Passages of a Working Life during Half a Century
Chapter VII
CHAPTER VII.
ON the 13th of June, 1820, I received an offer, conveyed to me
in confidence by my zealous friend Mr. Locker, to
become the Editor and part Proprietor of a London Weekly Paper, “The Guardian.” The tone of my political opinions had
been collected from the “Retrospect of Public
Affairs” in “The Plain
Englishman.” The violence of political agitation appeared to be fast
subsiding. Some of the physical-force Reformers were in prison. The miscreants who had
contemplated assassination as a cure for political evils were hanged. There was only one
chance of a convulsion. The Queen, contrary to all
reasonable expectation, had landed at Dover, and on the 6th of June had entered London
amidst the shouts of thousands. On that evening a Message from the King was presented to the Lords and Commons, and a green bag was laid on
the table of each House, containing papers respecting the conduct of Her Majesty when
abroad, which the King had thought fit to communicate to Parliament. When I entered upon my
new editorial duties at the end of the month, the hope was at an end which wise men of all
parties had entertained, that a compromise would avert the scandal and danger of a public
inquiry. Through July, after the Secret Committee of the House of Lords had made its
Report, and a Bill of Pains and Penalties was read
Ch. VII.] | THE FIRST EPOCH. | 259 |
a first time, the
mob excitement of London was such as few had before witnessed. When the Queen took up her
residence at Brandenburgh House on the 3rd of August, there began a series of processions,
from the extreme East to the extreme West, that manifested at once the energy and the folly
of democracy in its wildest hour of excitement. Often riding to Windsor have I been
detained by the impossibility of passing through an army of working men, with bands, and
banners, and placards, headed by deputations of their several committees with wands of
office—all terribly in earnest—all perfectly convinced of the Queen’s immaculate
purity—all resolved that oppression should not triumph—a peaceful multitude, but one that
in any other country would have seemed the herald, if not the manifestation, of Revolution.
In the fierce battle of journalism which was then fought throughout the year, I was not
called upon for a declaration of extreme opinions. If such a course had been insisted upon
I should have resigned my charge. I wrote to my co-proprietor, when it was suggested that a
stronger tone ought to be adopted with regard to the Queen, “I can only say that I
feel confident that the language of moderation ought to be most aimed at, as the
likeliest to prevent the existing ferment increasing into a state of perpetual division
and anarchy.” This was written at the end of November; when, although the
Government had terminated this unhappy contest, the political animosities that had grown up
with it were raging in a flood of personality such as had never before disgraced the Press
of England. The “Guardian” had not flourished under
the gross mismanagement of its early career, nor under my too conscientious 260 | PASSAGES OF A WORKING LIFE: | [Ch. VII. |
interpretation of the duties of a journalist. I became its sole
proprietor upon easy terms. Gladly did I leave the rough work of party to John Bull, which, established in December, 1820,
soon obtained an influence which was earned by something more than its cleverness. A year
after, in both the papers which I then conducted, I expressed my opinion of the danger and
disgrace of the prevailing tone of the “public instructors.” This opinion is
perhaps worth transcribing, as affording a contrast between the London newspapers of
1821—with a fourpenny stamp, paying a duty of 3s. 6d. on every advertisement, printed on
heavily-taxed paper, hemmed round by all imaginable safeguards against libel—and the
newspapers of 1863, with no stamp whatever and no advertisement-duty, paying no tax upon
paper, fettered by no securities; between the London newspapers whose aggregate circulation
in one week was about a quarter of a million, and the newspapers that upon a moderate
estimate may be held to circulate five millions weekly. In the country newspapers the
contrast is perhaps still greater. Much as I believed in the regenerating power of the
Press, I could scarcely have imagined that some distant age of cheapness would have been an
age when the impure, seditious, violent, intolerant, and libellous writer would have become
a rare exception amongst journalists. Nevertheless, I rightly considered that out of the
increase of knowledge amongst the people would arise a better spirit of journalism; which,
in its turn, would become one of the most efficient instruments of education.
Thus I wrote in 1821: “A general view of the influence of the Press
would lead us to judge that
Ch. VII.] | THE FIRST EPOCH. | 261 |
very much of that influence is
injurious to the safety of the Government; opposed to the happiness of the people; and
destructive of that real freedom of thought and writing upon which the glory and
prosperity of England have been built. But we believe that a great deal of the evil
will cure itself. It is the half-knowledge of the people that has created the host of
ephemeral writers who address themselves to the popular passions. If the firmness of
the Government, and, what is better, the good sense of the upper and middle classes who
have property at stake, can succeed for a few years in preserving tranquillity, the
ignorant disseminators of sedition:and discontent will be beaten out of the field by
opponents of better principles, who will direct the secret of popular writing to a
useful and a righteous purpose. But this change in the temper of the multitude is not
to be effected by borrowing the dirty weapons of those who are engaged in stimulating
them to acts of atrocity. It is not to be effected by raking up scandalous stories
against the demagogues of a faction—by penetrating into the recesses of private life to
drag forth the evidence of a forgotten fault or an expiated folly—by pouring forth the
coarsest abuse against the principles and practice of eminent men of adverse opinions,
with a blind and levelling fury. There is a revolutionary temper in such
ultra-publications which degrades the cause it affects to support, and furnishes an
example to the dangerous doctrines it pretends to resist. The Black Dwarf and John Bull are scions from the same stock. The
dictates of interest only have made the one a pander to the passions of the little
vulgar; the other, a hunter of scandal for the vulgar great.”
