Baron Van Zuylen. Scarcely a line ofthe original composition remains, although a very able one, because itdid not accord with the main design of the book. With regard to the omission, pp. 12, 13, I acknowledge its felicity; butit is totally at variance with every other notice of M. De Talleyrand inthe work, and entirely dissonant with the elaborate mention of him inthe last chapter. When the reviser introduced this pungent remark, hehad never even read the work he was revising. With regard to the authorship of this work, I should never be ashamed ofbeing considered the author, I should be _proud to be_; but I am not. Itis written by Legion, but I am one of them, and I bear theresponsibility. If it be supposed to be written by a Frenchman, all itsgood effects must be marred, as it seeks to command attention andinterest by its purely British spirit. I have no desire to thrust my acquaintance on your critic. More thanonce, I have had an opportunity to form that acquaintance, and more thanonce I have declined it, but I am ready to bear the _brunt ofexplanation_, if you desire me. It is quite impossible that anything adverse to the general measure ofReform can issue from my pen or from anything to which I contribute. Within these four months I have declined being returned for a Toryborough, and almost within these four hours, to mention slight affairs, I have refused to inscribe myself a member of "The Conservative Club. " Icannot believe that you will place your critic's feelings for a fewerased passages against my permanent interest. But in fact these have nothing to do with the question. To convenienceyou, I have no objection to wash my hands of the whole business, and putyou in direct communication with my coadjutors. I can assure you that itis from no regard for my situation that Reform was omitted, but becausethey are of opinion that its notice would be unwise and injurious. Formyself, I am ready to do anything that you can desire, except entirelychange my position in life. I will see your critic, if you please, or you can give up thepublication and be reimbursed, which shall make no difference in ourother affairs. All I ask in this and all other affairs, are candour anddecision. The present business is most pressing. At present I am writing a chapteron Poland from intelligence just received, and it will be ready for theprinter tomorrow morning, as I shall finish it before I retire. I awaityour answer with anxiety. Yours truly, B. D. Mr. Disraeli was evidently intent upon the immediate publication of hiswork. On the following day he wrote again to Mr. Murray: _Mr. Disraeli to John Murray_. _March_ 31, 1832. MY DEAR SIR, We shall have an opportunity of submitting the work to Count Orlofftomorrow morning, in case you can let me have a set of the proofstonight, I mean as far as we have gone. I do not like to send mine, which are covered with corrections. Yours truly, B. D. _Mr. Disraeli to John Murray_. _Monday morning_, 9 _o'clock [April_ 2]. DEAR SIR, Since I had the honour of addressing you the note of last night, I haveseen the Baron. Our interview was intended to have been a final one, andit was therefore absolutely necessary that I should apprize him of allthat had happened, of course concealing the name of your friend. TheBaron says that the insertion of the obnoxious passages is fatal to allhis combinations; that he has devoted two months of the most valuabletime to this affair, and that he must hold me personally responsible forthe immediate fulfilment of my agreement, viz. : to ensure itspublication when finished. We dine at the same house today, and I have pledged myself to give him acategorical reply at that time, and to ensure its publication by somemode or other. Under these principal circumstances, my dear sir, I can only state thatthe work must be published at once, and with the omission of allpassages hostile to Reform; and that if you are unwilling to introduceit in that way, I request from your friendliness such assistance as youcan afford me about the printer, etc. , to occasion its immediatepublication in some other quarter. After what took place between myself and my coadjutor last night, Ireally can have for him only one answer or one alternative, and as Iwish to give him the first, and ever avoid the second, I look forwardwith confidence to your answer. B. D. Mr. Disraeli next desires to have a set of the proofs to put into thehands of the Duke of Wellington: _Mr. Disraeli to John Murray_, _April_ 6, 1832. MY DEAR SIR, I have just received a note, that if I can get a set of clean proofs bySunday, they will be put in the Duke's hands preliminary to the debate. I thought you would like to know this. Do you think it impossible? Letthis be between us. I am sorry to give you all this trouble, but I knowyour zeal, and the interest you take in these affairs. I myself willnever keep the printer, and engage when the proofs are sent me toprepare them for the press within an hour. Yours, B. D. _Mr. Disraeli to John Murray_. MY DEAR SIR, I am very glad to receive the copy. I think that one should be sent tothe editor of the _Times_ as quickly as possible; that at least heshould not be anticipated in the receipt, even if in the _notice_, by aSunday paper. But I leave all this to your better judgment. You willsend copies to Duke Street as soon as you have them. B. D. After the article in the _Times_ had appeared, Baron de Haber, amysterious German gentleman of Jewish extraction, who had taken part inthe production of "Gallomania, " wrote to Mr. Murray: _Baron de Haber to John Murray_. 2 _Mai_, 1832. MON CHER MONSIEUR, J'espère que vous serez content de l'article de _Times_ sur la"Gallomania. " C'est un grand pas de fait. Il serait utile que le_Standard_ et le _Morning Post_ le copie en entier, avec desobservations dans son sens. C'est a vous, mon cher Monsieur Murray, desoigner cet objet. J'ai infiniment regrette de ne m'etre pas trouve chezmoi hier, lorsque vous etes venu me voir, avec l'aimable Mr. Lockhart. Tout a vous, DE H. _Baron de Haber to John Murray_. _Vendredi_. MON CHER MONSIEUR MURRAY, Vous desirez dans l'intèrêt de l'ouvrage faire mentionner dans le_Standard_ que le _Times_ d'aujourd'hui paroît etre assez d'accord avecl'auteur de la "Gallomania" sur M. Thiers, espérant que de jour en jouril reviendra aux idees de cet auteur. Il seroit aussi convenable de dire que la _prophétie_ dans la lettre à_My Lord Grey_ était assez juste: Allusion--"In less than a month weshall no doubt hear of their _warm_ reception in the Provinces, and ofsome gratifying, perhaps startling, demonstrations of nationalgratitude. " Voyez, mon cher Monsieur, comme depuis 8 jours ces pauvresDéputés qui ont voté pour le Ministre sont traités, Si vous étes à lamaison ce soir, dites-le-moi, je désire vous parler. Dinez-vouschez-vous? Votre dévoué, DE H. The following announcement was published by Mr. Disraeli in reply tocertain criticisms of his work: "I cannot allow myself to omit certain observations of my able criticwithout remarking that those omissions are occasioned by noinsensibility to their acuteness. "Circumstances of paramount necessity render it quite impossible thatanything can proceed from my pen hostile to the general question of_Reform_. "Independent however of all personal considerations, and viewing thequestion of Reform for a moment in the light in which my criticevidently speculates, I would humbly suggest that the cause which headvocates would perhaps be more united in the present pages by beingpassed over _in silence_. It is important that this work should be awork not of _party_ but of national interest, and I am induced tobelieve that a large class in this country, who think themselves boundto support the present administration from a superficial sympathy withtheir domestic measures, have long viewed their foreign policy withdistrust and alarm. "If the public are at length convinced that Foreign Policy, instead ofbeing an abstract and isolated division of the national interests, is infact the basis of our empire and present order, and that this basisshakes under the unskilful government of the Cabinet, the public may beinduced to withdraw their confidence from that Cabinet altogether. "With this exception, I have adopted all the additions and alterationsthat I have yet had the pleasure of seeing without reserve, and I seizethis opportunity of expressing my sense of their justness and theirvalue. "_The Author of 'Gallomania_. '" [Footnote: Several references are madeto "Contarini Fleming" and "Gallomania" in "Lord Beaconsfield's Lettersto his Sister, " published in 1887. ] The next person whom we shall introduce to the reader was one who hadbut little in common with Mr. Benjamin Disraeli, except that, like him, he had at that time won little of that world-wide renown which he wasafterwards to achieve. This "writer of books, " as he described himself, was no other than Thomas Carlyle, who, when he made the acquaintance ofMr. Murray, had translated Goethe's "Wilhelm Meister, " written the "Lifeof Schiller, " and several articles in the Reviews; but was not yet knownas a literary man of mark. He was living among the bleak, bare moors ofDumfriesshire at Craigenputtock, where he was consoled at times byvisits from Jeffrey and Emerson, and by letters from Goethe, and wherehe wrote that strange and rhapsodical book "Sartor Resartus, " containinga considerable portion of his own experience. After the MS. Was nearlyfinished, he wrapt it in a piece of paper, put in it his pocket, andstarted for Dumfries, on his way to London. Mr. Francis Jeffrey, then Lord Advocate, recommended Carlyle to tryMurray, because, "in spite of its radicalism, he would be the betterpublisher. " Jeffrey wrote to Mr. Murray on the subject, withoutmentioning Carlyle's name: _Mr. Jeffrey to John Murray_. _May_ I, 1831. "Lord Jeffrey [Footnote: Jeffrey writes thus, although he did not becomea Lord of Session till 1834. ] understands that the earlier chapters ofthis work (which is the production of a friend of his) were shown somemonths ago to Mr. Murray (or his reader), and were formally judged of;though, from its incomplete state, no proposal for its publication couldthen be entertained. What is now sent completes it; the earlier chaptersbeing now under the final perusal of the author. "Lord Jeffrey, who thinks highly of the author's abilities, ventures tobeg Mr. Murray to look at the MS. Now left with him, and to give him, assoon as possible, his opinion as to its probable success on publication;and also to say whether he is willing to undertake it, and on whatterms. " Carlyle, who was himself at the time in London, called upon Mr. Murray, and left with him a portion of the manuscript, and an outline of theproposed volume. _Mr. Carlyle to John Murray_. 6 WOBURN BUILDINGS, TAVISTOCK SQUARE, _Wednesday, August_ 10, 1831. DEAR SIR, I here send you the MS. Concerning which I have, for the present, onlyto repeat my urgent request that no time may be lost in deciding on it. At latest, next Wednesday I shall wait upon you, to see what further, orwhether anything further is to be done. In the meanwhile, it is perhaps unnecessary to say, that the wholebusiness is strictly confidential; the rather, as I wish to publishanonymously. I remain, dear Sir, yours truly, THOMAS CARLYLE. Be so kind as to write, by the bearer, these two words, "MS. Received. " When Carlyle called a second time Murray was not at home, but he foundthat the parcel containing the MS. Had not been opened. He again wroteto the publisher on the following Friday: _Mr. Carlyle to John Murray_. DEAR SIR, As I am naturally very anxious to have this little business that liesbetween us off my hands--and, perhaps, a few minutes' conversation wouldsuffice to settle it all--I will again request, in case I should be sounlucky as to miss you in Albemarle Street, that you would have thegoodness to appoint me a short meeting at any, the earliest, hour thatsuits your convenience. I remain, dear Sir, yours truly, THOMAS CARLYLE. This was followed up by a letter from Mr. Jeffrey: _Mr. Jeffrey to John Murray_. _Sunday, August_ 28, 1831. MY DEAR SIR, Will you favour me with a few minutes' conversation, any morning of thisweek (the early part of it, if possible), on the subject of my friendCarlyle's projected publication. I have looked a little into the MS. Andcan tell you something about it. Believe me, always, very faithfullyyours, F. JEFFREY. The interview between Jeffrey and Murray led to an offer for the MS. _Mr. Carlyle to John Murray_. TUESDAY. DEAR SIR, I have seen the Lord Advocate [Jeffrey], who informs me that you arewilling to print an edition of 750 copies of my MS. , at your own cost, on the principle of what is called "half profits"; the copyright of thebook after that to belong to myself. I came down at present to saythat, being very anxious to have you as a publisher, and to see my bookput forth soon, I am ready to accede to these terms; and I should likemuch to meet you, or hear from you, at your earliest convenience, thatthe business might be actually put in motion. I much incline to think, in contrasting the character of my little speculation with the characterof the times, that _now_ (even in these months, say in November) werethe best season for emitting it. Hoping soon to see all this pleasantlysettled, I remain, dear Sir, yours truly, THOMAS CARLYLE. Mr. Murray was willing to undertake the risk of publishing 750 copies, and thus to allow the author to exhibit his literary wares to thepublic. Even if the whole edition had sold, the pecuniary results toboth author and publisher would have been comparatively trifling, but asthe copyright was to remain in the author's possession, and he wouldhave been able to make a much better bargain with the future editions, the terms may be considered very liberal, having regard to theexceptional nature of the work. Mr. Carlyle, however, who did not knowthe usual custom of publishers, had in the meantime taken away his MS. And offered it to other publishers in London, evidently to try whetherhe could not get a better bid for his book. Even Jeffrey thought it "wastoo much of the nature of a rhapsody, to command success or respectfulattention. " The publishers thought the same. Carlyle took the MS. ToFraser of Regent Street, who offered to publish it if Carlyle would_give him_ a sum not exceeding £150 sterling. He had already been toLongmans & Co. , offering them his "German Literary History, " but theydeclined to publish the work, and he now offered them his "SartorResartus, " with a similar result. He also tried Colburn and Bentley, butwithout success. When Murray, then at Ramsgate, heard that Carlyle hadbeen offering his book to other publishers, he wrote to him: _John Murray to Mr. Carlyle_. _September_ 17, 1831. DEAR SIR, Your conversation with me respecting the publication of your MS. Led meto infer that you had given me the preference, and certainly not thatyou had already submitted it to the greatest publishers in London, whohad declined to engage in it. Under these circumstances it will benecessary for me also to get it read by some literary friend, before Ican, in justice to myself, engage in the printing of it. I am, dear Sir, your faithful servant, JOHN MURRAY. To this Mr. Carlyle replied: _September_ 19, 1831 SIR, I am this moment favoured with your note of the 17th, and beg to say, inreply, : _First_. --That your idea, derived from conversation with me, of mygiving you the preference to all other Publishers, was perfectlycorrect. I had heard you described as a man of honour, frankness, andeven generosity, and knew you to have the best and widest connexions; onwhich grounds, I might well say, and can still well say, that atransaction with you would please me better than a similar one with anyother member of the Trade. _Secondly_. --That your information, of my having submitted my MS. To thegreatest publishers in London, if you mean that, after coming out ofyour hands, it lay two days in those of Messrs. Longman & Rees, and wasfrom them delivered over to the Lord Advocate, is also perfectlycorrect: if you mean anything else, incorrect. _Thirdly_. --That if you wish the Bargain, which I had understood myselfto have made with you, unmade, you have only to cause your Printer, whois now working on my MS. , to return the same, without damage or delay, and consider the business as finished. I remain, Sir, your obedientservant, THOMAS CARLYLE. In the meantime Murray submitted the MS. To one of his literaryadvisers, probably Lockhart, whose report was not very encouraging. Later, as Mr. Carlyle was unwilling to entertain the idea of taking hismanuscript home with him, and none of the other publishers would