Memoirs of the Life of Sir Walter Scott, Bart.
Chapter VI 1808-09
|
LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. |
195 |
CHAPTER VI.
QUARREL WITH MESSRS CONSTABLE AND
HUNTER—JOHN BALLANTYNE ESTABLISHED AS A
BOOKSELLER IN EDINBURGH—SCOTT’S LITERARY PROJECTS—THE EDINBURGH ANNUAL REGISTER, &C.—MEETING OF JAMES
BALLANTYNE AND JOHN
MURRAY—MURRAY’S VISIT TO ASHESTIEL—POLITICS—THE
PENINSULAR WAR—PROJECT OF THE QUARTERLY REVIEW—CORRESPONDENCE
WITH ELLIS, GIFFORD,
MORRITT, SOUTHEY, SHARPE,
&C., 1808—1809.
The reader does not need to be reminded that Scott at this time had business enough on his hand besides
combing the mane of Brown Adam, and twisting couples for Douglas and Percy. He was deep in Swift; and the Ballantyne press was groaning under a multitude of works, some of them
already mentioned, with almost all of which his hand as well as his head had something,
more or less, to do. But a serious change was about to take place in his relations with the
spirited publishing house which had hitherto been the most efficient supporters of that
press; and his letters begin to be much occupied with differences and disputes which,
uninteresting as the details would now be, must have cost him many anxious hours in the
apparently idle autumn of 1808. Mr Constable had
then for his partner Mr Alexander Gibson Hunter,
afterwards Laird of Blackness, to whose intemperate language, much more than to any part of
Constable’s own conduct, Scott ascribed
this un-
196 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
fortunate alienation; which, however, as well as most of my
friend’s subsequent misadventures, I am inclined to trace in no small degree to the
influence which a third person, hitherto unnamed, was about this time beginning to exercise
over the concerns of James Ballantyne.
John Ballantyne, a younger brother of Scott’s schoolfellow, had been originally bred to their
father’s trade of a merchant—(that is to say, a dealer in
everything from broadcloth to children’s tops)—at Kelso; but James’s rise in the world was not observed by him
without ambitious longings; for he too had a love, and he at least fancied that he had a
talent for literature. He left Kelso abruptly for the chances of the English metropolis.
After a short residence in London, where, among other things, he officiated for a few
months as clerk in a banking house, the continued intelligence of the printer’s
prosperity determined him to return to Scotland. Not finding any opening at the moment in
Edinburgh, he again tried the shop at Kelso; but his habits had not been improved by his
brief sojourn in London, and the business soon melted to nothing in his hands. His goods
were disposed of by auction for the benefit of his creditors—the paternal shop was finally
closed; and John again quitted his birthplace, under circumstances
which, as I shall show in the sequel, had left a deep and painful trace even upon that
volatile mind.
He was a quick, active, intrepid little fellow; and in society so very
lively and amusing, so full of fun and merriment, such a thoroughly light-hearted droll,
all-over quaintness and humorous mimicry; and, moreover, such a keen and skilful devotee to
all manner of field-sports, from fox-hunting to badger-baiting inclusive, that it was no
wonder he should have made a favourable impression on Scott, when he appeared in Edinburgh in this desti-
tute plight, and offered to assist his brother in the management
of a concern by which James’s comparatively
indolent habits were now very severely tried. The contrast between the two brothers was not
the least of the amusement; indeed that continued to amuse him to the last. The elder of
these is painted to the life in an early letter of Leyden’s, which, on the doctor’s death, he, though not (I
fancy) without wincing, permitted Scott to print; “Methinks I
see you with your confounded black beard, bull-neck, and upper lip turned up to your nose,
while one of your eyebrows is cocked perpendicularly, and the other forms pretty well the
base of a right angled triangle, opening your great gloating eyes, and crying—But, Leyden!!!”
James was a short, stout, well-made man, and would have been
considered a handsome one, but for these grotesque frowns, starts, and twistings of his
features, set off by a certain mock majesty of walk and gesture, which he had perhaps
contracted from his usual companions, the emperors and tyrants of the stage. His voice in
talk was grave and sonorous, and he sung well (theatrically well), in a fine rich bass.
John’s tone in singing was a sharp treble—in conversation
something between a croak and a squeak. Of his style of
story-telling it is sufficient to say that the late Charles
Matthews’s “old Scotch lady” was but an imperfect copy of
the original, which the inimitable comedian first heard in my presence from his lips. He
was shorter than James, but lean as a scarecrow, and he rather hopped
than walked: his features, too, were naturally good, and he twisted them about quite as
much, but in a very different fashion. The elder brother was a gourmand—the younger liked
his bottle and his bowl, as well as, like Johnny
Armstrong, “a hawk, a hound, and a fair woman.”