262 |
PASSAGES OF A WORKING LIFE: |
[Ch. VII. |
It was time to speak out when a Society had started up to do the work of a
Censorship, in the blindest fashion of ultra-loyal partisanship. In March, 1821, the
“Constitutional Association” was formed, for the purpose of prosecuting
printers and publishers who went beyond what they deemed the proper bounds of political
discussion. This despicable Association—despicable, however supported by rank and
wealth—saw no mischief in the gross libels of one set of writers who professed to be the
friends of the Government, but instituted the most reckless prosecutions against
“liberal” newspapers. The term “liberal” had then begun to mark a
certain set of opinions which had outgrown their former title of “Jacobinical.”
This Association acquired the name of “The Bridge Street Gang.” After three or
four months of a hateful existence—denounced in Parliament—execrated by every man who had
inherited a spark of Milton’s zeal for
“the Liberty of Unlicensed Printing”—this Association was prosecuted for
oppression and extortion. The grand jury found a true bill against its members. They were
acquitted upon their trial; but practices were disclosed which showed how dangerous it was
for a crafty attorney and a knot of fanatical politicians to play at attorney-generalship.
The true public of this country was getting as sick of outrageous Loyalty as of desperate
Radicalism.
Looking around me at the Newspaper Press of London, I saw very few papers
that attempted to combine the literary and the political character. John Hunt was still the editor of “The Examiner;” but his brother Leigh, who had raised the critical department of the paper to the highest
eminence,
Ch. VII.] | THE FIRST EPOCH. | 263 |
might well be tired of newspaper occupation, and was
meditating the unfortunate union with Byron in
“The Liberal.” John
Hunt, in May, 1821, was prosecuted for a libel on the House of Commons, and
was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment. “The Champion,” “The
News,” and one or two others, had literary pretensions, but they made their
criticism little more than a vehicle for their politics. I fancied there was an opening for
a paper that, giving a temperate support to the Government, might deal with Literature in a
spirit of impartiality. I panted for a region of pure air and clear skies, lifted out of
the heat and fever of the plains, where public writers lost all natural freedom and vigour
in a constant round of controversial dram-drinking.
I have the merit, humble as it may be, of having created a new department of
Newspaper Literature. On the 3rd of March, 1821, “The Guardian” had the first of a series of articles,
regularly continued month by month, entitled “Magazine-Day.” This paper opens with a glimpse of “The Row,”
forty-two years since. What changes have come over the then narrow world of Magazines!
Periodical writing had then a few able workmen, and some, rather more numerous, of the
“Ned Purdon” school. But now! Let me
copy from this paper a few sentences of what then struck me as one of the remarkable
indications of a new “Reading Age,” upon which age Coleridge made some lumbering jokes:—“There is no bustle, to our
minds, half so agreeable as the bustle of Paternoster Row on the last day of the month.
This is Magazine Day—the most important division in the life of a bookseller’s
collector; as important as settling day to the stock-broker, or quarter-day to
264 | PASSAGES OF A WORKING LIFE: | [Ch. VII. |
the annuitant. We delight, on these memorable mornings, to lounge
through the narrow approaches of Ave-Maria or Warwick Lanes, and then to make a dead
stop in the Paradise of Publishers—to hear the hum of the great hive of literature—to
see its bees going forth in search of, or returning with, their spoils. As the dusky
porter, catching the rapid step of the periodical lore which he bears, brushes past us,
we delight to speculate upon the component parts of his burden—to estimate the relative
proportions of Blackwoods and Baldwins, of Monthlies (Old and New), of Gentleman’s and Ladies’, of Belle Assemblies and
Evangelicals.
It is a special pleasure to us to dive into some of the celebrated penetralia of the
Row, and there learn to estimate the merits of these monthly candidates for applause,
not by the beauty of their styles, but by the bulk of their heaps.” I then
described how, by these walks, I obtained possession of half a dozen periodicals, and was
able to taste the fruit, not before it was ripe, but before it was brought into the market.
I had long thought, I said, of turning this passion to account; and at length resolved to
give my readers some of the chit-chat of Magazine Day. “With a fearless hand we
will twitch your mantles, blue, or drab, or green, ye ‘Abstract and brief chronicles of the time.’
|
Your days of dulness are overpast. Ye are no longer the reversionary property of
the pastry-cook and the trunk-maker. Ye are well worth a regular monthly notice; aye,
and much better worth than many a lumbering quarto.” This article made a stir
in “The Trade,” and before next Magazine Day, these “squires of the
moon’s body” trooped into my office without Ch. VII.] | THE FIRST EPOCH. | 265 |
giving
me the trouble of a journey to Paternoster Row.