acceptit, he urgently requested Mr. Murray again to examine it, and come tosome further decision. "While I, with great readiness, " he said, "admityour views, and shall cheerfully release you from all engagement, orshadow of engagement, with me in regard to it: the rather, as it seemsreasonable for me to expect some higher remuneration for a work that hascost me so much effort, were it once fairly examined, such remunerationas was talked of between _us_ can, I believe, at all times, beprocured. " He then proposed "a quite new negotiation, if you incline toenter on such"; and requested his decision. "If not, pray have thegoodness to cause my papers to be returned with the least possibledelay. " The MS. Was at once returned; and Carlyle acknowledged itsreceipt: _Mr. Carlyle to John Murray_. _October_ 6, 1831. MY DEAR SIR, I have received the MS. , with your note and your friend's criticism, andI find it all safe and right. In conclusion, allow me to thank you foryour punctuality and courtesy in this part of the business; and to joincordially in the hope you express that, in some fitter case, a closerrelation may arise between us. I remain, my dear Sir, faithfully yours, T. CARLYLE. Mr. Carlyle returned to Craigenputtock with his manuscript in hispocket; very much annoyed and disgusted by the treatment of the Londonpublishers. Shortly after his arrival at home, he wrote to Mr. MacveyNapier, then editor of the _Edinburgh Review_: "All manner of perplexities have occurred in the publishing of my poorbook, which perplexities I could only cut asunder, not unloose; so theMS. , like an unhappy ghost, still lingers on the wrong side of Styx: theCharon of Albemarle Street durst not risk it in his _sutilis cymba_, soit leaped ashore again. Better days are coming, and new trials will endmore happily. " A little later (February 6, 1832) he said: "I have given up the notion of hawking my little manuscript book aboutany further. For a long time it has lain quiet in its drawer, waitingfor a better day. The bookselling trade seems on the edge ofdissolution; the force of puffing can go no further; yet bankruptcyclamours at every door: sad fate! to serve the Devil, and get no wageseven from him! The poor bookseller Guild, I often predict to myself, will ere long be found unfit for the strange part it now plays in ourEuropean World; and give place to new and higher arrangements, of whichthe coming shadows are already becoming visible. " The "Sartor Resartus" was not, however, lost. Two years after Carlyle'svisit to London, it came out, bit by bit, in _Fraser's Magazine_. Through the influence of Emerson, it was issued, as a book, at Boston, in the United States, and Carlyle got some money for his production. Itwas eventually published in England, and, strange to say, has had thelargest sale in the "People's Edition of Carlyle's Works. " Carlyle, himself, created the taste to appreciate "Sartor Resartus. " CHAPTER XXX MR. GLADSTONE AND OTHERS In July 1838 Mr. W. E. Gladstone, then Tory member of Parliament forNewark-upon-Trent, wrote to Mr. Murray from 6 Carlton Gardens, informinghim that he has written and thinks of publishing some papers on thesubject of the relationship of the "Church and the State, " which wouldprobably fill a moderate octavo volume, and that he would be glad toknow if Mr. Murray would be inclined to see them. Mr. Murray saw thepapers, and on August 9 he agreed with Mr. Gladstone to publish 750 or1, 000 copies of the work on "Church and State, " on half profits, thecopyright to remain with the author after the first edition was sold. The work was immediately sent to press, and proofs were sent to Mr. Gladstone, about to embark for Holland. A note was received by Mr. Murray from the author (August 17, 1838): "I write a line from Rotterdam to say that sea-sickness prevented mycorrecting the proofs on the passage. " This was Mr. Gladstone's first appearance in the character of an author, and the work proved remarkably successful, four editions being calledfor in the course of three years. It was reviewed by Macaulay in the_Edinburgh_ for April 1839, and in the _Quarterly_ by the Rev. W. Sewellin December. "Church Principles, " published in 1840, did not meet withequal success. Two years later we find a reference to the same subject. _Mr. W. E. Gladstone to John Murray_. 13 CARLTON HOUSE TERRACE, _April_ 6, 1842. My DEAR SIR, I thank you very much for your kindness in sending me the new number ofthe _Quarterly_. As yet I have only read a part of the article on theChurch of England, which seems to be by a known hand, and to be full ofvery valuable research: I hope next to turn to Lord Mahon's "Joan ofArc. " Amidst the pressure of more urgent affairs, I have held no consultationwith you regarding my books and the sale or no sale of them. As to thethird edition of the "State in its Relations, " I should think theremaining copies had better be got rid of in whatever summary orignominious mode you may deem best. They must be dead beyond recall. Asto the others, I do not know whether the season of the year has at allrevived the demand; and would suggest to you whether it would be well toadvertise them a little. I do not think they find their way much intothe second-hand shops. With regard to the fourth edition, I do not know whether it would bewell to procure any review or notice of it, and I am not a fair judge ofits merits even in comparison with the original form of the work; but myidea is, that it is less defective both in the theoretical and in thehistorical development, and ought to be worth the notice of those whodeemed the earlier editions worth their notice and purchase: that itwould really put a reader in possession of the view it was intended toconvey, which I fear is more than can with any truth be said of itspredecessors. I am not, however, in any state of anxiety or impatience: and I amchiefly moved to refer these suggestions to your judgment fromperceiving that the Fourth Edition is as yet far from having cleareditself. I remain always, Very faithfully yours, W. E. GLADSTONE. In the same year another author of different politics and stronganti-slavery views appeared to claim Mr. Murray's assistance as apublisher. It was Mr. Thomas Fowell Buxton, M. P. , who desired him topublish his work upon the "Slave Trade and its Remedy. " _Mr. Buxton to John Murray_. _December_ 31, 1837. "The basis of my proposed book has already been brought before theCabinet Ministers in a confidential letter addressed to LordMelbourne.... It is now my purpose to publish a portion of the work, onthe nature, extent, and horrors of the slave trade, and the failure ofthe efforts hitherto made to suppress it, [Footnote: See "Life of W. E. Forster, " ch. Iv. ] reserving the remainder for another volume to bepublished at a future day. I should like to have 1, 500 copies of thefirst volume thrown off without delay. " The book was published, and was followed by a cheaper volume in thefollowing year, of which a large number was sold and distributed. The following letter illustrates the dangerous results of reading sleepybooks by candle-light in bed: _Mr. Longman to John Murray_. 2 HANOVER TERRACE, 1838. MY DEAR MURRAY, Can you oblige me by letting me have a third volume of "Wilberforce"?The fact is, that in reading that work, my neighbour, Mr. Alexander, fell fast asleep from exhaustion, and, setting himself on fire, burntthe volume and his bed, to the narrow escape of the whole Terrace. Sincethat book has been published, premiums of fire assurance are up, and nothaving already insured my No. 2, now that the fire has broken out nearmy own door, no office will touch my house nor any others in the Terraceuntil it is ascertained that Mr. Alexander has finished with the book. So pray consider our position, and let me have a third volume to make upthe set as soon as possible. Mr. Murray had agreed with the Bishop of Llandaff to publish LordDudley's posthumous works, but the Bishop made certain complaints whichled to the following letter from Mr. Murray: _John Murray to the Bishop of Llandaff_. _December_ 31, 1839. MY LORD, I am told that your Lordship continues to make heavy complaints of theinconvenience you incur by making me the publisher of "Lord Dudley'sLetters, " in consequence of the great distance between St. Paul'sChurchyard and Albemarle Street, and that you have discovered anothercause for dissatisfaction in what you consider the inordinate profits ofa publisher. My Lord, when I had the honour to publish for Sir Walter Scott and LordByron, the one resided in Edinburgh, the other in Venice; and, withregard to the supposed advantages of a publisher, they were only such ascustom has established, and experience proved to be no more thanequivalent to his peculiar trouble and the inordinate risque which heincurs. My long acquaintance with Lord Dudley, and the kindness and friendshipwith which he honoured me to the last, made me, in addition to myadmiration of his talents, desire, and, indeed, expect to become thepublisher of his posthumous works, being convinced that he would havehad no other. After what has passed on your Lordship's side, however, Ifeel that it would be inconsistent with my own character to embarrassyou any longer, and I therefore release your Lordship at once from anypromise or supposed understanding whatever regarding this publication, and remain, my Lord, Your Lordship's humble Servant, JOHN MURRAY. The Bishop of Llandaff seems to have thought better of the matter, andin Mr. Murray's second letter to him (January 1, 1840) he states that, after his Lordship's satisfactory letter, he "renews his engagement aspublisher of Lord Dudley's 'Letters' with increased pleasure. " Thevolume was published in the following year, but was afterwardssuppressed; it is now very scarce. Mrs. Jameson proposed to Mr. Murray to publish a "Guide to thePicture-Galleries of London. " He was willing to comply with her request, provided she submitted her manuscript for perusal and approval. But asshe did not comply with his request, Mr. Murray wrote to her as follows: _John Murray to Mrs. Jameson_. _July_ 14, 1840 MY DEAR MADAM, It is with unfeigned regret that I perceive that you and I are notlikely to understand each other. The change from a Publisher, to whosemode of conducting business you are accustomed, to another of whom youhave heard merely good reports, operates something like secondmarriages, in which, whatever occurs that is different from that whichwas experienced in the first, is always considered wrong by the partywho has married a second time. If, for a particular case, you have beeninduced to change your physician, you should not take offence, or feeleven surprise, at a different mode of treatment. My rule is, never to engage in the publication of any work of which Ihave not been allowed to form a judgment of its merits and chances ofsuccess, by having the MSS. Left with me a reasonable time, in order toform such opinion; and from this habit of many years' exercise, Iconfess to you that it will not, even upon the present occasion, suit meto deviate. I am well aware that you would not wish to publish anything derogatoryto the high reputation which you have so deservedly acquired; butShakespeare, Byron, and Scott have written works that do not sell; and, as you expect money for the work which you wish to allow me the honourof publishing, how am I to judge of its value if I am not previouslyallowed to read it? Mrs. Jameson at length submitted her work for Mr. Murray's inspection;and after some negotiation, her Guide-Book was purchased for £400. Mr. Murray, it may here be mentioned, had much communication with SirRobert Peel during his parliamentary career. He published many of Peel'sspeeches and addresses--his Address to the Students of GlasgowUniversity; his Speeches on the Irish Disturbances Bill, the CoercionBill, the Repeal of the Union, and the Sugar Bills--all of which weremost carefully revised before being issued. Sugar had become so cloyingwith Sir Robert, that he refused to read his speeches on the subject. "Iam so sick of Sugar, " he wrote to Murray, "and of the eight nights'debate, that I have not the courage to look at any report of myspeech--at least at present. " A later letter shows that the connectioncontinued. _The Rt. Hon. Sir R. Peel to John Murray_. _July_ or _August_, 1840. DEAR SIR, Your printer must be descended from him who omitted _not_ from theseventh Commandment, and finding a superfluous "not" in his possession, is anxious to find a place for it. I am sorry he has bestowed it upon me, and has made me assure myconstituents that I do _not_ intend to support my political principles. Pray look at the 4th line of the second page of the enclosed. Faithfully yours, ROBERT PEEL. No account of Mr. Murray's career would be complete without some mentionof the "Handbooks, " with which his name has been for sixty yearsassociated; for though this series was in reality the invention of hisson, it was Mr. Murray who provided the means and encouragement for theexecution of the scheme, and by his own experience was instrumental inensuring its success. As early as 1817 Hobhouse had remarked on the inadequate character ofmost books of European travel. In later years Mrs. Starke made abeginning, but her works were very superficial and inadequate, and afterpersonally testing them on their own ground, Mr. John Murray decidedthat something better was needed. Of the origin of the Guide-books Mr. John Murray the Third has giventhe following account in Murray's Magazine for November 1889. "Since so many thousands of persons have profited by these books, it maybe of some interest to the public to learn their origin, and the causewhich led me to prepare them. Having from my early youth been possessedby an ardent desire to travel, my very indulgent father acceded to myrequest, on condition that I should prepare myself by mastering thelanguage of the country I was to travel in. Accordingly, in 1829, havingbrushed up my German, I first set foot on the Continent at Rotterdam, and my 'Handbook for Holland' gives the results of my personalobservations and private studies of that wonderful country. "At that time such a thing as a Guide-book for Germany, France, or Spaindid not exist. The only Guides deserving the name were: Ebel, forSwitzerland; Boyce, for Belgium; and Mrs. Starke, for Italy. Hers was awork of real utility, because, amidst a singular medley of classicallore, borrowed from Lemprière's Dictionary, interwoven with detailsregulating the charges in washing-bills at Sorrento and Naples, and anelaborate theory on the origin of _Devonshire Cream_, in which sheproves that it was brought by Phoenician colonists from Asia Minor intothe West of England, it contained much practical information gathered onthe spot. But I set forth for the North of Europe unprovided with anyguide, excepting a few manuscript notes about towns and inns, etc. , inHolland, furnished me by my good friend Dr. Somerville, husband of thelearned Mrs. Somerville. These were of the greatest use. Sorry was Iwhen, on landing at Hamburg, I found myself destitute of such friendlyaid. It was this that impressed on my mind the value of practicalinformation gathered on the spot, and I set to work to collect formyself all the facts, information, statistics, etc. , which an Englishtourist would be likely to require or find useful. The first of Mr. John Murray's Handbooks to the Continent, published1836, included Holland, Belgium, and North Germany, and was followed atshort intervals by South Germany, Switzerland--in which he was assistedby his intimate friend and fellow-traveller, William Brockedon, theartist, who was then engaged in preparing his own splendid work on "ThePeaks, Passes, and Glaciers of the Alps"--and France. These were allwritten by Mr. Murray himself; but, as the series proceeded, it wasnecessary to call in the aid of other writers and travellers. Switzerland, which appeared in 1838, was followed in 1839 by Norway, Sweden, and Denmark, and in 1840 by the Handbook to the East, the workof Mr. H. Parish, aided by Mr. Godfrey Levinge. In 1842 Sir FrancisPalgrave completed the Guide to Northern Italy, while Central andSouthern Italy were entrusted to Mr. Octavian Blewitt, for many yearsSecretary of the Royal Literary Fund. In later years, as well as at the earlier period, the originator of theHandbooks was fortunate enough to secure very able colleagues, amongwhom it is sufficient to mention Richard Ford for Spain, Sir GardnerWilkinson for Egypt, Dr. Porter for Palestine, Sir George Bowen forGreece, Sir Lambert Playfair for Algiers and the Mediterranean, and Mr. George Dennis for Sicily. CHAPTER XXXI GEORGE BORROW--RICHARD FORD--HORACE