Published under Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License
Lord Byron and his Times: http://lordbyron.org
Any dashes occurring in line breaks have been removed.
Obvious and unambiguous compositors’ errors have been silently corrected.
Since writing what follows, a most extraordinary
circumstance has come to my knowledge—a circumstance which really appeared at
first incredible to myself,—sinking my adversary to a depth of baseness far beyond even
my own previous appreciation of his character. A printed copy of
If there be a case in which one may he forgiven far laying before
the publicthe statement of a private difference, it is surely one like the present, wherein the original subject of discussion was an injury committed by means of apublication.Mr. Lockhart hopes, therefore, that the origin of the transaction now about to be disclosed, and the subsequent attempt which has been made to give it a false colouring, may be accepted as a sufficient apology for the appearance of the following statement.
In no part of this paper is there to be found the disavowal I had demanded
from Mr. Lockhartand which I had pledged myself I would regard as entitling him to receive
from me the satisfaction of a gentleman. It did not therefore appear, either to my
friends or myself, that this paper at all altered the position of things,—and I took no
notice of it.
What was my surprise to find, on my coming to town on Wednesday afternoon, that
the printed statement, circulated by after the time fixed for his departure from
London, commences with the following paragraph, which has no place
whatever in the printed paper sent to me, with an intimation where
Mr. Lockhartmight be heard
of!
Mr. Lockhart thinks proper to introduce the following narrative with a distinct statement (which he would never have hesitated about granting to any one who had the smallest right to demand it) concerning the nature of his connection with. Blackwood’s Edinburgh MagazineMr. Lockhart has occasionally contributed articles to that publication, but he is in no sense of the word Editor or Conductor of it, and neither derives, nor ever did derive, any emolument whatever from any management of it.
No one can fail to be struck by this most extraordinary difference between the
two printed papers. The one carefully prepared and printed to be
transmitted to me, contains no such disavowal as I had required; while that which was
afterwards sent out to the public, as having been first sent to me,
contains the precise disavowal I did require! That very disavowal which
would, as a matter of course, have taken me instantly into the field with him!
The conclusions are self-evident:
In the first place, Nota Bene, declaring that he had
seat me “a copy” of the statement he has since circulated,
is a deliberate, palpable, printed lie. The paper he sent to me differs
from that which he has published, in the most important of all points—namely, the very point which stood in the way of my giving Mr. Lockhartthe
privilege of a meeting.*
In the second place, with an engagement to give him the satisfaction of a gentleman should he
accede to it)—the slightest consideration of the circumstances will show, that
London Magazine
I therefore regard him as having acted as an impostor all
the way through the business. I believe that he had no conception that the person he addressed
would have any scruple in evading an Editorship, when called
upon;—and that, finding his mistake in this respect, he instantly retreated into false punctilio to ensure his safety. His last atrocious deception,
practised by means of the two printed statements, one differing from the other, must sink him
in nameless and incontested infamy. It fully authorizes me to declare, that I totally
disbelieve his word,—and, in spite of his tardy declaration, trust to the information in
my possession, that he has been actively and lucratively concerned in the
management of Blackwood’s Magazinefinally attached to him, as
a cowardly falsifier of facts, documents, and reputation.
* Nothing but the rankest shrinking can
account for this juggle. He knew that if he sent to me his disavowal, I was pledged to call
upon him: he therefore dispatched to my house a paper with the first paragraph drawn up as
a formal apology to the public,—from the tenour of which I
could not suppose that any alteration was in his contemplation. Had that paragraph been
omitted altogether, copy of his Statement, would have noticed this omission,
and its motive! As it is, his declaration is, I repeat, a direct
lie.
I venture to expect that such persons as may think it worth their while to
express any opinion at all on the dispute between
I must take it for granted, that the reader of these observations has seen my
after he was in possession of my Statement, contradicts me on
no one point of fact; he asserts, however, that I was actuated by
certain motives, and feelings of an unmanly and discreditable kind. The existence of these, in
my mind, is, indeed, disproved by the very documents which he gives; but these require to be
regarded with some attention, in order that their evidence may be plainly seen; and I dare not
flatter myself that the majority of persons, occupied with matters of more interest to
themselves, have bestowed on them that serious notice which would be sufficient for my
vindication, without further comment. The very looseness and falsehood of demonstrate what I had previously
only left open to deduction.
asserts that
his “sudden” appearance in London induced me to evade an
honourable engagement, which I had readily entered into when I knew he was four hundred miles
off.
The documents speak on this point for themselves. In my second note to
stipulated for, his appearance could not be regarded by me
as “sudden,”—nor could it, nor did it, take me by
surprise.