The new era of Magazines may be said to have commenced in 1817. In that year
“Blackwood’s Edinburgh
Magazine” startled the London publishers into a conviction that for a new
generation of readers more attractive fare might be provided than at some of the old
established restaurateurs, whose dishes were neither light, nor elegant, nor altogether
wholesome. When Blackwood was started—apparently without any very
correct knowledge that something was wanted in periodical literature beyond political
bitterness—the old magazines and their new rivals had gone on without much deviation from
the hackneyed paths in which they had first walked. The possibility was then scarcely
conceived that they could afford to pay handsomely for contributions; and thus their chief
dependence was upon their gratuitous correspondence. They were the vehicles for the
communication to the world of all sorts of opinions, theological, moral, political, and
antiquarian. They were the tablets upon which the retired scholar or the active citizen
might equally inscribe their theories or their observations, in a familiar and unpretending
style; and they at once kept alive the intelligence of their own generation, and formed
valuable records for succeeding eras. In one magazine, “The Gentleman’s,” which had lived the most
respectable of existences for nine decades, the antiquarians stoutly held their own. In its
volumes from 1731 there is more valuable “tombstone information” to be found
than in any other work in our language; and this, to speak truly, is not knowledge to be
despised. The honest printer of St. John’s
266 | PASSAGES OF A WORKING LIFE: | [Ch. VII. |
Gate, of whom
Johnson said that he scarcely ever looked out of
the window without a view to the improvement of his magazine, had seen the births and the
deaths of many rivals. There was a “London” to enter the lists against him when the booksellers had
discovered the value of this new lode in the mine of literature. There was a “Monthly.” There was a “Ladies’.” The old names were supposed to
retain their old influences; and so at the time of my “Magazine Day” there was
a “Monthly,” and there was a “New Monthly;” there was a “London,” and there was a “Ladies.” Mr. Phillips,
afterwards Sir Richard, had revived the “Monthly” in 1796, pretty much upon the ancient
“correspondence” principle. The “New Monthly Magazine
and Universal Register” had scarcely more ambitious pretensions, when set
up in 1814. The “London,” of all the metropolitan
magazines, was the most distinguished for its literary excellence. It had been
re-established in 1820 by Mr. Robert Baldwin, and
was as often called “Baldwin,” as the Edinburgh Magazine was called “Blackwood.” A controversy between the two leading Miscellanies, conducted
with that bitterness on both sides which was an evil characteristic of the periodical
literature of those days,—when writers of all grades readily plunged into the waters of
strife and there wallowed like the heroes of “The Dunciad” in Fleet Ditch—led to the fatal
catastrophe of the death in a duel of Mr. John
Scott, the amiable and accomplished editor of the “London.” I knew not Mr. Scott; but in common with
all who felt that the pistol was the worst arbiter of differences, literary or political, I
deeply grieved for such an end of his career, in which he had in various ways shed a lustre
upon journalism. Ch. VII.] | THE FIRST EPOCH. | 267 |
In my first article of “Magazine Day,” I
said, “Looking at the melancholy circumstances under which the present
“London” has been brought out, we are
surprised that there is so much excellent matter in it; and argue thence that the fatal
termination of a foolish affair will not greatly impair the future gratification of the
public in this very agreeable miscellany.”
The “Blackwood” of
this period had attained a reputation which made all successful rivalry very difficult.
“Nothing,” says Mrs. Gordon,
“was left undone to spread the fame and fear of Blackwood.” The indefatigable publisher, who, as we now learn,
was its real editor, was as careful to propitiate a favourable opinion of his “Maga” amongst periodical writers who admired its talent, as
its great supporters, Wilson and Lockhart, were ever ready for a warfare in which no
quarter was given or expected. It was a surprise to me when I received from the dreaded
William Blackwood a letter of thanks for
“your kind and early notices of my magazine.” Still more was I
surprised when he wrote, “Permit me to return you the author’s and my own
best thanks for your splendid critique upon ‘Valerius.’ Your opinion (which was the
first given upon the work) seems to be fully confirmed by the public voice.”
Was this the style, I thought, in which it was necessary for a publisher to administer
small doses of flattery to periodical critics, however humble, for what ought only to be
considered an act of justice? In after years, occasionally coming across the cold and proud
author of “Valerius,” when he had become Editor of
the “Quarterly Review,” I have
thought of “the author’s best thanks,” &c.; and have suspected
268 | PASSAGES OF A WORKING LIFE: | [Ch. VII. |
that the ultra-courteous phrase was a mere façon de parler of the skilful charioteer who could
show such a high-mettled racer in his team. Of Professor Wilson I
could readily have believed that any cordial acknowledgment of a supposed courtesy would be
in accordance with his genial nature. In later years, he and I may be judged to have
adopted very different opinions upon public questions, but his hand of kindness was always
held out to me; and in his social hour, when I first knew him, and in those days when
sorrow and sadness had impaired but not subdued the elasticity of his nature, I had a
confirmation of my belief, established in many instances before and since, that a political
partisan and satirist may have the warmest heart and be capable of the truest friendship.