TWISS--JOHN STERLING--MR. GLADSTONE--DEATH OF SOUTHEY, ETC. In November 1840 a tall athletic gentleman in black called upon Mr. Murray offering a MS. For perusal and publication. George Borrow hadbeen a travelling missionary of the Bible Society in Spain, though inearly life he had prided himself on being an athlete, and had even takenlessons in pugilism from Thurtell, who was a fellow-townsman. He was anative of Dereham, Norfolk, but had wandered much in his youth, firstfollowing his father, who was a Captain of Militia. He went from southto north, from Kent to Edinburgh, where he was entered as pupil in theHigh School, and took part in the "bickers" so well described by SirWalter Scott. Then the boy followed the regiment to Ireland, where hestudied the Celtic dialect. From early youth he had a passion, and anextraordinary capacity, for learning languages, and on reaching manhoodhe was appointed agent to the Bible Society, and was sent to Russia totranslate and introduce the Scriptures. While there he mastered thelanguage, and learnt besides the Solavonian and the gypsy dialects. Hetranslated the New Testament into the Tartar Mantchow, and publishedversions from English into thirty languages. He made successive visitsinto Russia, Norway, Turkey, Bohemia, Spain and Barbary. In fact, thesole of his foot never rested. While an agent for the Bible Society inSpain, he translated the New Testament into Spanish, Portuguese, Romany, and Basque--which language, it is said, the devil himself never couldlearn--and when he had learnt the Basque he acquired the name ofLavengro, or word-master. Such was George Borrow when he called upon Murray to offer him the MSS. Of his first book, "The Gypsies in Spain. " Mr. Murray could not fail tobe taken at first sight with this extraordinary man. He had a splendidphysique, standing six feet two in his stockings, and he had brains aswell as muscles, as his works sufficiently show. The book now submittedwas of a very uncommon character, and neither the author nor thepublisher was very sanguine about its success. Mr. Murray agreed, afterperusal, to print and publish 750 copies of "The Gypsies in Spain, " anddivide the profits with the author. But this was only the beginning, andBorrow reaped much better remuneration from future editions of thevolume. Indeed, the book was exceedingly well received, and met with aconsiderable sale; but not so great as his next work, "The Bible inSpain, " which he was now preparing. _Mr. George Borrow to John Murray_. _August_ 23, 1841. "A queer book will be this same 'Bible in Spain, ' containing all myqueer adventures in that queer country whilst engaged in distributingthe Gospel, but neither learning, nor disquisition, fine writing, orpoetry. A book with such a Bible and of this description can scarcelyfail of success. It will make two nice foolscap octavo volumes of about500 pages each. I have not heard from Ford since I had last the pleasureof seeing you. Is his book out? I hope that he will not review the'Zincali' until the Bible is forthcoming, when he may, if he please, kill two birds with one stone. I hear from Saint Petersburg that thereis a notice of the 'Zincali' in the _Revue Britannique_; it has beentranslated into Russian. Do you know anything about it?" _Mr. George Borrow to John Murray_. OULTON HALL, LOWESTOFT, _January_1842. MY DEAR SIR, We are losing time. I have corrected seven hundred consecutive pages ofMS. , and the remaining two hundred will be ready in a fortnight. I donot think there will be a dull page in the whole book, as I have madeone or two very important alterations; the account of my imprisonment atMadrid cannot fail, I think, of being particularly interesting.... During the last week I have been chiefly engaged in horse-breaking. Amost magnificent animal has found his way to this neighbourhood--ahalf-bred Arabian. He is at present in the hands of a low horse-dealer, and can be bought for eight pounds, but no one will have him. It is saidthat he kills everybody who mounts him. I have been _charming_ him, andhave so far succeeded that he does not fling me more than once in fiveminutes. What a contemptible trade is the author's compared with that ofthe jockey's! Mr. Borrow prided himself on being a horse-sorcerer, an art he learnedamong the gypsies, with whose secrets he claimed acquaintance. Hewhispered some unknown gibberish into their ears, and professed thus totame them. He proceeded with "The Bible in Spain. " In the following month he sentto Mr. Murray the MS. Of the first volume. To the general information asto the contents and interest of the volume, he added these words: _Mr. George Borrow to John Murray_. _February_, 1842. "I spent a day last week with our friend Dawson Turner at Yarmouth. Whatcapital port he keeps! He gave me some twenty years old, and of nearlythe finest flavour that I ever tasted. There are few better things thanold books, old pictures, and old port, and he seems to have plenty ofall three. " _May_ 10, 1842. "I am coming up to London tomorrow, and intend to call at AlbemarleStreet.... I make no doubt that we shall be able to come to terms; Ilike not the idea of applying to second-rate people. I have beendreadfully unwell since I last heard from you--a regular nervous attack;at present I have a bad cough, caught by getting up at night in pursuitof poachers and thieves. A horrible neighbourhood this--not a magistratethat dares to do his duty. "P. S. --Ford's book not out yet?" There seems to have been some difficulty about coming to terms. Borrowhad promised his friends that his book should be out by October 1, andhe did not wish them to be disappointed: _Mr. George Borrow to John Murray_. _July_ 4, 1842. Why this delay? Mr. Woodfall [the printer] tells me that the state oftrade is wretched. Well and good! But you yourself told me so two monthsago, when you wrote requesting that I would give you the preference, provided I had not made arrangements with other publishers. Betweenourselves, my dear friend, I wish the state of the trade were ten timesworse than it is, and then things would find their true level, and anoriginal work would be properly appreciated, and a set of people whohave no pretensions to write, having nothing to communicate buttea-table twaddle, could no longer be palmed off upon the public asmighty lions and lionesses. But to the question: What are yourintentions with respect to "The Bible in Spain"? I am a frank man, andfrankness never offends me. Has anybody put you out of conceit with thebook? There is no lack of critics, especially in your neighbourhood. Tell me frankly, and I will drink your health in Rommany. Or, would theappearance of "The Bible" on the first of October interfere with theAvatar, first or second, of some very Lion or Divinity, to whom GeorgeBorrow, who is neither, must, of course, give place? Be frank with me, my dear sir, and I will drink your health in Rommany and Madeira. In case of either of the above possibilities being the fact, allow me toassure you that I am quite willing to release you from your share of theagreement into which we entered. At the same time, I do not intend tolet the work fall to the ground, as it has been promised to the public. Unless you go on with it, I shall remit Woodfall the necessary money forthe purchase of paper, and when it is ready offer it to the world. If itbe but allowed fair play, I have no doubt of its success. It is anoriginal book, on an original subject. Tomorrow, July 5, I amthirty-nine. Have the kindness to drink my health in Madeira. Ever most sincerely yours, GEORGE BORROW. Terms were eventually arranged to the satisfaction of both parties. Borrow informed Murray that he had sent the last proofs to the printer, and continued: _Mr. George Borrow to John Murray_. _November_ 25, 1842. Only think, poor Allan Cunningham dead! A young man, only fifty-eight, strong and tall as a giant, might have lived to a hundred and one; buthe bothered himself about the affairs of this world far too much. Thatstatue shop [of Chantrey's] was his bane! Took to bookmakinglikewise--in a word, was too fond of Mammon. Awful death--nopreparation--came literally upon him like a thief in the dark. I'mthinking of writing a short life of him; old friend of twenty years'standing. I know a good deal about him; "Traditional Tales, " his bestwork, first appeared in _London Magazine_, Pray send Dr. Bowring a copyof the Bible-another old friend. Send one to Ford, a capital fellow. Godbless you--feel quite melancholy. Ever yours, G. BORROW. "The Bible in Spain" was published towards the end of the year, andcreated a sensation. It was praised by many critics, and condemned byothers, for Borrow had his enemies in the press. _Mr. George Borrow to John Murray, Junior_. LOWESTOFT, _December_ 1, 1842. MY DEAR SIR, I received your kind letter containing the bills. It was very friendlyof you, and I thank you, though, thank God, I have no Christmas bills tosettle. Money, however, always acceptable. I dare say I shall be inLondon with the entrance of the New Year; I shall be most happy to seeyou, and still more your father, whose jokes do one good. I wish all theworld were as gay as he; a gentleman drowned himself last week on myproperty, I wish he had gone somewhere else. I can't get poor Allan outof my head. When I come up, intend to go and see his wife. What a woman!I hope our book will be successful. If so, shall put another on thestocks. Capital subject; early life, studies, and adventures; someaccount of my father, William Taylor, Whiter, Big Ben, etc. , etc. Hadanother letter from Ford; wonderful fellow; seems in high spirits. Yesterday read "Letters from the Baltic"; much pleased with it; veryclever writer; critique in _Despatch_ harsh and unjust; quite uncalledfor; blackguard affair altogether. I remain, dear Sir, ever yours, GEORGE BORROW, _December_ 31, 1842. MY DEAR SIR, I have great pleasure in acknowledging your very kind letter of the28th, and am happy to hear that matters are going on so prosperously. Itis quite useless to write books unless they sell, and the public has oflate become so fastidious that it is no easy matter to please it. Withrespect to the critique in the _Times_, I fully agree with you that itwas harsh and unjust, and the passages selected by no means calculatedto afford a fair idea of the contents of the work. A book, however, like"The Bible in Spain" can scarcely be published without excitingconsiderable hostility, and I have been so long used to receiving hardknocks that they make no impression upon me. After all, the abuse of the_Times_ is better than its silence; it would scarcely have attacked thework unless it had deemed it of some importance, and so the public willthink. All I can say is, that I did my best, never writing but when thefit took me, and never delivering anything to my amanuensis but what Iwas perfectly satisfied with. You ask me my opinion of the review in the_Quarterly_. Very good, very clever, very neatly done. Only one fault tofind--too laudatory. I am by no means the person which the reviewer hadthe kindness to represent me. I hope you are getting on well as tohealth; strange weather this, very unwholesome, I believe, both for manand beast: several people dead, and great mortality amongst the cattle. Am tolerably well myself, but get but little rest--disagreeabledreams--digestion not quite so good as I could wish; been on the watersystem--won't do; have left it off, and am now taking lessons insinging. I hope to be in London towards the end of next month, andreckon much upon the pleasure of seeing you. On Monday I shall mount myhorse and ride into Norwich to pay a visit to a few old friends. Yesterday the son of our excellent Dawson Turner rode over to see me;they are all well, it seems. Our friend Joseph Gurney, however, seems tobe in a strange way--diabetes, I hear. I frequently meditate upon "TheLife, " and am arranging the scenes in my mind. With best remembrances toMrs. M. And all your excellent family, Truly and respectfully yours, GEORGE BORROW. Mr. Richard Ford's forthcoming work--"The Handbook for Spain"--aboutwhich Mr. Borrow had been making so many enquiries, was the result ofmany years' hard riding and constant investigation throughout Spain, oneof the least known of all European countries at that time. Mr. Fordcalled upon Mr. Murray, after "The Bible in Spain" had been published, and a copy of the work was presented to him. He was about to start onhis journey to Heavitree, near Exeter. A few days after his arrival Mr. Murray received the following letter from him: _Mr. Richard Ford to John Murray_. "I read Borrow with great delight all the way down per rail, and itshortened the rapid flight of that velocipede. You may depend upon itthat the book will sell, which, after all, is the rub. It is theantipodes of Lord Carnarvon, and yet how they tally in what they have incommon, and that is much--the people, the scenery of Galicia, and thesuspicions and absurdities of Spanish Jacks-in-office, who yield not inignorance or insolence to any kind of red-tapists, hatched in thehot-beds of jobbery and utilitarian mares-nests ... Borrow spares noneof them. I see he hits right and left, and floors his man wherever hemeets him. I am pleased with his honest sincerity of purpose and hisgraphic abrupt style. It is like an old Spanish ballad, leaping in _resmedias_, going from incident to incident, bang, bang, bang, hops, steps, and jumps like a cracker, and leaving off like one, when you wish hewould give you another touch or _coup de grâce_ ... He really sometimesputs me in mind of Gil Blas; but he has not the sneer of the Frenchman, nor does he gild the bad. He has a touch of Bunyan, and, like thatenthusiastic tinker, hammers away, _à la Gitano_, whenever he thinks hecan thwack the Devil or his man-of-all-work on earth--the Pope. Thereinhe resembles my friend and everybody's friend--_Punch_--who, amidst allhis adventures, never spares the black one. However, I am not going toreview him now; for I know that Mr. Lockhart has expressed a wish that Ishould do it for the _Quarterly Review_. Now, a wish from my liegemaster is a command. I had half engaged myself elsewhere, thinking thathe did not quite appreciate such a _trump_ as I know Borrow to be. He isas full of meat as an egg, and a fresh laid one--not one of your Inglisbreed, long addled by over-bookmaking. Borrow will lay you golden eggs, and hatch them after the ways of Egypt; put salt on his tail and securehim in your coop, and beware how any poacher coaxes him with 'raisins'or reasons out of the Albemarle preserves. When you see Mr. Lockharttell him that I will do the paper. I owe my entire allowance to the _Q. R_. Flag ... Perhaps my understanding the _full force_ of this 'gratia'makes me over partial to this wild Missionary; but I have ridden overthe same tracks without the tracts, seen the same people, and know that_he_ is true, and I believe that he believes all that he writes to betrue. " Mr. Lockhart himself, however, wrote the review for the _Quarterly_ (No. 141, December 1842). It was a temptation that he could not resist, andhis article was most interesting. "The Gypsies in Spain" and "The Biblein Spain" went through many editions, and there is still a large demandfor both works. Before we leave George Borrow we will give a fewextracts from his letters, which, like his books, were short, abrupt, and graphic. He was asked to become a member of the Royal Institution. _Mr. George Borrow to John Murray_. _February_ 26, 1843. "I should like to become a member. The thing would just suit me, moreespecially as they do not want _clever_ men, but _safe_ men. Now, I amsafe enough; ask the Bible Society, whose secrets I have kept so much totheir satisfaction, that they have just accepted at my hands an EnglishGypsy Gospel gratis. What would the Institution expect me to write? Ihave exhausted Spain and the Gypsies, though an essay on Welsh languageand literature might suit, with an account of the Celtic tongue. Or, won't something about the ancient North and its literature be moreacceptable? I have just received an invitation to join the EthnologicalSociety (who are they?), which I have declined. I am at present in greatdemand; a bishop has just requested me to visit him. The worst of thesebishops is that they are skin-flints, saving for their families. Theircuisine is bad, and their port wine execrable, and as for theircigars!