But it was only one of my conditions: the other was, that he
should make “such open reference to the ground of his
complaint, as would prove the justice of his pretensions to having been
injured,”—that is to say, that he should declare, at the outset, whether he
complained as one of the beaten writers in Blackwood’s Magazine
* Copies of my
My second note to his sudden appearance, instead of driving me
back from my pledge, led me instantly to go beyond it, and to make an avowal perfectly
gratuitous on my part,—which I was under no sort of obligation to make,—and which I
could easily have avoided making. But I wished to show him a contrast to his own conduct as a
public writer—and therefore, though not pledged to do so, without a preliminary
explanation from him, no sooner was I assured of his being in London, than I declared to his
friend that I deemed it due to myself to state frankly, that I was
Editor of the London
Magazine
This distinct, plain, and voluntary avowal,—which I might have shunned
with ease, and which the conductors of Blackwood’s Magazine
Yet in the teeth of this document, referring to the
conversation that had just passed between his friend and myself;—in the teeth of my
former note, inviting him to London, and expressing astonishment at his absence, since he had thought proper to stir at all in such an
affair;—in the teeth of a frank, and voluntary declaration, which his experience of the
tactics of Blackwood’s
Magazinesurprise and disquiet at his appearance! He
has the impudence to term my conversation a shuffling one, and my note
an evasion of an engagement! The mere terms of abuse are very
insignificant in themselves:—l shall not therefore employ them here, but leave the reader
to pronounce those, which, in his opinion, may be applicable to the man who is thus convicted of mean-spirited misrepresentation, and total disregard of
truth and consistency.
The fact was, I knew the individual I had to deal with from the first, and
therefore I expressly objected to his absence from London, when he took the liberty of
questioning me, in my private capacity, relative to anonymous papers in a periodical work. My
information left me in no doubt that he was the chief writer and conductor of Blackwood’s MagazineEditor, had not scrupled in a case of danger to disclaim a connection
from which he had been long deriving pecuniary profit—the wages of the most abject
hypocrisy in religion and politics, and the foulest scandals in regard to private character.
Being determined that nothing should drive me to disclaim what I had done or countenanced, as
the conductor of a periodical work,—I was naturally desirous to have a questioner of the
stamp I have just been describing, on the spot, to answer for himself promptly, as I was called
upon to do. At Edin-disclaim the responsibility about
which he directed questions to be put: I might have disclaimed it upon a feeling in my own mind
that I was not responsible under the circumstances of the case; perhaps
such a feeling nine persons out of ten in my situation would have entertained. From the
publishers of the London
Magazinedisavowal—but he found I was not ready
to make it! He invited this to the last. There was an easy way for me to
avoid all personal consequences, if I had chosen to take it when it was so plainly indicated:
but I had felt too much honest indignation at the assassin-system of Blackwood’s Magazineprinciple, which
I conceive to be the fair and honourable one, in regard to the responsibility of persons
concerned in conducting the public Journals, and other periodical works. My first note to
Blackwood’s Magazineapology in the first instance;—the satisfaction
given him must have been of another description, and of my determination
to that effect, both my friends, retire altogether from Blackwood’s Magazineas
report says I have,) it is too much to ask of me to supply the bankrupt partners with
the means of setting up in the new capacity of gentlemen! London Magazine
not state, what repeatedly declared himself ready to
arrange for my giving Mr. Lockhart satisfaction, on terms which, as my
friend, he considered fair and applicable to the case. The preliminary conditions I
certainty took upon myself; because I thought it an undue concession to
Blackwood’s Magazine
Blackwood’s Magazine
Standing, as I did during the whole of my discussion with
I felt it however, due to myself, and to society, pertinaciously to adhere to a
principle of distinction between the discovered, exposed, and silenced anonymous writer, and
the gentleman who habitually holds himself ready to avow his actions, and to answer for them in
his person. As the acknowledged Editor of a periodical work, devoted chiefly to comments on the
events of the day, what would be my situation, unless I adhered to this principle? So long as
the criticism in the London
Magazine
His simple word, that he had not been interestedly concerned in the management
of the publication in question, would have been sufficient for me: he was told this over and
over again, and he might clearly mere punctilio! Has he been always
equally scrupulous? Does he appear so when be affirms that he saw the London Magazineaccident: that he is not in the habit of seeing it; and that
he remained ignorant of the severest article on his conduct for three weeks after it reached
Edinburgh! The people of Edinburgh will know what value to attach to these assertions.
The responsibility I have acknowledged leaves me open to the claim of any person
who may be really aggrieved by the publication I conduct. I have voluntarily exposed myself to
such claims, because I thought it honest to do so; and towards invitation,
rather than of evasion. All I could do, without ceding an important principle, I did, to afford
him access to the position in which he expressed himself so anxious to stand. I asked no
assurance from him derogatory to his honour; and even supposing me wrong in the point of etiquette (which I am far from admitting) his concession to my mistake
in such a case would have done him credit in public opinion. By his conduct, therefore, I
consider that he has disgraced himself in every respect;—and I must regard him for the
future, as only a fit subject for that public castigation, by means of the instrument he has
venally abused, which I have already effectually applied, and shall be ready to apply again,
should I see occasion for it.
As to his scandalous epithets, had I permitted them to have altered my
determination, as expressed by myself, and through my friend, I should have allowed
Every circumstance of the case proves that I should have committed an
irreparable error, had I considered
* This expression has been thought to imply that I did not
myself write the articles on Blackwood’s Magazinepowerful with
reference to the infamy of that publication. A sufficient proof of its power has been given
in the breaking-up of the scandal-establishment.