In “Blackwood” at this
time was finished “The Ayrshire
Legatees,” in which Galt first
opened his rich vein of observation and humour. Had that publishing economy of the present
day been then fully established, which consists in making a work of fiction do double
service, originally as a series of magazine papers and then as a complete work,
Galt would have spread his next venture over a dozen numbers of
the closely printed pages that had rendered Buchanan’s head so familiar to the Southern public, and then have
made his more dignified appearance. The canny publisher seems to have had some doubts of
our metropolitan tastes, for he writes to the editor of “The Guardian:”—“With this you will receive a
very singular book, which I shall publish in a few days, ‘Annals of the Parish.’ How it may be liked in
England I cannot exactly say; but I am sure it will be highly relished by all
Ch. VII.] | THE FIRST EPOCH. | 269 |
Scotsmen, because the sketches of Scottish country life are so
true to nature.” Do any of the younger readers of the present day care to
look into a book whose chief merit is that it is “so true to nature?” Do
they care to turn to that storehouse of quiet humour, “Sir Andrew Wylie, of that ilk,” which came in rapid
succession? Perhaps some of my Georgian-era contemporaries who are sick of sensation
novels, may turn again to what afforded them delight forty years ago. Proud as he was of
the men of genius that he had gathered around him, Mr.
Blackwood could not forego his political antipathies; and, somewhat too
confidently, fancied that the “able editor” whom he flattered would partake
them. He wrote, “As the magazine has been so much attacked and misrepresented by
the Whig and Radical press, I would be particularly obliged to you if you could notice
the article on ‘The
Personalities of the Whigs,’” I did notice it in these
words: “The letter on ‘The Personalities of the
Whigs’ is forcible, and convincing enough—to a partizan. The object of
the writer is to prove that the Whigs commenced this species of warfare, and that those
opposed to their principles have a right to bring the same weapons into the field which
their enemies have so long been exclusively permitted to employ. For our own parts, we
had rather that political contests were conducted according to the usual rules of
honourable warfare; but if one party use catamarans and infernal machines, it would be
hard to restrict the other to simple steel and gunpowder.”
The new facilities of communication were beginning to tell upon the commerce
of Literature as upon all other commerce. Railroads were yet ten years off
270 | PASSAGES OF A WORKING LIFE: | [Ch. VII. |
in an undreamt-of future. But in 1821 the potent agency of
steam-packets was breaking down the difference between Paternoster Row and Princes Street.
On the 28th of September I was reading “Blackwood,” when the magazines of our metropolis were just getting on
their outer garments; while their northern brethren were quietly reposing, in well arranged
heaps, in our southern warehouses, perfectly sleek and dry, after a happy voyage of sixty
hours. This new condition upon which competition was to be carried on made the London
publishers more solicitous for the excellence, rather than the cheap cost, of their
periodical offerings to a public that had begun to be clamorous for novelties, and somewhat
more critical than a previous generation. Unmoved amidst the general rivalry was that staid
and sober brown-coated companion of our
forefathers, who scorned the fluctuations of fashion, and was still the Gentleman of the days of Pulteney and
Walpole. His costume was preserved as
unchangeably as that of the statue of George the Second
in Leicester Square. He still gloried in being one of the staunchest cocked hats of the
Society of Antiquaries; knew nothing of Wellington boots or Cossack trousers; dined at one
o’clock; and if he could have been persuaded to go to the play, would have been at
the pit-door at five, as in his spring-time. It would have puzzled the dandyism of the days
of George the Fourth and Brummell to have found Mr. Urban an
endurable companion; but he was eminently respectable; and no magazine critic could
honestly pass over this excellent hermit of modern literature. One of his old companions,
”The European,” was smartening
up. Mr. Colburn, Ch. VII.] | THE FIRST EPOCH. | 271 |
not to be left
behind in the periodical race, had, in 1821, engaged Campbell to be the avowed editor of “The New Monthly Magazine and Literary Journal.”
Campbell’s own lectures on poetry were elegant and dull. His contributors had not caught the
spirit of liveliness by which even the old stock of ideas could be successfully reproduced.
The poet made, as we then thought, a mistake in proclaiming his acceptance of the editorial
office. There is a good deal to be argued for and against anonymous editorship and
anonymous contributorship. We then said, and we are not quite sure that we were
wrong—“His power of selection from the contributions of his assistants must be
fettered, and the freedom and boldness of his own opinions encumbered, by a thousand
personal considerations, which ought not to weigh, and would not have weighed, a
feather in the scale, had he preserved that best of all forms of government in
periodical literature—a secret despotism.”
After the unhappy death of John
Scott, the “London” had
passed from Mr. Baldwin into the hands of Messrs.