--I say, do you remember those precious ones of the Sanctuary? Afew days ago one of them turned up again. I found it in my great-coatpocket, and thought of you. I have seen the article in the _Edinburgh_about the Bible--exceedingly brilliant and clever, but rather tooepigrammatic, quotations scanty and not correct. Ford is certainly amost astonishing fellow; he quite flabbergasts me--handbooks, review's, and I hear that he has just been writing a 'Life of Velasquez' for the'Penny Cyclopaedia'!" OULTON HALL, LOWESTOFT, _March_ 13, 1843. "So the second edition is disposed of. Well and good. Now, my dearfriend, have the kindness to send me an account of the profits of it andlet us come to a settlement. Up to the present time do assure you I havenot made a penny by writing, what with journeys to London and tarryingthere. Basta! I hate to talk of money matters. "Let them call me a nonentity if they will; I believe that some of thosewho say I am a phantom would alter their tone provided they were to askme to a good dinner; bottles emptied and fowls devoured are not exactlythe feats of a phantom: no! I partake more of the nature of a Brownie orRobin Goodfellow--goblins, 'tis true, but full of merriment and fun, andfond of good eating and drinking. Occasionally I write a page or two ofmy life. I am now getting my father into the Earl of Albemarle'sregiment, in which he was captain for many years. If I live, and myspirits keep up tolerably well, I hope that within a year I shall beable to go to press with something which shall beat the 'Bible inSpain. '" And a few days later: "I have received your account for the two editions. I am perfectlysatisfied. We will now, whenever you please, bring out a third edition. "The book which I am at present about will consist, if I live to finishit, of a series of Rembrandt pictures, interspersed here and there witha Claude. I shall tell the world of my parentage, my early thoughts andhabits, how I become a _sap-engro, _ or viper-catcher: my wanderings withthe regiment in England, Scotland, and Ireland, in which last place myjockey habits first commenced: then a great deal about Norwich, BillyTaylor, Thurtell, etc. : how I took to study and became a _lav-engro. _What do you think of this for a bill of fare? I am now in a blacksmith'sshop in the south of Ireland taking lessons from the Vulcan in horsecharming and horse-shoe making. By the bye, I wish I were acquaintedwith Sir Robert Peel. I could give him many a useful hint with respectto Ireland and the Irish. I know both tolerably well. Whenever there's arow, I intend to go over with Sidi Habesmith and put myself at the headof a body of volunteers. " During the negotiations for the publication of Mr. Horace Twiss's "Lifeof the Earl of Eldon, " Mr. Murray wrote to Mr. Twiss: _John Murray to Mr. Twiss_. _May_ 11, 1842. "I am very sorry to say that the publishing of books at this timeinvolves nothing but loss, and that I have found it absolutelynecessary to withdraw from the printers every work that I had in thepress, and to return to the authors any MS. For which they requiredimmediate publication. " Mr. Murray nevertheless agreed to publish the "Life of Eldon" oncommission, and it proved very successful, going through severaleditions. Another work offered to Mr. Murray in 1841 was "The Moor and the Loch, "by John Colquhoun, of Luss. He had published the first edition atEdinburgh through Mr. Blackwood; and, having had some differences withthat publisher, he now proposed to issue the second edition in London. He wrote to Mr. Murray desiring him to undertake the work, and receivedthe following reply: _John Murray to Mr. Colquhoun_. _March_ 16, 1841. SIR, I should certainly have had much pleasure in being the originalpublisher of your very interesting work "The Moor and the Loch, " but Ihave a very great dislike to the _appearance even_ of interfering withany other publisher. Having glass windows, I must not throw stones. WithBlackwood, indeed, I have long had particular relations, and they forseveral years acted as my agents in Edinburgh; so pray have the kindnessto confide to me the cause of your misunderstanding with that house, andlet me have the satisfaction of at least trying in the first place tosettle the matter amicably. In any case, however, you may rely upon allmy means to promote the success of your work, the offer of which hasmade me, dear Sir, Your obliged and faithful Servant, JOHN MURRAY. _Mr. Colquhoun to John Murray_. _March_ 20, 1841. DEAR SIR, I am much obliged by your note which I received yesterday. I shallendeavour to see you directly, and when I explain the cause of mydissatisfaction with Messrs. Blackwood, I am sure you will at once seethat it would be impossible for us to go on comfortably together with mysecond edition; and even if any adjustment was brought about, I feelconvinced that the book would suffer. I do not mean to imply anythingagainst the Messrs. Blackwood as men of business, and should be sorry tobe thus understood; but this case has been a peculiar one, and requirestoo long an explanation for a letter. In the meantime I have written toyou under the strictest confidence, as the Messrs. B. Are not aware ofmy intention of bringing out a second edition at the present time, or ofmy leaving them. My reasons, however, are such that my determinationcannot be altered; and I hope, after a full explanation with you, thatwe shall at once agree to publish the book with the least possibledelay. I shall be most happy to return your note, which you mayafterwards show to Messrs. B. , and I may add that had you altogetherrefused to publish my book, it could in no way have affected my decisionof leaving them. I remain, dear Sir, faithfully yours, JOHN COLQUHOUN. Mr. Colquhoun came up expressly to London, and after an interview withMr. Murray, who again expressed his willingness to mediate with theEdinburgh publishers, Mr. Colquhoun repeated his final decision, and Mr. Murray at length agreed to publish the second edition of "The Moor andthe Loch. " It may be added that in the end Mr. Colquhoun did, as urgedby Murray, return to the Blackwoods, who still continue to publish hiswork. Allan Cunningham ended his literary life by preparing the "Memoirs" ofhis friend Sir David Wilkie. Shortly before he undertook the work he hadbeen prostrated by a stroke of paralysis, but on his partial recovery heproceeded with the memoirs, and the enfeebling effects of his attack maybe traced in portions of the work. Towards the close of his life Wilkiehad made a journey to the East, had painted the Sultan atConstantinople, and afterwards made his way to Smyrna, Rhodes, Beyrout, Jaffa, and Jerusalem. He returned through Egypt, and at Alexandria heembarked on board the _Oriental_ steamship for England. While atAlexandria, he had complained of illness, which increased, partly inconsequence of his intense sickness at sea, and he died off Gibraltar onJune 1, 1841, when his body was committed to the deep. Turner's splendidpicture of the scene was one of Wilkie's best memorials. A review ofAllan Cunningham's work, by Mr. Lockhart, appeared in the _Quarterly_, No. 144. Previous to its appearance he wrote to Mr. Murray as follows: _Mr. Lockhart to John Murray_. _February_ 25, 1843. DEAR MURRAY, I don't know if you have read much of "The Life of Wilkie. " AllCunningham's part seems to be wretched, but in the "Italian and SpanishJournals and Letters" Wilkie shines out in a comparatively newcharacter. He is a very eloquent and, I fancy, a deep and instructivecritic on painting; at all events, Vol. Ii. Is full of very highinterest.... Is there anywhere a good criticism on the alteration thatWilkie's style exhibited after his Italian and Spanish tours? Thegeneral impression always was, and I suppose will always be, that thechange was for the worse. But it will be a nice piece of work to accountfor an unfortunate change being the result of travel and observation, which we now own to have produced such a stock of admirable theoreticaldisquisition on the principles of the Art. I can see little to admire orlike in the man Wilkie. Some good homely Scotch kindness for kith andkin, and for some old friends too perhaps; but generally the characterseems not to rise above the dull prudentialities of a decent man in aweof the world and the great, and awfully careful about No. 1. No genuineenjoyment, save in study of Art, and getting money through that study. He is a fellow that you can't suppose ever to have been drunk or inlove--too much a Presbyterian Elder for either you or me. Mr. Murray received a communication (December 16, 1841), from Mr. JohnSterling, Carlyle's friend, with whom he had had transactions on his ownaccount. "Not, " he said, "respecting his own literary affairs, but thoseof a friend. " The friend was Mr. John Stuart Mill, son of the historianof British India. He had completed his work on Logic, of which Mr. Sterling had the highest opinion. He said it had been the "labour ofmany years of a singularly subtle, patient, and comprehensive mind. Itwill be our chief speculative monument of this age. " Mr. Mill himselfaddressed Mr. Murray, first on December 20, 1841, while he was preparingthe work for the press, and again in January and February, 1842, when hehad forwarded the MS. To the publisher, and requested his decision. Wefind, however, that Mr. Murray was very ill at the time; that he couldnot give the necessary attention to the subject; and that the MS. Waseventually returned. When Copyright became the subject of legislation in 1843, Mr. Murrayreceived a letter from Mr. Gladstone. _Mr. Gladstone to John Murray_. WHITEHALL, _February_ 6, 1843. MY DEAR SIR, I beg leave to thank you for the information contained in andaccompanying your note which reached me on Saturday. The view with whichthe clauses relating to copyright in the Customs Act were framed wasthat those interested in the exclusion of pirated works would take careto supply the Board of Customs from time to time with lists of all worksunder copyright which were at all likely to be reprinted abroad, andthat this would render the law upon the whole much more operative andmore fair than an enormous catalogue of all the works entitled to theprivilege, of which it would be found very difficult for the officers atthe ports to manage the use. Directions in conformity with the Acts of last Session will be sent tothe Colonies. But I cannot omit to state that I learn from your note with greatsatisfaction, that steps are to be taken here to back the recentproceedings of the Legislature. I must not hesitate to express myconviction that what Parliament has done will be fruitless, unless the_law_ be seconded by the adoption of such modes of publication, as willallow the public here and in the colonies to obtain possession of newand popular English works at moderate prices. If it be practicable forauthors and publishers to make such arrangements, I should hope to see agreat extension of our book trade, as well as much advantage toliterature, from the measures that have now been taken and from thosewhich I trust we shall be enabled to take in completion of them; butunless the proceedings of the trade itself adapt and adjust themselvesto the altered circumstances, I can feel no doubt that we shall relapseinto or towards the old state of things; the law will be first evadedand then relaxed. I am, my dear Sir, Faithfully yours, W. E. GLADSTONE. Here it is fitting that a few paragraphs should be devoted to theclosing years of Robert Southey, who for so many years had been thefriend and coadjutor of the publisher of the _Quarterly_. Between 1808 and 1838, Southey had written ninety-four articles for the_Quarterly_; the last was upon his friend Thomas Telford, the engineer, who left him a legacy. He had been returned Member of Parliament forDownton (before the Reform Bill passed), but refused the honour--acurious episode not often remembered in the career of this distinguishedman of letters. When about fifty-five years old, his only certain sourceof income was from his pension, from which he received £145, and fromhis laureateship, which was £90. But the larger portion of these sumswent in payment for his life insurance, so that not more than £100 couldbe calculated on as available. His works were not always profitable. Inone year he only received £26 for twenty-one of his books, published byLongman. Murray gave him £1, 000 for the copyright of the "Peninsular War"; buthis "Book of the Church" and his "Vindiciae" produced nothing. Southey's chief means of support was the payments (generally £100 foreach article) which he received for his contributions to the_Quarterly_; but while recognizing this, as he could not fail to do, aswell as Murray's general kindness towards him, he occasionally allowed avein of discontent to show itself even in his acknowledgment of favoursreceived. In 1835 Southey received a pension of £300 from the Government of SirRobert Peel. He was offered a Baronetcy at the same time, but hedeclined it, as his circumstances did not permit him to accept thehonour. _Mr. Southey to John Murray_. _June_ 17, 1835. "What Sir Robert Peel has done for me will enable me, when my presentengagements are completed, to employ the remainder of my life upon thoseworks for which inclination, peculiar circumstances, and longpreparation, have best qualified me. They are "The History of Portugal, ""The History of the Monastic Orders, " and "The History of EnglishLiterature, " from the time when Wharton breaks off. The possibility ofaccomplishing three such works at my age could not be dreamt of, if Ihad not made very considerable progress with one, and no little, thoughnot in such regular order, with the others. " Shortly after his second marriage, Southey's intellect began to failhim, and he soon sank into a state of mental imbecility. He would wanderabout his library, take down a book, look into it, and then put it backagain, but was incapable of work. When Mr. Murray sent him the octavoedition of the "Peninsular War, " his wife answered: _Mrs. Southey to John Murray_. GRETA HALL, _May_ 15, 1840. If the word _pleasure_ were not become to me as a _dead letter, I_should tell you with how much I took possession of your kind gift. But I_may_ tell you truly that it gratified, and more than gratified me, bygiving pleasure to my dear husband, as a token of your regard for him, so testified towards myself. The time is not far passed when we shouldhave rejoiced together like children over such an acquisition. Yours very truly and thankfully, CAR. SOUTHEY. _May_ 23, 1840. DEAR SIR, Very cordially I return your friendly salutations, feeling, as I do, that every manifestation of kindness for my husband's sake is moreprecious to me than any I could receive for my own exclusively. Two-and-twenty years ago, when he wished to put into your hands, aspublisher, a first attempt of mine, of which he thought better than itdeserved, he little thought in that so doing he was endeavouring toforward the interests of his future wife; of her for whom it wasappointed (a sad but honoured lot) to be the companion of his laterdays, over which it has pleased God to cast the "shadow before" of that"night in which no man can work. " But twelve short months ago he wascheerfully anticipating (in the bright buoyancy of his happy nature) afar other companionship for the short remainder of our earthly sojourn;never forgetting, however, that ours must be short at the longest, andthat "in the midst of life we are in death. " He desires me to thank youfor your kind expressions towards him, and to be most kindly rememberedto you. Your intimation of the favourable progress of his 8vo "Book ofthe Church" gave him pleasure, and he thanks you for so promptlyattending to his wishes about a neatly bound set of his "PeninsularWar. " Accept my assurances of regard, and believe me to be, dear Sir, Yours very truly, CAROLINE SOUTHEY. On September 17, 1840, Mr. Murray sent to Mr. Southey a draft for £259, being the balance for his "Book of the Church, " and informed him that hewould be pleased to know that another edition was called for. Mrs. Southey replied: _Mrs. Southey to John Murray_. "He made no remark on your request to be favoured with any suggestionshe might have to offer. _My_ sad persuasion is that Robert Southey'sworks have received their last revision and correction from his mind andpen. " GRETA HALL, _October 5_, 1840. DEAR SIR, I will not let another post go out, without conveying to you my thanksfor your very kind letter last night received. It will gratify you toknow that its contents (the copy of the critique included), aroused andfixed Mr. Southey's attention more than anything that has occurred formonths past--gratifying him, I believe, far more than anything moreimmediately concerning himself could have done. "Tell Murray, " he said, "I am very much obliged to him. " It is long since he has sent a messageto friend or relation. Now let me say for myself that I am very thankful to _you_--verythankful to my