Taylor and Hessey. These were its palmy days—the days of Lamb and De Quincey; of John Hamilton Reynolds; of Thomas Hood, whose first introduction to the literary world was that of its
sub-editor. I wrote, in September, 1821: “We never read anything more deeply
interesting than the ‘Confessions of an English Opium-Eater.’ We can put implicit faith in
them. They have all the circumstantial sincerity of Defoe. They are written in a fine flowing style, in which the author is
perfectly forgotten.” After the publication of two articles on the Pleasures
and Pains of Opium, the majority of
272 | PASSAGES OF A WORKING LIFE: | [Ch. VII. |
their readers doubted the reality
of these Confessions. The author, in a letter to the editor of the magazine, declared that
the narrative contained a faithful statement of his own experience as an Opium-Eater, drawn
up with entire simplicity, except in some trifling deviations of dates and suppression of
names which circumstances had rendered it expedient should not be published. I had ample
opportunities, a few years after, of knowing how unexaggerated were Mr. De
Quincey’s statements of his extraordinary power of taking opium,
injurious indeed to his health, but without any perceptible deterioration of his wonderful
intellect. Of “Elia” I was almost extravagant in my
admiration. I sometimes: ventured upon verse in my “Magazine Day,” and thus I
wrote, in 1822, after speaking dispraisingly of some articles: “But Elia, Elia, he is half divine, Fragrant as woodbines in the evening sun, Fresh as the jasmines round his porch that twine, Happy as school-boy when his task is done, And simple as the village-maid that sings Her bubbling song of old forgotten things.” |
I can scarcely understand De Quincey when he says of
Charles Lamb, and particularly of his delightful prose essays
under the signature of Elia, that “he ranks amongst writers
whose works are destined to be for ever unpopular, and yet for ever interesting;
interesting, moreover, by means of those very qualities which guarantee their
non-popularity” (De
Quincey’s Works, 1st edit., Leaders in Literature, p. 109). If De Quincey be right, is
popularity worth having?
My life, during the period of my London editorship was one of very
pleasurable excitement. My
Ch. VII.] | THE FIRST EPOCH. | 273 |
solitary musings, my morbid fancies, had
reached their term. I had ample occupation—perhaps too much for tranquil thought. We had a
branch-office of our newspaper at Aylesbury, where the last page of “The Bucks Gazette” was printed, whilst three pages were
supplied by the printed sheets of “The Windsor
Express.” To despatch these sheets by a special conveyance thirty miles,
so as to be in time for the due appearance of the secondary paper, required careful
organization. This I had to accomplish on a Saturday morning, leaving my Windsor paper in a
state fit for publication. To ride up to London, or to mount one of the long coaches in the
afternoon, so as to be at the “Guardian” office for new work, was my next exertion. The day had perhaps
brought forth fresh aspects of political affairs. Often, before writing my leader, have I
discussed the great topics of the hour with two valued friends, whose opinions were not
entirely in accordance with my own. Mounted upon stools at my editorial desk, have
Matthew Davenport Hill and John Steer (who was my sub-editor), argued with me about
the delinquencies and short-comings of the Government, the necessity of Parliamentary
Reform, the degradation of England in all matters of foreign policy. My work done, we have
gladly foregone all disputation, to place ourselves under the genial presidency of the
worthy immortalized by Tennyson—“the waiter at
the Cock.” In the lapse of time we gradually grew nearer in our opinions. The
world was changing. The miserable convulsion on the subject of the Queen was terminated by her death. Lord Castlereagh was no more, carrying with him a good deal of undeserved
obloquy. Canning was come back to 274 | PASSAGES OF A WORKING LIFE: | [Ch. VII. |
power. He was to inaugurate a new era of liberty for the nations. I had access to one
who was at that time Canning’s political adherent upon the
subject of Catholic Emancipation, and that of the pretensions of a Congress to decide upon
the destinies of Europe. Mr. John Wilson Croker was
always ready to give me his opinions, as I believed, honestly. They were to a great extent
liberal, as liberalism was then understood by those opposed to extreme views. He was always
glad to gossip upon subjects of literature, and he earnestly counselled me to settle in
London as a publisher. I am bound to say, advisedly, that I think his character has been
misrepresented; and that the “Rigby” of
“Coningsby” is an
ebullition of personal spite.
My occupation as the editor of a literary paper necessarily made me somewhat
familiar with the aspects of the Publishing Trade of London. I gradually looked at the
great establishments and the small, somewhat more closely, through my vague desire to find
a place amongst them. There was a new world all before me “where to choose,”
not my “place of rest,” but my sphere of action. Let me glance back at my rough
survey of this terra incognita.
Paternoster Row, and the immediate neighbourhood of St. Paul’s
Churchyard and Ave-Maria Lane, were the principal seats of the wholesale book-trade. At the
beginning of the century, according to Mr. Britton,
“most of the tradesmen attended to their respective shops, and dwelt in the
upper part of their houses.” He had lived to see “the heads of many
of the large establishments visit their counting-houses only for a few hours in the
day, and leave
Ch. VII.] | THE FIRST EPOCH. | 275 |
the working part to junior partners, clerks, and
apprentices.” The greater number of city booksellers did not carry on the
business of publisher pur et simple. They were
factors of books for the London collectors; they were the agents of the country
booksellers; they almost all were shareholders of what were called Chapter Books, from the
business concerning them being conducted at the Chapter Coffee House. If we open a book of
fifty years ago, which had become a standard work in its frequent reprints, we find the
names of twelve or twenty or even more booksellers on the title-page. The copyright had
probably long expired. But these shareholders, who formed a Limited Liability Company (not
registered), were considered as the only legitimate dealers, and their editions the only
genuine ones. It was long before their monopoly was broken up by a few daring adventurers
who defied these banded hosts, and were ready to pounce upon an expired copyright before it
could be appropriated by the large and small potentates who had parcelled out the realms of
print, with absolute exclusiveness, in the good times before Innovation. Trade Sales, as
they were called, were frequent and general amongst the primitive race of booksellers; at
which sales these share-books were sold, amongst other wares, to the best bidders. The
company was not attracted by elegant banquets, such as those at which, in later times, I
have assisted as a guest and as a host. There was a plain dinner of substantial beef and
mutton, which the bookseller ordered at an adjacent tavern, directing what dishes should be
provided to meet the number of his expected guests. I have heard an illustrative anecdote—I
do not 276 | PASSAGES OF A WORKING LIFE: | [Ch. VII. |
vouch for its truth—of one of the respectable firm that lived
under the sign of the Bible and Crown. In the midst of family prayer he suddenly paused,
and exclaimed, “John, go and tell
Higgins to make another marrow-pudding.”
The “legitimate” trade had its code of “protection,”
on which it had reposed since the days of the Tonsons and Lintots. Its system of
associating many shareholders in the production and sale of an established work kept up its
price. The retailers were only allowed to purchase of the wholesale houses upon certain
conditions, which had the effect of making it difficult, if not impossible, for the private
purchaser to obtain a book under the sum advertised. No publisher had discovered that it
was to his interest that the profit of the middle-man should be small, so that a book
should be vended at the cheapest rate. The very notion of cheap books stank in the
nostrils, not only of the ancient magnates of the East, but of the new potentates of the
West. For a new work which involved the purchase of copyright, it was the established rule
that the wealthy few, to whom price was not a consideration, were alone to be depended upon
for the remuneration of the author and the first profit of the publisher. The proud quarto,
with a rivulet of text meandering through a wide plain of margin, was the
“decus et tutamen” of the Row and of Albemarle Street.*
Conduit Street now and then vied in this grandiosity; but more commonly sent forth legions
of octavos, translated from the French with a rapidity that was not very careful about
correctness or elegance
* The Albemarle Street of Mr.
Murray is still famous. The Conduit Street of Mr. Colburn is no longer renowned. |
Ch. VII.] | THE FIRST EPOCH. | 277 |
—qualities which were not contemplated in the estimate of the literary
cost. These were the books whose cheapness was deceptive, like the books issued by the
Number-publishers. One of these successful tradesmen, who, although he became Lord Mayor,
was once “Thomas” the porter in an old
concern for the production of the dearest books in folio—such as we may still find amongst
the heir-looms of a humble family in some remote village—was never solicitous to buy an
author; his great object was to buy “a ground.” “A ground” was like
a milk-walk—there were a body of customers to be transferred to the new capitalist. He was
once tempted into the employment of original authorship. When his press one day stood still
for want of a sufficient supply of the commodity for which he had indiscreetly bargained,
he exclaimed, “Give me dead authors!—they never keep you waiting for
copy.”
The publishers of classical books were not numerous. Amongst the most
celebrated was Richard Priestley, who undertook many
reprints of Greek and Roman authors and ponderous lexicons. His career was not a successful
one. In 1830, I occupied for the summer a cottage near Hampstead. My landlord, who had
become rich by a bequest, had been a sheriff’s officer. “Did you know poor
Dick Priestley?” he said. “He was a good
fellow. I had him often under my lock. We were great friends; and after I left my
calling I lent him a couple of thousand.” Was a sentimental friendship ever
before or since formed under circumstances so unromantic? Amongst the new class of
publishers there were several whose republications of standard works were as beautiful as
they were cheap. The names of Major and
278 | PASSAGES OF A WORKING LIFE: | [Ch. VII. |
Pickering are still deservedly in repute. But till
Constable started his “Miscellany,”
in 1827, no one had thought it possible that an original work could be produced in the
first instance at the price of the humblest reprint. His three-and-sixpenny volumes, and
his grand talk of “a million of buyers,” made the publishing world of
London believe that the mighty autocrat of Edinburgh literature had gone
“daft.” And so the Row sneered, and persevered in its old system of
fourteen-shilling octavos and two-guinea quartos. The Circulating Library was scarcely then
an institution to be depended upon for the purchase of a large impression, even of the most
popular Novels. Travels and Memoirs rarely then found a place on the shelves of which
fiction had long claimed the exclusive occupation. There were Book-Clubs, whose members
aspired to be patrons of a more solid literature; but they were far from universal. All
circumstances considered, it was extremely difficult for one like myself, very imperfectly
acquainted with the Trade, to form a correct estimate of what number of a new book he might
venture to print. Caution and common-sense might save inexperience from ridiculous
ventures, such as had ruined many who fancied there were no blanks in that tempting
lottery. I had known an unhappy man, who had come into the possession of a considerable
fortune, rush into the wildest dealings with literary schemers, who regarded him as a whale
cast upon the shore, to be cut up as speedily as possible. Poor fellow! he was always ready
to buy—he would even buy a title-page, the more absurd the more attractive. “Mumbo
Jumbo,” in the egg, was held by him cheap at a few hundreds. I looked upon his fate
as a warning. But yet I could Ch. VII.] | THE FIRST EPOCH. | 279 |
not resist the temptation to enter upon
a career of usefulness, in which there was reputation, and possible wealth, to be won by
diligence and integrity. Not to be embarrassed with conflicting occupations, I sold my pet
“Guardian” at the end of 1822,
and in the season of 1823 I had taken my position in Pall Mall East.