indulgent reviewer--and that if I could yet feel interestabout anything of my own writing, I should be pleased and encouraged byhis encomium--as well as grateful for it. But if it did _not soundthanklessly_, I should say, "too late--too late--it comes too late!"and that bitter feeling came upon me so suddenly, as my eyes fell uponthe passage in question, that they overflowed with tears before it wasfinished. But he _did take interest in_ it, at least for a few moments, and so itwas not _quite_ too late; and (doing as I _know he would have me)_, Ishall act upon your most _kind_ and _friendly_ advice, and transmit itto Blackwood, who will, I doubt not, be willingly guided by it. It was one of my husband's pleasant visions before our marriage, and hisfavourite prospect, to publish a volume of poetry conjointly with me, not weighing the disproportion of talent. I must tell you that immediately on receiving the _Review_, I shouldhave written to express my sense of your kindness, and of the flatteringnature of the critique; but happening to _tell_ Miss Southey and herbrother that you had sent it me, as I believed, as an obliging personalattention, they assured me I was mistaken, and that the numbers wereonly intended for "their set. " Fearing, therefore, to arrogate to myselfmore than was designed for me, I kept silence; and now expose _mysimplicity_ rather than _leave_ myself _open_ to the imputation ofunthankfulness. Mr. Southey desires to be very kindly remembered to you, and I am, my dear Sir, Very thankfully and truly yours, Car. Southey. P. S. --I had almost forgotten to thank you for so kindly offering to sendthe _Review_ to any friends of mine, I may wish to gratify. I _will_accept the proffered favour, and ask you to send one addressed to MissBurnard, Shirley, Southampton, Hants. The other members of my family andmost of my friends take the _Q. R. _, or are sure of seeing it. This lastnumber is an excellent one. Southey died on March 21, 1843. The old circle of friends was beingsadly diminished. "Disease and death, " his old friend Thomas Mitchell, one of the survivors of the early contributors to the _Quarterly_, wroteto Murray, "seem to be making no small havoc among our literarymen--Maginn, Cunningham, Basil Hall, and poor Southey, worst of all. Lockhart's letters of late have made me very uneasy, too, about him. Hashe yet returned from Scotland, and is he at all improved?" Only a fewmonths later Mr. Murray himself was to be called away from the scene ofhis life's activity. In the autumn of 1842 his health had already begunto fail rapidly, and he had found it necessary to live much out ofLondon, and to try various watering-places; but although he rallied attimes sufficiently to return to his business for short periods, he neverrecovered, and passed away in sleep on June 27, 1843, at the age ofsixty-five. CHAPTER XXXII JOHN MURRAY AS A PUBLISHER In considering the career of John Murray, the reader can hardly fail tobe struck with the remarkable manner in which his personal qualitiesappeared to correspond with the circumstances out of which he built hisfortunes. When he entered his profession, the standard of conduct in everydepartment of life connected with the publishing trade was determined byaristocratic ideas. The unwritten laws which regulated the practice ofbookselling in the eighteenth century were derived from the Stationers'Company. Founded as it had been on the joint principles of commercialmonopoly and State control, this famous organization had long lost itsold vitality. But it had bequeathed to the bookselling community a largeportion of its original spirit, both in the practice of cooperativepublication which produced the "Trade Books, " so common in the lastcentury, and in that deep-rooted belief in the perpetuity of copyright, which only received its death-blow from the celebrated judgment of theHouse of Lords in the case of Donaldson _v_. Becket in 1774. Narrow andexclusive as they may have been in their relation to the publicinterest, there can be no doubt that these traditions helped toconstitute, in the dealings of the booksellers among themselves, astandard of honour which put a certain curb on the pursuit of privategain. It was this feeling which provoked such intense indignation in thetrade against the publishers who took advantage of their strict legalrights to invade what was generally regarded as the property of theirbrethren; while the sense of what was due to the credit, as well as tothe interest, of a great organized body, made the associatedbooksellers zealous in the promotion of all enterprises likely to add tothe fame of English literature. Again, there was something, in the best sense of the word, aristocraticin the position of literature itself. Patronage, indeed, had declined. The patron of the early days of the century, who, like Halifax, soughtin the Universities or in the London Coffee-houses for literary talentto strengthen the ranks of political party, had disappeared, togetherwith the later and inferior order of patron, who, after the manner ofBubb Dodington, nattered his social pride by maintaining a retinue ofpoetical clients at his country seat. The nobility themselves, absorbedin politics or pleasure, cared far less for letters than their fathersin the reigns of Anne and the first two Georges. Hence, as Johnson said, the bookseller had become the Maecenas of the age; but not thebookseller of Grub Street. To be a man of letters was no longer areproach. Johnson himself had been rewarded with a literary pension, andthe names of almost all the distinguished scholars of the latter part ofthe eighteenth century--Warburton, the two Wartons, Lowth, Burke, Hume, Gibbon, Robertson--belong to men who either by birth or merit were in aposition which rendered them independent of literature as a source oflivelihood. The author influenced the public rather than the public theauthor, while the part of the bookseller was restricted to introducingand distributing to society the works which the scholar had designed. Naturally enough, from such conditions arose a highly aristocraticstandard of taste. The centre of literary judgment passed from thehalf-democratic society of the Coffee-house to the dining-room ofscholars like Cambridge or Beauclerk; and opinion, formed from thebrilliant conversation at such gatherings as the Literary Club;afterwards circulated among the public either in the treatises ofindividual critics, or in the pages of the two leading Monthly Reviews. The society from which it proceeded, though not in the strict sense ofthe word fashionable, was eminently refined and widely representative;it included the politician, the clergyman, the artist, the connoisseur, and was permeated with the necessary leaven of feminine intuition, ranging from the observation of Miss Burney or the vivacity of Mrs. Thrale, to the stately morality of Mrs. Montagu and Mrs. Hannah More. On the other hand, the whole period of Murray's life as a publisher, extending, to speak broadly, from the first French Revolution to almostthe eve of the French Revolution of 1848, was characterized in a markeddegree by the advance of Democracy. In all directions there was anuprising of the spirit of individual liberty against the prescriptionsof established authority. In Politics the tendency is apparent in theprogress of the Reform movement. In Commerce it was marked by theinauguration of the Free Trade movement. In Literature it made itselffelt in the great outburst of poetry at the beginning of the century, and in the assertion of the superiority of individual genius to thetraditional laws of form. The effect produced by the working of the democratic spirit within thearistocratic constitution of society and taste may without exaggerationbe described as prodigious. At first sight, indeed, there seems to be acertain abruptness in the transition from the highly organized societyrepresented in Boswell's "Life of Johnson, " to the philosophicalretirement of Wordsworth and Coleridge. It is only when we look beneaththe surface that we see the old traditions still upheld by a small classof Conservative writers, including Campbell, Rogers, and Crabbe, and, asfar as style is concerned, by some of the romantic innovators, Byron, Scott, and Moore. But, generally speaking, the age succeeding the firstFrench Revolution exhibits the triumph of individualism. Society itselfis penetrated by new ideas; literature becomes fashionable; men ofposition are no longer ashamed to be known as authors, nor women ofdistinction afraid to welcome men of letters in their drawing-rooms. Onall sides the excitement and curiosity of the times is reflected in thedemand for poems, novels, essays, travels, and every kind of imaginativeproduction, under the name of _belles lettres_. A certain romantic spirit of enterprise shows itself in Murray'scharacter at the very outset of his career. Tied to a partner of a pettyand timorous disposition, he seizes an early opportunity to rid himselfof the incubus. With youthful ardour he begs of a veteran author to beallowed the privilege of publishing, as his first undertaking, a workwhich he himself genuinely admired. He refuses to be bound by meretrading calculations. "The business of a publishing bookseller, " hewrites to a correspondent, "is not in his shop, or even in hisconnections, but in his brains. " In all his professional conduct alargeness of view is apparent. A new conception of the scope of histrade seems early to have risen in his mind, and he was perhaps thefirst member of the Stationers' craft to separate the business ofbookselling from that of publishing. When Constable in Edinburgh senthim "a miscellaneous order of books from London, " he replied: "Countryorders are a branch of business which I have ever totally declined asincompatible with my more serious plans as a publisher. " With ideas of this kind, it may readily be imagined that Murray was notwhat is usually called "a good man of business, " a fact of which he waswell aware, as the following incident, which occurred in his lateryears, amusingly indicates. The head of one of the larger firms with which he dealt came in personto Albemarle Street to receive payment of his account. This was dulyhanded to him in bills, which, by some carelessness, he lost on his wayhome, He thereupon wrote to Mr. Murray, requesting him to advertise inhis own name for the lost property. Murray's reply was as follows: TWICKENHAM, _October_ 26, 1841. MY DEAR-----, I am exceedingly sorry for the vexatious, though, I hope, only temporaryloss which you have met with; but I have so little character for being aman of business, that if the bills were advertised in _my_ name it wouldbe publicly confirming the suspicion--but in your own name, it will beonly considered as a very extraordinary circumstance, and I thereforegive my impartial opinion in favour of the latter mode. Remaining, mydear-----, Most truly yours, JOHN MURRAY. The possession of ordinary commercial shrewdness, however, was by nomeans the quality most essential for successful publishing at thebeginning of the nineteenth century. Both Constable and Ballantyne weremen of great cleverness and aptitude for business; but, wanting certainhigher endowments, they were unable to resist the whirl of excitementaccompanying an unprecedented measure of financial success. Their ruinwas as rapid as their rise. To Murray, on the other hand, perhaps theirinferior in the average arts of calculation, a vigorous native sense, tempering a genuine enthusiasm for what was excellent in literature, gave precisely that mixture of dash and steadiness which was needed tosatisfy the complicated requirements of the public taste. A high sense of rectitude is apparent in all his business transactions;and Charles Knight did him no more than justice in saying that he had"left an example of talent and honourable conduct which would long be amodel for those who aim at distinction in the profession. " He would havenothing to do with what was poor and shabby. When it was suggested tohim, as a young publisher, that his former partner was ready to bearpart of the risk in a contemplated undertaking, he refused to associatehis fortunes with a man who conducted his business on methods that hedid not approve. "I cannot allow my name to stand with his, because heundersells all other publishers at the regular and advertised prices. "Boundless as was his admiration for the genius of Scott and Byron, heabandoned one of the most cherished objects of his ambition-to be thepublisher of new works by the author of "Waverley"--rather than involvehimself further in transactions which he foresaw must lead to discreditand disaster; and, at the risk of a quarrel, strove to recall Byron tothe ways of sound literature, when through his wayward genius he seemedto be drifting into an unworthy course. In the same way, when the disagreement between the firms of Constableand Longmans seemed likely to turn to his own advantage, instead ofmaking haste to seize the golden opportunity, he exerted himself toeffect a reconciliation between the disputants, by pointing out what heconsidered the just and reasonable view of their mutual interests. Theletters which, on this occasion, he addressed respectively to Mr. A. G. Hunter, to the Constables, and to the Longmans, are models of good senseand manly rectitude. Nor was his conduct to Constable, after thedownfall of the latter, less worthy of admiration. Deeply as Constablehad injured him by the reckless conduct of his business, Murray notonly retained no ill-feeling against him, but, anxious simply to help abrother in misfortune, resigned in his favour, in a manner full of themost delicate consideration, his own claim to a valuable copyright. Thesame warmth of heart and disinterested friendship appears in his effortsto re-establish the affairs of the Robinsons after the failure of thatfirm. Yet, remarkable as he was for his loyalty to his comrades, he wasno less distinguished by his spirit and independence. No man without avery high sense of justice and self-respect could have conducted acorrespondence on a matter of business in terms of such dignifiedpropriety as Murray employed in addressing Benjamin Disraeli after thecollapse of the _Representative_. It is indeed a proof of power toappreciate character, remarkable in so young a man, that Disraelishould, after all that had passed between them, have approached Murrayin his capacity of publisher with complete confidence. He knew that hewas dealing with a man at once shrewd and magnanimous, and he gave himcredit for understanding how to estimate his professional interest apartfrom his sense of private injury. Perhaps his most distinguishing characteristic as a publisher was hisunfeigned love of literature for its own sake. His almost romanticadmiration for genius and its productions raised him above theatmosphere of petty calculation. Not unfrequently it of course led himinto commercial mistakes, and in his purchase of Crabbe's "Tales" hefound to his cost that his enthusiastic appreciation of that author'sworks and the magnificence of his dealings with him were not the measureof the public taste. Yet disappointments of this kind in no wayembittered his temper, or affected the liberality with which he treatedwriters like Washington Irving, of whose powers he had himself onceformed a high conception. The mere love of money indeed was never anabsorbing motive in Murray's commercial career, otherwise it is certainthat his course in the suppression of Byron's Memoirs would have beensomething very different to that which he actually pursued. On theperfect letter which he wrote to Scott, presenting him with his fourthshare in "Marmion, " the best comment is the equally admirable letter inwhich Scott returned his thanks. The grandeur--for that seems theappropriate word--of his dealings with men of high genius, is seen inhis payments to Byron, while his confidence in the solid value ofliterary excellence appears from the fact that, when the _Quarterly_ wasnot paying its expenses, he gave Southey for his "Life of Nelson" doublethe usual rate of remuneration. No doubt his lavish generosity waspolitic as well as splendid. This, and the prestige which he obtained asByron's publisher, naturally drew to him all that was vigorous andoriginal in the intellect of the day, so that there was a general desireamong young authors to be introduced to the public under his auspices. The relations between author and publisher which had prevailed in theeighteenth century were, in his case, curiously inverted, and, in theplace of a solitary scholar like Johnson, surrounded by an associationof booksellers, the drawing-room of Murray now presented the remarkablespectacle