Robert Baldwin (1780-1858)
London bookseller apprenticed in 1794; he entered into partnership with Charles Cradock
and William Joy, and was publisher of the
London Magazine.
William Blackwood (1776-1834)
Edinburgh bookseller; he began business 1804 and for a time was John Murray's Scottish
agent. He launched
Blackwood's Magazine in 1817.
John Britton (1771-1857)
English autodidact, antiquary, and topographer; he published
Beauties
of Wiltshire (1801) and
Autobiography, 2 vols (1850,
1857).
George Buchanan (1506-1582)
Scottish historian, scholar, and respected Latin poet; he was tutor to James VI. and
author of
Rerum Scoticarum historia (1582).
Thomas Campbell (1777-1844)
Scottish poet and man of letters; author of
The Pleasures of Hope
(1799),
Gertrude of Wyoming (1808) and lyric odes. He edited the
New Monthly Magazine (1821-30).
George Canning (1770-1827)
Tory statesman; he was foreign minister (1807-1809) and prime minister (1827); a
supporter of Greek independence and Catholic emancipation.
Queen Caroline of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel (1768-1821)
Married the Prince of Wales in 1795 and separated in 1796; her husband instituted
unsuccessful divorce proceedings in 1820 when she refused to surrender her rights as
queen.
Henry Colburn (1785-1855)
English publisher who began business about 1806; he co-founded the
New
Monthly Magazine in 1814 and was publisher of the
Literary
Gazette from 1817.
Samuel Taylor Coleridge (1772-1834)
English poet and philosopher who projected
Lyrical Ballads (1798)
with William Wordsworth; author of
Biographia Literaria (1817),
On the Constitution of the Church and State (1829) and other
works.
Archibald Constable (1774-1827)
Edinburgh bookseller who published the
Edinburgh Review and works
of Sir Walter Scott; he went bankrupt in 1826.
John Wilson Croker (1780-1857)
Secretary of the Admiralty (1810) and writer for the
Quarterly
Review; he edited an elaborate edition of Boswell's
Life of
Johnson (1831).
Sir Thomas Davies (1631 c.-1680)
London bookseller who purchased titles by John Milton and Samuel Butler; he was Lord
Mayor in 1676.
Thomas De Quincey (1785-1859)
English essayist and man of letters; he wrote for the
London
Magazine and
Blackwood's, and was author of
Confessions of an English Opium-Eater (1821).
Daniel Defoe (1660-1731)
English novelist and miscellaneous writer; author of
Robinson
Crusoe (1719),
Moll Flanders (1722) and
Roxanna (1724).
John Galt (1779-1839)
Scottish novelist who met Byron during the first journey to Greece and was afterwards his
biographer; author of
Annals of the Parish (1821).
James Augustus Hessey (1785-1870)
London publisher in partnership with John Taylor; they published the London Magazine from
1821 to 1825.
Matthew Davenport Hill (1792-1872)
English barrister, the brother of Sir Rowland Hill; he was MP for Hull (1833-35),
recorder of Birmingham (1839) and a reformer of criminal laws.
Thomas Hood (1799-1845)
English poet and humorist who wrote for the
London Magazine; he
published
Whims and Oddities (1826) and
Hood's
Magazine (1844-5).
John Hunt (1775-1848)
English printer and publisher, the elder brother of Leigh Hunt; he was the publisher of
The Examiner and
The Liberal, in
connection with which he was several times prosecuted for libel.
James Henry Leigh Hunt (1784-1859)
English poet, journalist, and man of letters; editor of
The
Examiner and
The Liberal; friend of Byron, Keats, and
Shelley.
Samuel Johnson (1709-1784)
English man of letters, among many other works he edited
A Dictionary
of the English Language (1755) and Shakespeare (1765), and wrote
Lives of the Poets (1779-81).
Charles Lamb [Elia] (1775-1834)
English essayist and boyhood friend of Coleridge at Christ's Hospital; author of
Essays of Elia published in the
London
Magazine (collected 1823, 1833) and other works.
Bernard Lintot (1675-1736)
London bookseller who published Alexander Pope and John Gay.
Edward Hawke Locker (1777-1849)
Secretary to the Royal Naval Hospital, Greenwich (1819); he was a painter, editor of
The Plain Englishman (1820-30) and a friend of Robert Southey and
Sir Walter Scott.
John Gibson Lockhart (1794-1854)
Editor of the
Quarterly Review (1825-1853); son-in-law of Walter
Scott and author of the
Life of Scott 5 vols (1838).
John Major (1782-1849)
English bookseller, poet, and publisher of reprints of standard works. He contributed
verse to
John Bull.
John Milton (1608-1674)
English poet and controversialist; author of
Comus (1634),
Lycidas (1638),
Areopagitica (1644),
Paradise Lost (1667), and other works.
John Murray II (1778-1843)
The second John Murray began the
Quarterly Review in 1809 and
published works by Scott, Byron, Austen, Crabbe, and other literary notables.
Sir Richard Phillips (1767-1840)
London bookseller, vegetarian, and political reformer; he published
The
Monthly Magazine, originally edited by John Aikin (1747-1822). John Wolcot was a
friend and neighbor.
William Pickering (1796-1854)
London literary publisher who issued the Aldine edition of the English poets (1830) and
published the
Gentleman's Magazine from 1834.
Richard Priestley (1771 c.-1852)
London bookseller who specialized in Greek and Roman classics; he died impoverished in
the Charterhouse.
William Pulteney, earl of Bath (1684-1764)
Whig MP; with Bolingbroke he was one of the leaders of the “Patriot” opposition to the
Walpole administration.
Edward Purdon [Ned Purdon] (1729-1767)
A schoolmate of Oliver Goldsmith, he was educated at Trinity College, Dublin before
becoming a writer in London; an epigram by Goldsmith made him a byeword for a
“bookseller's hack.”
John Hamilton Reynolds (1794-1852)
English poet, essayist, and friend of Keats; he wrote for
The
Champion (1815-17) and published
The Garden of Florence; and
other Poems (1821).
John Scott (1784-1821)
After Marischal College he worked as a journalist with Leigh Hunt, edited
The Champion (1814-1817), and edited the
London
Magazine (1820) until he was killed in the duel at Chalk Farm.
John Steer (d. 1837)
Educated at Lincoln's Inn, he was a barrister and contributor to the
Plain Englishman and sub-editor at the
Guardian.
John Taylor (1781-1864)
Publisher of the
London Magazine and poems of John Keats, and a
prolific writer in his own right.
Alfred Tennyson, first baron Tennyson (1809-1892)
English poet who succeeded William Wordsworth as Poet Laureate in 1850; he published
Poems, chiefly Lyrical (1830) and
Idylls of the
King (1859, 1869, 1872).
Jacob Tonson (1655-1736)
London bookseller and member of the Kit-Kat Club; the elder Tonson published Dryden; his
son, also Jacob Tonson (1682-1735), published Pope.
Robert Walpole, first earl of Orford (1676-1745)
English politician whose management of the financial crisis resulting from the South Sea
Bubble led to his commanding career the leader of the Whigs in Parliament (1721-42).
John Wilson [Christopher North] (1785-1854)
Scottish poet and Tory essayist, the chief writer for the “Noctes Ambrosianae” in
Blackwood's Magazine and professor of moral philosophy at Edinburgh
University (1820).
La Belle Assemblée. (1806-1837). A monthly women's magazine with fashion plates, published by John Bell.
The Black Dwarf. (1817-1824). A radical journal edited by Thomas Jonathan Wooler.
Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine. (1817-1980). Begun as the
Edinburgh Monthly Magazine,
Blackwood's assumed the name of its proprietor, William Blackwood after the sixth
number. Blackwood was the nominal editor until 1834.
The Champion. (1814-22). A Sunday London newspaper edited by John Scott (1784-1821); John Thelwall (1764-1834) was
proprietor and editor from 1818.
The Englishman. (1803-1834). A London weekly newspaper; the proprietor was William I. Clement (1821-34).
The European Magazine. 87 vols (1782-1825). A monthly literary miscellany founded by James Perry and edited by Stephen Jones and
Isaac Reed; when a new series (1825-26) failed, the
European was
incorporated into the
Monthly Magazine.
The Examiner. (1808-1881). Founded by John and Leigh Hunt, this weekly paper divided its attention between literary
matters and radical politics; William Hazlitt was among its regular contributors.
The Gentleman's Magazine. (1731-1905). A monthly literary miscellany founded by Edward Cave; edited by John Nichols 1778-1826,
and John Bowyer Nichols 1826-1833.
The Guardian. (1819-1825). A weekly Tory paper edited by Charles Knight from 1820-22.
John Bull. (1820-1892). A scurrilous Tory weekly newspaper edited by Theodore Hook.
The London Magazine. (1820-1829). Founded by John Scott as a monthly rival to
Blackwood's, the
London Magazine included among its contributors Charles Lamb, John Clare, Allan Cunningham,
Thomas De Quincey, and Thomas Hood.
The Monthly Magazine. (1796-1843). The original editor of this liberal-leaning periodical was John Aikin (1747-1822); later
editors included Sir Richard Phillips (1767-1840), the poet John Abraham Heraud
(1779-1887), and Benson Earle Hill (1795-45).
New Monthly Magazine. (1814-1884). Founded in reaction to the radically-inclined
Monthly Magazine,
the
New Monthly was managed under the proprietorship of Henry
Colburn from 1814 to 1845. It was edited by Thomas Campbell and Cyrus Redding from
1821-1830.
The News. (1805-1839). A weekly newspaper founded by John Hunt, with Leigh Hunt as its drama critic. The
News was later edited by John Scott.
The Quarterly Review. (1809-1967). Published by John Murray, the
Quarterly was instigated by Walter
Scott as a Tory rival to the
Edinburgh Review. It was edited by
William Gifford to 1824, and by John Gibson Lockhart from 1826 to 1853.
Alexander Pope (1688-1744)
The Dunciad. (London: A. Dodd, 1728). Pope's mock-heroic satire on the abuse of literature unfolded over time, appearing as
The Dunciad: an Heroic Poem in Three Books (1728),
The Dunciad Variorum (1729),
The New Dunciad (1742), and
The Dunciad in Four Books (1743). The original hero, Lewis
Theobald, was replaced by Colley Cibber in 1743.