of a single publisher acting as the centre of attraction to ahost of distinguished writers. In Murray the spirit of the eighteenth century seemed to meet andharmonize with the spirit of the nineteenth. Enthusiasm, daring, originality, and freedom from conventionality made him eminently a manof his time, and, in a certain sense, he did as much as any of hiscontemporaries to swell that movement in his profession towards completeindividual liberty which had been growing almost from the foundation ofthe Stationers' Company. On the other hand, in his temper, taste, andgeneral principles, he reflected the best and most ancient traditions ofhis craft. Had his life been prolonged, he would have witnessed thedisappearance in the trade of many institutions which he reverenced andalways sought to develop. Some of them, indeed, vanished in his ownlife-time. The old association of booksellers, with its accompaniment oftrade-books, dwindled with the growth of the spirit of competition andthe greater facility of communication, so that, long before his death, the co-operation between the booksellers of London and Edinburgh was nomore than a memory. Another institution which had his warm support wasthe Sale dinner, but this too has all but succumbed, of recent years, tothe existing tendency for new and more rapid methods of conductingbusiness. The object of the Sale dinner was to induce the greatdistributing houses and the retail booksellers to speculate, and buy anincreased supply of books on special terms. Speculation has now almostceased in consequence of the enormous number of books published, whichmakes it difficult for a bookseller to keep a large stock of any singlework, and renders the life of a new book so precarious that the demandfor it may at any moment come to a sudden stop. The country booksellers--a class in which Murray was always deeplyinterested--are dying out. Profits on books being cut down to a minimum, these tradesmen find it almost impossible to live by the sale of booksalone, and are forced to couple this with some other kind of business. The apparent risk involved in Murray's extraordinary spirit of adventurewas in reality diminished by the many checks which in his day operatedon competition, and by the high prices then paid for ordinary books. Menwere at that time in the habit of forming large private libraries, andfurnishing them with the sumptuous editions of travels and books ofcostly engraving issued from Murray's press. The taste of the time haschanged. Collections of books have been superseded, as a fashion, bycollections of pictures, and the circulating library encourages thehabit of reading books without buying them. Cheap bookselling, thecharacteristic of the age, has been promoted by the removal of the taxon paper, and by the fact that paper can now be manufactured out ofrefuse at a very low cost. This cheapness, the ideal condition for whichCharles Knight sighed, has been accompanied by a distinct deteriorationin the taste and industry of the general reader. The multiplication ofreviews, magazines, manuals, and abstracts has impaired the love of, andperhaps the capacity for, study, research, and scholarship on which thegeneral quality of literature must depend. Books, and even knowledge, like other commodities, may, in proportion to the ease with which theyare obtained, lose at once both their external value and their intrinsicmerit. Murray's professional success is sufficient evidence of the extent ofhis intellectual powers. The foregoing Memoir has confined itself almostexclusively to an account of his life as a publisher, and it has beenleft to the reader's imagination to divine from a few glimpses how muchof this success was due to force of character and a rare combination ofpersonal qualities. A few concluding words on this point may not beinappropriate. Quick-tempered and impulsive, he was at the same time warm-hearted andgenerous to a fault, while a genuine sense of humour, which constantlyshows itself in his letters, saved him many a time from those troublesinto which the hasty often fall. "I wish, " wrote George Borrow, within ashort time of the publisher's death, "that all the world were as gay ashe. " He was in some respects indolent, and not infrequently caused seriousmisunderstandings by his neglect to answer letters; but when he didapply himself to work, he achieved results more solid than most of hiscompeers. He had, moreover, a wonderful power of attraction, and both inhis conversation and correspondence possessed a gift of felicitousexpression which rarely failed to arouse a sympathetic response in thosewhom he addressed. Throughout "the trade" he was beloved, and he rarelylost a friend among those who had come within his personal influence. He was eager to look for, and quick to discern, any promise of talent inthe young. "Every one, " he would say, "has a book in him, or her, if oneonly knew how to extract it, " and many was the time that he lent ahelping hand to those who were first entering on a literary career. To his remarkable powers as a host, the many descriptions of his dinnerparties which have been preserved amply testify; he was more than a mereentertainer, and took the utmost pains so to combine and to place hisguests as best to promote sympathetic conversation and the generalharmony of the gathering. Among the noted wits and talkers, moreover, who assembled round his table he was fully able to hold his own inconversation and in repartee. On one occasion Lady Bell was present at one of these parties, andwrote: "The talk was of wit, and Moore gave specimens. Charles thoughtthat our host Murray said the best things that brilliant night. " Many of the friends whose names are most conspicuous in these pages hadpassed away before him, but of those who remained there was scarcely onewhose letters do not testify to the general affection with which he wasregarded. We give here one or two extracts from letters received duringhis last illness. Thomas Mitchell wrote to Mr. Murray's son: "Give my most affectionate remembrances to your father. More than once Ishould have sunk under the ills of life but for his kind support andcountenance, and so I believe would many others say besides myself. Behis maladies small or great, assure him that he has the earnestsympathies of one who well knows and appreciates his sterling merits. " Sir Francis Palgrave, who had known Mr. Murray during the whole courseof his career, wrote to him affectionately of "the friendship andgoodwill which, " said he, "you have borne towards me during a period ofmore than half my life. I am sure, " he added, "as we grow older we findday by day the impossibility of finding _any_ equivalent for oldfriends. " Sharon Turner also, the historian, was most cordial in hisletters. "Our old friends, " he said, "are dropping off so often that it becomesmore and more pleasing to know that some still survive whom we esteemand by whom we are not forgotten.... Certainly we can look back on eachother now for forty years, and I can do so as to you with great pleasureand satisfaction, when, besides the grounds of private satisfaction andesteem, I think of the many works of great benefit to society which youhave been instrumental in publishing, and in some instances ofsuggesting and causing. You have thus made your life serviceable to theworld as well as honourable to yourself.... You are frequently in myrecollections, and always with those feelings which accompanied ourintercourse in our days of health and activity. May every blessingaccompany you and yours, both here and hereafter. " It was not only in England that his loss was felt, for the news of hisdeath called forth many tokens of respect and regard from beyond theseas, and we will close these remarks with two typical extracts from theletters of American correspondents. To Mr. Murray's son, Dr. Robinson of New York summed up his qualities inthese words: "I have deeply sympathised with the bereaved family at the tidings ofthe decease of one of whom I have heard and read from childhood, and towhose kindness and friendship I had recently been myself so muchindebted. He has indeed left you a rich inheritance, not only by hissuccessful example in business and a wide circle of friends, but alsoin that good name which is better than all riches. He lived in afortunate period--his own name is inseparably connected with one of thebrightest eras of English literature--one, too, which, if not created, was yet developed and fostered by his unparalleled enterprise andprincely liberality. I counted it a high privilege to be connected withhim as a publisher, and shall rejoice in continuing the connection withhis son and successor. " Mrs. L. H. Sigourney wrote from Hartford, Connecticut, U. S. : "Your father's death is a loss which is mourned on this side of theAtlantic. His powerful agency on the patronage of a correct literature, which he was so well qualified to appreciate, has rendered him abenefactor in that realm of intellect which binds men together in allages, however dissevered by political creed or local prejudice. Hisurbanity to strangers is treasured with gratitude in many hearts. To mehis personal kindness was so great that I deeply regretted not havingformed his acquaintance until just on the eve of my leaving London. Buthis parting gifts are among the chief ornaments of my library, and hislast letter, preserved as a sacred autograph, expresses the kindness ofa friend of long standing, and promises another 'more at length, ' which, unfortunately, I had never the happiness of receiving. " THE END INDEX Abercorn, Marq. And Marchioness of, Allegra, death of; buried at Harrow, Athenaeum Club, Austen, Miss Jane, "Northanger Abbey, "; Novels published by Murray, Austria, Empress of, Baillie, Miss Joanna, Ballantyne & Co. (John & James), bill transactions with Murray; partnership with Scott; proposed edition of "British Novelists, "; Works of De Foe; James B. Meets Murray at Boroughbridge; appointed Edinburgh agents for _Q. R. _; views on _Q. R. _; close alliance with Murray; financial difficulties; breach with Murray; failure of _Edinburgh Ann. Reg_. ; "Waverley, "; "Lord of the Isles, "; "Don Roderick, "; Scott's proposed letters from the Continent; proposal to Murray and Blackwood about Scott's works; in debt to Scott; "Tales of my Landlord, " "The Black Dwarf, "; bankruptcy; death of John Ballantyne, Barker, Miss, Barrow, Sir John, induced by Canning to write for _Q. R_. ; visit to Gifford; consulted by Murray about voyages or travels; nicknamed "Chronometer" by B. Disraeli, Bartholdy, Baron, Barton, Bernard, Basevi, junr. , George, Bastard, Capt. , Beattie, Dr. , Bedford, Grosvenor, Bell, Lady, Bell & Bradfute, Bellenden, Mary, Belzoni, Giovanni, Berry, Miss, edits "Horace Walpole's Reminiscences, "Blackwood, William, appointed Murray's Agent for Scotland; visits Murray; intimacy with Murray; early career; threatens Constable with proceedings for printing Byron's "Poems, "; refuses to sell "Don Juan, "; alliance and correspondence with Murray; Ballantyne's proposals about Scott's works; _Blackwood's Magazine_ started; Murray's remonstrance about the personality of articles; Hazlitts libel action; interested with Murray in various works, _Blackwood's Magazine_ started (first called _Edinburgh Magazine_); article attacking Byron; "Ancient Chaldee MS. , "; "The Cockney School of Poetry, "; personality of articles, ; "Hypocrisy Unveiled, " etc. ; Murray retires from--Cadell and Davies appointed London Agents for, Blessington, Countess of, "Conversations with Lord Byron, "Blewitt, Octavian, Borrow, George, his youth; capacity for learning languages; appointed Agent to the Bible Society--Russia, Norway, Turkey and Spain, his translation of the Bible; called Lavengro, his splendid physique, "Gypsies of Spain, " "The Bible in Spain, " as a horse-breaker, remarks on Allan Cunningham's death, asked to become a member of the Royal Institution, "Boswell's Johnson, " Croker's edition of, Bray, Mrs. , Brockedon, William, his portrait of the Countess Guiccioli, his help in Murray's Handbooks, Brougham, Lord, his article in _Ed. Rev. _ on Dr. Young's theory of light, Chairman of the Society for the diffusion of Useful Knowledge, Broughton, Lord, _see_ Hobhouse. Buccleuch, Duke of, his present of a farm to James Hogg, Butler, Charles, "Books on the R. Cath. Church, "Burney, Dr. , Buxton, Thos. Powell, "Slave Trade and its Remedy, "Byron, Lord, first association and meeting with Murray, "Childe Harold, " presented to Prince Regent, friendship with Scott, "Giaour, " "Bride of Abydos, " "Corsair, " "Ode to Napoleon, " "Lara, " marriage, meets Scott at Murray's house, remarks on Battle of Waterloo, portrait by Phillips, kindness to Maturin, dealings with Murray, residence in Piccadilly, pecuniary embarrassments, Murray's generous offer, Murray's remonstrance, "Siege of Corinth" and "Parisina, " separation from wife, sale of effects, "Sketch from Private Life, " leaves England, "Childe Harold" and "Prisoner of Chillon, " remarks on Scott's Review of "Childe Harold, " Canto III. , "Manfred, " attack of fever at Venice, "Childe Harold, " Canto IV. , visit from Hobhouse, his bust by Thorwaldsen, correspondence with Murray in 1817 to 1822, "Beppo, " Frere's "Whistlecraft, " at Venice, opinion of Southey, "Don Juan, " Cantos I. And II. ; Murray's suggestions as to, hatred of Romilly, "Letter of Julia, " "Mazeppa, " "Ode to Venice, " Copyright of "Don Juan, " Countess Guiccioli: proposal to visit S. America, "Don Juan, " Cantos III. And IV. , "Don Juan, " Canto V. , Murray's refusal to publish further Cantos of "Don Juan, " "My boy Hobby O!" Hobhouse's anger, Whig Club at Cambridge, pamphlet on "Bowles' strictures, " "Sardanapalus, " "The Two Foscari, " "Cain, a Mystery, " injunction in case of "Cain, " death and burial of Allegra, illness, and last letter to Murray, adopts Hato or Hatagée, the Suliotes incident, death: Murray's application for his burial in Westminster Abbey refused, Memoirs and Moore, destruction of Memoirs, agreement between Moore and Murray, Moore undertakes to write "Life, " Murray's negotiations with Moore as to "Life, " agreement as to "Life, " Vol. I. Of "Life" published, Vol. II. , Murray's proposed edition of his works, Thorwaldsen's statue refused by Dean of Westminster, attempt to alter Dean's decision; the statue placed in library of Trinity College, Cambridge, Byron, Lady, her offer to Murray for redemption of Byron's Memoirs, Cadell & Davies, appointed London Agents for _Blackwood's Magazine_, Callcott, Lady, _see_ Graham, Mrs. Campbell, Thomas, "Pleasures o Hope, " "Hohenlinden, " "The Exile of Erin, " "Ye Mariners of England, " "Battle of the Baltic, " "Lochiel's Warning"; correspondence with Scott; intimacy with Murray; proposed "Selection from British Poets"; "Gertrude of Wyoming"; Lectures on Poetry; "Now Barabbas was a Publisher"; his opinion of Mrs. Hemans's "Records of Woman, "Canning, George, starts _Anti-Jacobin_; assists in starting _Quarterly Review_; article in _Q. R. _ on "Austrian State Papers"; on Spain; views on the Royal Society of Literature; opinion of "Waverley"; letters from Gifford; called "X. " by Benjamin Disraeli, Canning, Stratford, "The Miniature"; connection with _Q. R. _; introduces Gifford to Murray; his mission to Constantinople, Carlyle, Thomas, recommended to Murray by Lord Jeffrey; correspondence with Murray about "Sartor Resartus"; "Sartor Resartus" declined by other publishers; returns to Craigenputtock; "Sartor Resartus" published in _Fraser's Magazine_, and, through Emerson's influence, in United States, Cawthorn, publisher of "English Bards and Scotch Reviewers, "Cervetto, Chantrey, Sir F. , calls Murray "a brother Cyclops, " _note_Chesterfield, Lord, Cleghorn, James, Editor of _Blackwood's Magazine_, Colburn, the publisher, "Vivian Grey"; declines "Sartor Resartus, "Coleridge, John Taylor; appointed Editor to _Quarterly Review_; wishes to resign editorship, Coleridge, Samuel Taylor; correspondence with Murray; Goethe's "Faust"; "Wallenstein"; "The Friend"; "Remorse, " "Glycine, " "Christabel, " "Christmas Tale, " "Zapolya"; opinion of Frere, Colman's Comedy, "John Bull, "Colquhoun, Rt. Hon. J. C. (Lord Advocate), Colquhoun, John, "The Moor and the Loch"; correspondence with Murray; dissatisfaction with Blackwood; visit to London and interview with Murray, Constable, Archibald (Constable & Co. ); _Farmer's Magazine, Scots Magazine, Edinburgh Review_; his partner, A. G. Hunter; appointed Murray's agent; "Sir Tristram" and "Lay of the Last Minstrel"; breach with Longman; injunction as to _Edin. Rev. _ obtained by Longman; letter from Jeffrey; Murray's remonstrances as to drawing bills; establishes London House; breach with Murray; final breach with Murray; fresh alliance with Scott; Campbell's "Selections from the British Poets"; Poems by Byron on his Domestic Circumstances; Mrs. Markham's "History of England"; bankruptcy; renews friendship with Murray; death, Cooper, James Fenimore, Coplestone, Copyright Bill, the, Mr. Gladstone's remarks on, Coxe, Archdeacon, Crabbe, "Tales of the Hall, " and other poems, Creech and ElliotCroker, CroftonCroker, John Wilson, visit to Prince Regent, portrait by Eddis, "Stories for Children on Hist. Of England", on "Don Juan" and Byron, takes charge of _Q. R. _ during Gifford's illness, views on the _Monthly Register_, edits Lady Hervey's Letters, opinion of the Waldegrave and Walpole Memoirs, edits the Suffolk Papers, edits Mrs. Delany's Letters, Lockhart's opinion of him, "Boswell's Johnson", opinion of Moore's "Life of Byron", Moore's "Life of Lord Fitzgerald"Cumberland, Richard, "John de Lancaster"Cumming, ThomasCunningham, Allan, "Paul Jones: a Romance", his death, "Memoirs of Sir D. Wilkie", Lockhart's article in _Q. R. _ on the "Memoirs"Cunningham, Rev. J. W. , and the burial of Allegra at HarrowCuthill Dacre, Lady (Mrs. Wilmot)Dagley (the engraver)Dallas, Mr. Davies, Annie, Gifford's housekeeperDavy, Sir Humphry, "Salmonia, or Days of Fly-Fishing"D'Haussez, BaronDelany, Mrs. De QuincyDe Staël, Madame, ordered to quit Paris, a frequenter of Murray's drawing-roomDisraeli, Benjamin, "Aylmer Papillon, " "History of Paul Jones", correspondence with Murray, pamphlets on Mining Speculations, connection with Messrs. Powles, partner with Murray and Powles in _Representative_, letters to Murray on the _Representative_ negotiations, description of York Cathedral, visits Lockhart, interview with Scott at Chiefswood, second visit to Scotland, and exertions on behalf of _Representative_ drops his connection with _Representative_, "Vivian Grey" and "Contarini Fleming", renewal of correspondence with Murray, travels in Spain, etc. , Radical candidate for Wycombe, attended by Tita (Byron's Gondolier), "Gallomania", publishes reply to criticisms on "Gallomania"D'Israeli, Isaac, "Curiosities of Literature", friendship with Murray, "Flim-Flams", birth of his son Benjamin, Murray's marriage-settlement, Trustee, advice about _Q. R. _, "Calamities of Authors", "Character of James I. ", impromptu on Belzoni, meets Washington Irving at Murray's, consulted by Murray as to _Representative_, proposed pamphlet on his misunderstanding with MurrayD'Oyley, Rev. Dr. Dudley, Lord, his "Letters" Eastlake, Sir Charles L. , "Translation of Memoirs of the Carbonari", Mrs. Graham's interest inEaton, Mrs. Ebrington, Lord_Edinburgh Annual Register__Edinburgh Magazine_ and _Review__Edinburgh Review_ started, published by Murray, its great success, injunction obtained by Longman, Jeffrey, editor of, articles on "Marmion", on "Don Cevallos on the Occupation of Spain"Eldon, Lord, on copyright of "Cain"Elliot, Miss; marries John Murray II. Elliot, CharlesEllis, George; letters from Scott; friendship with Scott; contributes to _Q. R. _; constant critic of the _Q. R_. ; article on Spain; on ponderous articles in _Q. R. _; advice as to punctuality in issuing _Q. R_. Ellis, Sir Henry, "Embassy to China"Emerson, friendship with CarlyleErskine, WilliamEverett, A. H. Faber, Rev. G. S. Falconer, William, "The Shipwreck"; lost at sea "Family Library, " works comprisingFazakerly's interview with NapoleonFerriar, Dr. , on "Apparitions"Field, BarronFord's "Dramatic Works"Ford, Richard, "Handbook to Spain"; opinion of BorrowFoscolo, UgoFraser, Rev. AlexanderFraser, Mr. , offers £150 for "Sartor Resartus"Frere, John Hookham; Coleridge's opinion of; his marriage; "Whistle-craft"Froissart GalignaniGarden, Mrs. , "Memorials of James Hogg"Gifford, William, introduced to Murray; accepts editorship of _Q. R_. ; advice from Scott on _Q. R_. ; Southey and the _Q. R_. ; unpunctuality as editor; at Ryde; George Canning and the _Q. R_. ; Southey's "Life of Nelson"; Miss A. T. Palmer's bribe; disagreement with Murray; wages war with _Edin. Rev. _; relations with Murray; opinion of Pillans; bad health; Murray's present; opinion of W. S. Landor; review of Ford's "Dramatic Works"; on Charles Lamb--his deep grief; opinion of "Childe Harold"; illness and death of his housekeeper; opinion of Southey; memorial to his housekeeper; libellous attack on him; opinion of Miss Austen's novels; of Maturin; illness at Dover; Murray gives him a carriage; Byron's "unlordly scrape"; edition of "Ben Jonson"; illness; Croker akes charge of _Q. R_. ; opinion of Milman's "Fall of Jerusalem"; letter to George Canning; resigns editorship; declines Oxford degree; his death and burial in Westminster Abbey; will; character; love for children; venomous attack upon himGladstone, Rt. Hon. W. E. , Tory member for Newark; proposal to Murray about "Church and State"; visit to Holland; "Church and State" published, and "Church Principles"; letter to Murray on Copyright BillGleig, Rev. GeorgeGlenbervie, LordGooch, Dr. , anecdote of Lord NelsonGordon, General Sir RobertGraham, Mrs. (Lady Callcott); intimacy with MurrayGrahame's "British Georgies"Grant, Sir Robert; his articles in _Q. R. _ on "Character of the late C. J. Fox"GreenfieldGuiccioli, Countess; Murray's kindness to; Brockedon's portrait ofGurney, JosephGurwood, Col. , editor of Wellington "Despatches" Haber, Baron deHall, Capt. BasilHall, Sir James, Hall, S. C. , Hallam, Henry, friendship with Murray, "Middle Ages, " "Constitutional History, "Hamilton, Walter, "East India Gazetteer, " "Description of Hindostan and Adjacent Countries, "Hamilton, Sir William, "Handbooks, " Murray's, Hanson, Mr. (Byron's solicitor), Hastings, Warren, Hato, or Hatagée, Greek child adopted by Byron, Hay, R. W. , Hazlitt, William, his libellous pamphlet on Gifford, action for libel against Blackwood and Murray, Heber, Bishop (Rev. Reginald), Heber, Richard, Hemans, Mrs. , "Records of Woman, "Herschell, Sir John, on Dr. Young's theory of light, Hervey, Lady, "Letters, etc. , "Highley, Samuel, Hoare, Prince, "Epochs of the Arts, "Hobhouse, John Cam (Lord Broughton), "Journey through Albania, etc. , with Lord Byron, " "Last Reign of Napoleon, " visits Byron at Venice, his inscription for Thorwaldsen's bust of Byron, on Byron's intention to visit S. America, imprisoned for breach of privilege, "My boy Hobby O!"--his account of the Whig Club at Cambridge, Byron's executor, anxiety about a complete edition of Byron's Works, Hodgson, Rev. Francis, Hogg, James, "Ettrick Shepherd, " "The Queen's Wake, " "The Pilgrims of the Sun, " correspondence with Murray, Duke of Buccleuch gives him a farm, supposed to be author of "Tales of my Landlord, " contributor to _Blackwood's Magazine_, said to be author of the "Chaldee Manuscript, " helped by Scott and Murray, "Jacobite Relics of Scotland, "Holland, Lord, "Life of Lope de Vega and Inez de Castro, " on Napoleon's treatment at St. Helena, opinion of "Tales of my Landlord, " proposals to Murray about the Waldegrave and Walpole Memoirs, Holland, Rev. W. (Canon of Chichester), Hope, Thomas, "Anastasius, or Memoirs of a Modern Greek, etc. , "Hoppner, Mr. , Horton, Sir Robert Wilmot, letter from Murray with particulars of the destruction ofByron's Memoirs, Howard, Mrs. , Hume, Joseph, Hunt, John, Hunt, Leigh, joint Editor of the _Examiner_, in gaol for libelling Prince Regent, correspondence with Murray about "Story of Rimini, " "Recollections of Lord Byron and some of his Contemporaries, "Hunter, Alexander G. , Hunter, Charles, Hurst, Rohinson & Co. , Inchbald, Mrs. , Ireland, Dr. John (Dean of Westminster), proposed burial of Byron in the Abbey, Gifford's executor, Byron's statue, Irving, Peter, Irving, Washington, account of a dinner at Murray's, "Sketch Book, " "Bracebridge Hall, " letter from Murray as to _Representative_, Jameson, Mrs. , "Guide to the Picture Galleries of London, "Jeffrey, Francis, Editor of _Edinburgh Review, _ opinion of Wordsworth, Southey, and Coleridge, Southey's opinion of him, "Don Cevallos on the Occupation of Spain, " party politics in _Ed. Rev_. , recommends Carlyle to Murray, his interview with Murray, Jerdan, William his erroneous account in _Literary Gazette_ of destruction of Byron's Memoirs, on Gifford, Kean, Charles, in "Bertram, " in "Manuel, "Keats' "Endymion" reviewed in _Q. R. _, Kerr, William, Kerr, Robert, Kinnaird, Honble. Douglas, and "Childe Harold, " letter to Murray, Kinneir, Macdonald, "Persia, "Kingsburg, Miss Harriet (Mrs. Maturin), Knight, Charles, "Library of Entertaining Knowledge, " remarks on Murray's honourable conduct, Knight, H. Gally, Lamb, Lady Caroline, "Glenarvon, " opinion of Byron's works, correspondence with Murray, "Penruddock, " "Ada Reis, "Lamb, Charles, Lamb, Honble. George, Lamb, Honble. William (Lord Melbourne), Lamennais' "Paroles d'un Croyant, "Landor, W. S. , "Remarks upon C. J. Fox's Memoirs, "Lauderdale, Lord, Lavater on Physiognomy, Leigh, Honble. Augusta, her wish that Byron's Memoirs should be destroyed, Levinge, Godfrey, Leyden's "Africa, "Lieven, Prince, Lindo, Mr. And Mrs. , Llandaff, Bishop of, "Lord Dudley's Letters, "Lockhart, John, the "Littlejohn, " to whom Scott's "Tales of aGrandfather" were addressed, Lockhart, John Gibson, contributor to _Blackwood's Magazine_, article on "The Cockney School of Poetry, " challenges the anonymous author of "Hypocrisy Unveiled, etc. , " called "M. " by B. Disraeli, at Chiefswood, B. Disraeli's visit, editorship of _Representative_ offered to him, Scott's opinion of him, 261, 273 accepts editorship of _Q. R. _, his success as Editor of _Q. R. _, relations with Murray, opinion of Wordsworth's poems, visit to Brighton with Scott, interview with Duke of Wellington, at Abbotsford, Scott's death: writes his "Life, " remarks on Croker's edition of "Boswell's Johnson, " on Taylor's "Isaac Comnenus, " "Life of Napoleon, " opinion of early part of Moore's "Life of Byron, " opinion of "Contarini Fleming, " article on Borrow's "Bible in Spain, " on Wilkie, his illness, Longman & Co. , breach with Constable, Murray's intervention, injunction as to _Edin. Rev_. , accept £1, 000 for claim on _Edin. Rev_. , Coleridge's "Wallenstein, " offer to Campbell, Crabbe's poems declined, advertise an edition of Mrs. Rundell's "Domestic Cookery, " injunction granted to Murray, refuse to publish "Sartor Resartus, "Longman, Thos. , on the danger of reading in bed, Lyndhurst, Lord, Lyttelton, Lord, "Dialogues of the Dead, " "History of King Henry II. , " Maas, of Coblentz, Macaulay, Lord, his articles in _Edin. Rev_. , on Crokers's "Boswell'sJohnson, " Gladstone's "Church and State, "Macirone, Col. Mackay, the actorMackintosh, Sir JamesMacleod, John, "Voyage of H. M. S. _Alceste_ to Loochoo"Macready, W. C. Maginn, Dr. Magnus, Samuel, his testimonial to Dean MilmanMahon, Lord (Earl Stanhope)Malcolm, Sir John "Sketch of the Sikhs"Malthus, "Rent, " "Corn-Laws, " "Essay on Population"Markham, Mrs. , "History of England"Mason, Rev. William (T. Gray's executor) controversy with MurrayMaturin, Rev. Chas. Robert his early life and marriage; "The Fatal Revenge, " "The Wild IrishBoy, " "The Milesian Chief, " "Bertram" "Bertram" at Drury Lane "Manuel" his deathMaule, WilliamMavrocordato, PrinceMawman, JosephMedwin, Capt. Thomas, "Conversations of Lord Byron"Melbourne, Lord (_see_ Lamb)Mémoires pour servirMilbanke, MissMill, James, "History of British India"Mill, John StuartMiller, JohnMiller, RobertMiller, William, of Albemarle StreetMills, JamesMilman, Dean (Rev. H. H. ) "Fall of Jerusalem" one of Murray's Historians "History of Christianity" "History of the Jews" received with disapprobation; his remarkson Sharon Turner's Expostulation; testimonial from the Jews opinion of "Contarini Fleming"Mirza, Abul Hassan, impressions of English SocietyMitchell, Thomas impressions of Ugo Foscolo opinion of MurrayMitford, "History of Greece"_Monthly Register_Moore, Thomas opinion of "The Corsair" presented with Byron's Memoirs offers them to Longman accepted by Murray their destruction reconciled to Murray and undertakes "Life of Byron" his views on Cookery Books and on Mrs. Rundell's "DomesticCookery" agreement with Murray as to "Life of Byron, " receives £3, 000from Murray for "Life" Lockhart's opinion of the "Life" Vol. I. Of "Life" published Vol. II. Of "Life" published; Mrs. Somerville's opinion of it "Thoughts on Editors" Murray's proposal as to a complete edition of Byron's worksMorgan, LadyMorier, James, "Hajji Baba"Morritt, of Rokeby ParkMurat, King of NaplesMurray, Sir GeorgeMurray, Joe (Byron's Steward)Murray I. , John. 1745-68--His birth and early years 1768--Marriage and retirement from Royal Marines offers partnership to W. Falconer purchases W. Sandby's business early publications 1769-70--Support from Sir R. Gordon and his old comrades money difficulties agents in Ireland and Scotland 1771--Defence of Sir R. Gordon 1777-78--Second marriage controversy with Rev. W. Mason 1782-93--Paralytic stroke his son's education and character Dr. Johnson's funeral illness and deathMurray II. , John called by Lord Byron "The Anax of Publishers, " nicknamed "The Emperor of the West, " 1778-92--Birth, at Edinburgh High School, at school at Margate, at school at Gosport, sight of one eye destroyed, 1793--At school at Kennington, 1795--Enters his father's business firm of Murray & Highley, 1802--Dissolves partnership with Highley and starts business alone, 1803--Offers to publish Colman's Comedy "John Bull, " money difficulties, military duties, friendship with Isaac D'Israeli, Isaac D'Israeli's "Narrative Poems, " business transactions with Constable, appoints Constable his agent in Edinburgh; pushes sale of _Edinburgh Review_, 1804--Birth of Benjamin Disraeli, takes Charles Hunter as apprentice, 1805--Isaac D'Israeli's letters to him, attempts to reconcile Constable and Longman, expedition to Edinburgh, attachment to Miss Elliot, 1806--The "Miniature" and Stratford Canning, introduced to George Canning, close attention to business, visits Edinburgh, engagement to Miss Elliot, financial position, appointed publisher of _Edinburgh Review_, Campbell's proposed Magazine and "Selection from British Poets, " 1807--Marries Miss Elliot, I. D'Israeli one of his Trustees, friendship with Sharon Turner, injunction in the matter of the _Edinburgh Review_, remonstrates with Constable about drawing bills, breach with Constable, bill transactions with Ballantyne, writes to George Canning proposing a new Review, 1808--"Marmion" and friendship with Scott, proposed edition of the "British Novelists, " De Foe's works, introduced to Gifford by Stratford Canning, visits Scott at Ashestiel, correspondence about _Quarterly Review_, Gifford accepts editorship, Missionary Reports and Southey's article in _Q. R. _, article on Spain for _Q. R. _ by Canning, Gifford, and Ellis, correspondence with Mrs. Inchbald, 1809--Meets Ballantyne at Boroughbridge, appoints Ballantyne Edinburgh publisher of _Q. R. _, Scott's _Life of Swift_, _Q. R. _, No. 1 published, urges Scott to visit London, letter to Stratford Canning, exertions to procure contributors, Mrs. Rundell's "Domestic Cookery, " close alliance with Ballantyne, Grahame's "British Georgies" and Scott's "English Ministrelsy, " financial difficulties with Ballantyne, letter from Campbell on "Selection from British Poets, " Campbell's Gertrude of "Wyoming, " 1810--Breach with Ballantyne, appoints W. Blackwood his agent in Scotland, Southey's "Life of Nelson, " money difficulties--Ballantyne's bills, transfers printing business, Constable's bills, decrease in circulation of _Q. R. _, 1811--Relations with Gifford, improvement of _Q. R. _, generosity to Gifford, origin of his connection with Byron, "Childe Harold, " 1812--Ballantyne's bills again, purchases stock of Miller, of Albemarle Street, removes to Albemarle Street, Constable's bills, final breach with Constable, complete success of _Q. R. _ refuses "The Rejected Addresses, " 1813--"The Giaour, " and "The Bride of Abydos, " Sir J. Malcolm, I. D'Israeli's "Calamities of Authors, " Scott's bill transactions, Mme. De Staël at Albemarle Street, other books published by him during the year, 1814--"The Corsair, " "Ode to Napoleon, " "Lara and Jacqueline, " Mrs. Murray's visit to Leith, letters to Mrs. Murray, visit from Blackwood, dines with I. D'Israeli, education of his son John, visit to D'Israeli at Brighton, description of Newstead Abbey, Byron's skull-cup, trip to Edinburgh, alliance with Blackwood, visit to Abbotsford, shares in Scott's "Don Roderick, " correspondence with Coleridge, 1815--Drawing-room in Albemarle Street, Mme. De Staël, first meeting of Scott and Byron, Napoleon's escape from Elba, sends first news of Battle of Waterloo to Blackwood, literary parties, portraits of distinguished men, trip to Paris, Scott's proposed letters from the Continent, Napoleon's personal correspondence with crowned heads, etc. , of Europe, publishes Miss Austen's "Emma, " begins to publish Malthus' works, correspondence with Leigh Hunt as to the "Story of Rimini, " correspondence with James Hogg, dealings with Byron, his liberal offer to Byron, "Siege of Corinth" and "Parisina, " remonstrates with Byron, correspondence with Blackwood, other books published by him during the year, 1816--Kindness to Rev. C. R. Maturin, Coleridge's "Glycine: a Song, " "Remorse, " "Zapolya, " "Christabel, "and "Christmas Tale, " correspondence with Leigh Hunt, Gifford's illness, gives Gifford a carriage, entrusted with sale of Byron's books and furniture, buys some of Byron's books, the large screen (now at AlbemarleStreet), and silver cup, Byron's "Sketch from Private Life, " Byron leaves England, "Childe Harold" and "The Prisoner of Chillon, " letter to Byron on the "Monody on Sheridan, " "Tales of my Landlord, " correspondence with Lady Byron and Lady C. Lamb, Ballantyne's proposal about Scott's works, his assistance to Hogg, other books published by him during the year, 1817--Correspondence with Coleridge, Scott's review of "Childe Harold, " Canto III. , letters from Lady C. Lamb, "Manfred, " "Manuscrit venu de Ste. Hèléne, " "Childe Harold, " Canto IV. , Captain Basil Hall's "Fragments of Voyages and Travels, " correspondence with Lady Abercorn, Giovanni Belzoni, Washington Irving at Albemarle Street, other books published by him during the year, 1818--"Beppo, " visit to Scott, "Don Juan, " Canto I. , takes share in _Blackwood's Magazine_, remonstrances with Blackwood on the personality of the MagazineArticles, the anonymous pamphlet "Hypocrisy Unveiled, " assailed by a pamphlet, entitled "A Letter to Mr. John Murrayof Albemarle Street, etc. , " Hazlitt's libel action, correspondence with Scott, friendship with Hallam--publishes "Middle Ages, " the proposed _Monthly Register_, Crabbe's "Tales of the Hall, " and other poems, Rev. H. H. Milman 1819--Campbell's "Selections from British Poets, " suggestions to Byron about "Don Juan, " Canto II. , "Mazeppa" and "The Ode to Venice, " Blackwood refuses to sell "Don Juan, " copyright of "Don Juan" infringed--injunction applied for andgranted; retires from _Blackwood's Magazine_, transfers his Scottish Agency to Oliver and Boyd, Thomas Hope's "Anastasius, " threatened by Colonel Macirone with libel action, verdict in his favour, buys house at Wimbledon, literary levées at Albemarle Street, his acquaintance with Ugo Foscolo 1820--"Don Juan, Cantos III. And IV. , " Hobhouse's anger--the "My boy Hobby O!" incident, Milman's "Fall of Jerusalem, " B. Disraeli first mentioned, Washington Irving's "Sketch-Book, " other books published by him during the year 1821--Cantos III. , IV. , and V. Of "Don Juan, " refuses to publish further cantos of "Don Juan, " Byron's pamphlet on Bowles, "Sardanapalus, " "The Two Foscari, " "Cain, a Mystery, " present with Scott at Coronation of George IV. , injunction in case of "Cain, " accepts Byron's "Memoirs, " Mrs. Graham's letter to him about Sir Charles Eastlake, pirated copies of Byron's works in America and France, injunction obtained restraining sale by Longman of Mrs. Rundell's"Domestic Cookery, " 1822--Death of Allegra, Milman's "Fall of Jerusalem, " intimacy with Milman, "Bracebridge Hall, " declines James Fenimore Cooper's novels, Ugo Foscolo 1823--Giflord's serious illness--difficulty in choosing new Editorfor the _Q. R. _, other books published by him during the year 1824--Closing incidents of friendship with Byron, Byron's last letter and illness, Byron's death, correspondence with Dr. Ireland (Dean of Westminster) about Byron'sburial in Westminster Abbey, destruction of Byron's Memoirs, Moore undertakes "Life of Byron, " Mrs. Markham's "History of England, " a crisis in the _Q. R. _, John Taylor Coleridge appointed Editor of _Q. R. _; correspondence with B. Disraeli about "Aylmer Papillon"1825--Agreement and arrangements regarding proposed morning paper, _Representative_, letters from B. Disraeli as to _Representative_, I. D'Israeli's views on the _Representative_, offers editorship of _Representative_ to Lockhart; Scott's opinion of the scheme, secures foreign correspondents for _Representative_, bears the whole expense, appoints Lockhart Editor of _Q. R. _ on Coleridge's resignation, letters to him from Scott on Lockhart's fitness for the _Q. R. _editorship, letters from Lockhart, Hallam's "Constitutional History, " renews friendship with Constable after fifteen years' interval, other books published by him during the year, 1826--_Representative_ started--its utter failure, health breaks down, commercial crisis and failure of large publishing houses, Constable & Co. , Ballantyne & Co. , Hurst, Robinson & Co. , and others, helps London publishers in their difficulties, _Representative_ ceases to exist after career of six months, misunderstanding with I. D'Israeli, intimacy with Lockhart, Wordsworth's proposal to him, 1827--Letter from his son describing Scott's acknowledgement ofthe authorship of "Waverley Novels" at the Theatrical Fund dinner inEdinburgh, Henry Taylor's "Isaac Comnenus, " buys all Byron's works, 1828--Offers Scott £1, 250 for copyright of "History of Scotland, " "Tales of a Grandfather, " Napier's "History of Peninsular War, " the "Wellington Despatches, " "Library of Entertaining Knowledge, " negotiations with Moore as to "Life of Byron, " 1829--Resigns his share in "Marmion" to Scott, Croker's edition of "Boswell's Johnson, " "The Family Library, " 1830--Milman's "History of the Jews, " Moore's "Life of Byron, " Vol. I. , renewal of correspondence with B. Disraeli and negotiations withhim as to "Contarini Fleming: a Psychological Biography, " 1831--Moore's "Life of Byron, " Vol. II. , Moore's "Thoughts on Editors, " Thomas Carlyle recommended to him by Lord Jeffrey, "Sartor Resartus"--which he ultimately declines to publish, 1832--Complete edition of Byron's works, correspondence with Benjamin Disraeli about "Gallomania, " 1834--Dean of Westminster refuses his request that Thorwaldsen'sstatue of Byron should be placed in Westminster Abbey, 1836--The first Handbook to the Continent (Holland, Belgium, and North Germany), published, 1837--Letter to _Morning Chronicle_ on Napier's "History of thePeninsular War, " 1838--Mr. Gladstone's "Church and State, " T. Powell Buxton's "Slave Trade and its Remedy, " Handbook to Switzerland, 1839--Handbook to Norway, Sweden, and Denmark, 1840--Mrs. Jameson and her "Guide to the Picture Galleries ofLondon, " Handbook to the East, George Borrow, Borrow's "Gypsies of Spain, " Southey's death, 1841--Bishop of Llandaff and "Lord Dudley's Letters, " correspondence with John Colquhoun on "The Moor and the Loch, " 1842--Handbook to Italy, letters from George Borrow, "The Bible in Spain" published, Horace Horace Twiss's "Life of Lord Eldon, " his illness, 1843--In constant communication with Sir Robert Peel, many of whose speeches, etc. , he published, Richard Ford's Handbook of Spain, Mr. Gladstone on the Copyright Bill, his failing health and death, his dinner-parties an institution, tokens of respect from all parts--extracts from letters of sympathy from the Americans, Dr. Robinson and Mrs. L. H. Sigourney, Murray, III. , John, a reader for the press at six years old, recollections of Scott and Byron at Albemarle Street, present at the destruction of Byron's Memoirs, letter from R. W. Hay on the anonymous attack on Gifford's memory, present at the Theatrical Fund Dinner in Edinburgh when Scott declared himself the author of the "Waverley Novels, " the originator and author of the "Guides, " extract from his article in Murray's Magazine on the "Handbooks, " Napier, Macvey, Napier, Col. W. , "History of the Peninsular War, " at Strathfieldsaye with Duke of Wellington, negotiations with Murray, Napoleon Buonaparte, escapes from Elba, private correspondence with crowned heads, etc. , of Europe declined by Murray, Nelson, Lord, anecdote of, Newton (the artist), Nugent's "Memorials of Hampden, " Oliver & Boyd, Orloff, Count, Ouseley, Sir Gore, Owen, Robert, his "New View of Society, " Paget, Lieut. Henry (Murray's stepfather), Palgrave, Sir Francis, Murray's Guide to Northern Italy, on Murray's friendship, Palmer, Miss Alicia T. , Parish, H. , Paul, Emperor, proposal to assist Napoleon in turning English out of India, Paxton, Dr. G. A. , Peel, Sir Robert, on Byron, publishes his speeches, etc. , Perry, James, _Independent Gazette_, Phillips, Sir Richard, 17 "Waverley" offered to, 97Phillips, Thomas, his portraits, Phillpotts, Rev. Dr. Henry (Bishop of Exeter), Pillans, Mr. , Pindar, Peter, Pitcairn's "Criminal Trials of Scotland, "Polidori, Dr. , Powles, J. D. , Pringle, Thomas, Editor of _Blackwood's Magazine_, Proctor, John, _Quarterly Review_, proposals by Murray to Canning, to Scott, Gifford accepts editorship, letters from Scott, his advice to Gifford, general arrangements, launched, first number appears, first edition exhausted, its unpunctual appearance, Southey a constant contributor to, its prosperity, Sir J. Barrow's connection with, Croker takes charge of it during Gifford's illness, Gifford's illness and resignation, crisis--only two numbers in 1824, J. T. Coleridge appointed Editor, Coleridge resigns, Lockhart appointed Editor, Ramsay & Co. , George, Regent, Prince, _Representative_, The, Murray's daily newspaper; its projection, first appearance and complete failure, ceases to exist, Roberts, Rev. Dr. Robinson, Dr. Robinson, H. CrabbRogers, Samuel, on _Q. R. _ opinion of "Childe Harold" "Jacqueline" on Crabbe's poemsRomilly, Sir S. Royal Society of LiteratureRundell, Mrs. , "Domestic Cookery" history of the book and injunction obtained by MurrayRussell, Lord John, "Memoirs, Journals, and Correspondence of T. Moore" "The Affairs of Europe" Sandby, WilliamScott, Sir Walter "Sir Tristram, " and "Lay of the Last Minstrel" "Marmion" "Border Minstrelsy" partnership with Ballantyne proposed edition of "British Novelists" asks Southey to contribute to _Edin. Rev. _ severs his connection with Constable and _Edin. Rev. _ visit from Murray correspondence with Murray about _Q. R. _ letter to George Ellis on Murray, etc. Views as to management of _Q. R. _ advice to Gifford friendship with George Ellis "Life of Swift" a principal contributor to first number of _Q. R. _ proposed "Secret History of the Court of James I. " "Portcullis Copies" "English Minstrelsy" "Lady of the Lake" Prince Regent's opinion of his poems, etc. Opinion of "Calamities of Authors" new edition of "Lord Somers's Tracts" Ballantyne's recklessness at Abbotsford fresh alliance with Constable his writing-desk; "Waverley" (Great Unknown) "The Lord of the Isles" additions to Abbotsford "Don Roderick" meets Byron at Murray's house portrait by Newton trip to Belgium proposed letters from the Continent visit from Murray opinion of "Cain" "Tales of my Landlord, " "The Black Dwarf" cicerone to George IV. In Edinburgh serious illness assists Hogg "Heart of Midlothian, " "Rob Roy" assists Washington Irving nicknamed "The Chevalier" by B. Disraeli bankruptcy of his publishers on Lockhart's fitness for the _Q. R. _ editorship at Brighton with Lockhart; illness of his grandson "Littlejohn" "History of Scotland" Cadell appointed his publisher; purchases, jointly with Cadell, all principal copyrights of his works Murray's transfer of his share of "Marmion" last letter to Murray rapid decline death account of his acknowledgment of the authorship of "Waverley Novels" at the Theatrical Fund dinner opinion of "Murray, the Emperor of the West" advises Lockhart to undertake "Life of Napoleon" opinion of Moore's "Life of Byron" some of the articles he wrote for _Q. R. _: Carr's "Tour in Scotland"; "Curse of Kehama" "Daemonology"; Miss Austen's "Emma" "Culloden Papers"; Campbell's "Gertrude of Wyoming"; "Childe Harold" Canto III. ; "Tales of my Grandfather"; "Lord Orford's Letters"; "Pepys' Memoirs"; "Works of John Home, " "Planting Waste Lands, " "Plantation and Landscape Gardening, " Sir Humphry Davy's "Salmonia"; "Hajji Baba, " "Ancient History of Scotland, " Southey's "Life of John Bunyan" Pitcairn's "Criminal Trials of Scotland"Scott, Thomas reported to be author of "Tales of my Landlord"Senior, Nassau, Sewell, Rev. W. , his articles in _Q. R. _ on Gladstone's "Church and State, "Shadwell, Vice-Chancellor, on copyright of "Don Juan, " on copyright of "Cain, "Sharpe, Charles K. , Sheffield, Lord, Shelley, Mrs. , opinion of Croker's "Boswell's Johnson, " on Moore's "Life of Byron, "Shelley's "Revolt of Islam, " Southey's attack on, Sigourney, Mrs. L. H. , on Murray's death, Smart, Theophilus, Smith, Horace and James, "Rejected Addresses, "Smith, Sydney, "Visitation Sermon, "Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, Somerville, Mrs. , her portrait, opinion of Moore's "Life of Byron, "Somerville, Dr. , Sotheby, Wm. , Soult, Marshal, Southey, Robert Jeffrey's boast about his "Excursion, " asked by Scott to write for _Edin. Rev_. , opinion of Jeffrey, asked to contribute to the _Q. R. _, "Life of Nelson, " "Madoc, " "Thalaba, " and "Curse of Kehama, " constant contributor to _Q. R. _, his income diminished by failure of _Edinburgh Annual Register_, opinion of "Calamities of Authors, " intention about his own Memoirs, portrait by Phillips, asks Murray to employ Coleridge to translate Goethe's "Faust, " "Wat Tyler" ruled by Chancellor to be seditious, "History of Peninsular War, " extracts from his letters to Murray, "Book of the Church, " literary work, advice as to Gifford's successor, "Life of John Bunyan, " returned M. P. For Downton, his _Q. R. _ articles his chief means of support, receives pension from Government, his intellect failing, his death, had written ninety-four articles for _Q. R. _, some of which are: "Missionary Enterprise, " "Life of Nelson, " "Life and Achievements of Lord Wellington, " "Parliamentary Reform, " "Thomas Telford, "Southey, Mrs. (Southey's second wife), on her husband's state, Spanish Colonies, emancipation of, effect on English money market, Staël, Madame de, _see_ De Staël. Starke, Mrs. , Stationers' Co. In 18th century, Sterling, John, opinion of Mill's "Logic, "Stothard, Charles, Suffolk, Countess of, "The Suffolk Papers, "Suliotes, the, Taylor, Henry, "Isaac Comnenus, " proposes to divide loss on his drama with Murray, "Philip van Artevelde, "Talfourd, Serjeant, Teignmouth, Lord, Thackeray, W. M. , his opinion of the "Suffolk Papers, "Thomson, Dr. Thomas, article on Kidd's "Outlines of Mineralogy, "Thorwaldsen's bust of Byron, statue of Byron, Ticknor, George, impressions of Gifford, Tita (Byron's Gondolier), Tomline, Bishop, "Life of William Pitt, "Townsend, Dr. George, "Trade Books" of 18th century, Turner, Dawson, Turner, Sharon, retained by Longman, Murray's staunch friend, criticises _Q. R. _ No. 1, on "Austrian State Papers, " opinion of Byron's "Sketch from Private Life, " copyright of "Don Juan, " poems declined by Murray, advice on Macirone's libel suit, an injunction in the case of Mrs. Rundell's "Domestic Cookery, " consulted by Isaac D'Israeli as to pamphlet on quarrel with Murray, expostulates with Murray about Milman's "History of Jews, " expression of his affection for Murray, Turner, Mrs. Sharon, Twiss, Horace, "Life of the Earl of Eldon, "Tyndale, Tytler's "History of Scotland, " Underwood, T. And G. , Van Zuylen, Baron, Vere, Lady, Volunteers, Review of, in Hyde Park--Murray an Ensign in 3rd Regiment of RoyalLondon Volunteers, Waldegrave Memoirs, Waldie, Miss Jane (Mrs. Eaton), "Letters from Italy, "Walker, C. E. , "Wallace: a Historical Tragedy, "Walpole Memoirs, Walpole, Rev. R. , Walpole's "Castle of Otranto, "Weber, Henry, Scott's amanuensis, "Tales of the East, "Wellington, Duke of, witness in Macirone's libel suit, interest in the _Q. R. _, connection with Napier's "History of Peninsular War, " "Despatches, "Whistlecraft, by J. H. Frere, Whitaker, Rev. John, White, Rev. J. Blanco, Wilkie, Sir David, his journey to the East; paints the Sultan at Constantinople, death off Gibraltar; Turner's picture of his funeral at sea, Wilmot, Mrs. _see_ Dacre, Lady. Wilson, John (Christopher North) connection with _Blackwood's Magazine_, article on "Childe Harold, " Canto IV. , a principal writer in _Blackwood's Magazine_, challenges anonymous author of "Hypocrisy Unveiled, etc. , " "An Hour's Tête-a-Tête with the Public" in _Blackwood's Magazine_, Wool, Rev. J. , "Life of Joseph Wharton, "Wordsworth, William, Wright, Mr. , his connection with the _Representative_, Young, Dr. Thomas, his theory of light.