Scott used to call the one Aldiborontiphoscophornio, the other Rigdumfunnidos. They both 198 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
entertained him; they both
loved and revered him; and I believe would have shed their heart’s blood in his
service; but they both, as men of affairs, deeply injured him—and above all, the day that
brought John into pecuniary connexion with him was the blackest in his
calendar. A more reckless, thoughtless, improvident adventurer never rushed into the
serious responsibilities of business; but his cleverness, his vivacity, his unaffected
zeal, his gay fancy always seeing the light side of every thing, his imperturbable
good-humour and buoyant elasticity of spirits, made and kept him such a favourite, that I
believe Scott would have as soon ordered his dog to be hanged, as
harboured, in his darkest hour of perplexity, the least thought of discarding
“jocund Johnny.”
The great bookseller of Edinburgh was a man of calibre infinitely beyond
these Ballantynes. Though with a strong dash of the sanguine, without
which, indeed, there can be no great projector in any walk of life, Archibald Constable was one of the most sagacious persons
that ever followed his profession. A brother poet of Scott says to
him, a year or two before this time, “Our butteraceous friend at the Cross turns
out a deep drawwell;” and another eminent literator, still more closely
connected with Constable, had already, I believe, christened him
“The Crafty.” Indeed, his fair and very handsome
physiognomy carried a bland astuteness of expression, not to be mistaken by any who could
read the plainest of nature’s handwriting. He made no pretensions to
literature—though he was in fact a tolerable judge of it generally, and particularly well
skilled in the department of Scotch antiquities. He distrusted himself, however, in such
matters, being conscious that his early education had been very imperfect; and moreover, he
wisely considered the business of a critic as quite as much out of his “proper
line” as authorship itself.
But of
that “proper line,” and his own qualifications for it, his estimation was
ample; and—often as I may have smiled at the lofty serenity of his self-complacence—I
confess I now doubt whether he rated himself too highly as a master in the true science of
the bookseller. He had, indeed, in his mercantile character, one deep and fatal flaw—for he
hated accounts, and systematically refused, during the most vigorous years of his life, to
examine or sign a balance-sheet; but for casting a keen eye over the remotest indications
of popular taste for anticipating the chances of success and failure in any given variety
of adventure—for the planning and invention of his calling—he was not, in his own day at
least, surpassed; and among all his myriad of undertakings, I question if any one that
really originated with himself, and continued to be superintended by his own care, ever did
fail. He was as bold as far-sighted—and his disposition was as liberal as his views were
wide. Had he and Scott from the beginning trusted as thoroughly as
they understood each other; had there been no third parties to step in, flattering an
overweening vanity on the one hand into presumption, and on the other side spurring the
enterprise that wanted nothing but a bridle, I have no doubt their joint career might have
been one of unbroken prosperity. But the Ballantynes were jealous of
the superior mind, bearing, and authority of Constable: and though he
too had a liking for them both personally—esteemed James’s literary tact, and was far too much of a humourist not to be
very fond of the younger brother’s company—he could never away with the feeling that
they intervened unnecessarily, and left him but the shadow where he ought to have had the
substantial lion’s share of confidence. On his part, again, he was too proud a man to
give entire confidence where that was withheld from himself; and more espe-200 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
cially, I can well believe that a frankness of communication as to the
real amount of his capital and general engagements of business, which would have been the
reverse of painful to him in habitually confidential intercourse with
Scott, was out of the question where
Scott’s proposals and suggestions were to be met in
conference, not with his own manly simplicity, but the buckram pomposity of the one, or the
burlesque levity of the other of his plenipotentiaries.
The disputes in question seem to have begun very shortly after the
contract for the Life and Edition of Swift
had been completed; and we shall presently see reason to infer that Scott to a certain degree was influenced at the moment by a soreness
originating in the recent conduct of Mr
Jeffrey’s Journal—that great primary source of the wealth and
authority of the house of Constable. The then
comparatively little-known bookseller of London, who
was destined to be ultimately Constable’s most formidable rival
in more than one department of publishing, has told me, that when he read the article on Marmion, and another on
general politics, in the same number of the Edinburgh
Review, he said to himself—“Walter Scott has
feelings both as a gentleman and a Tory, which these people must now have wounded. The
alliance between him and the whole clique of the Edinburgh
Review, its proprietor included, is shaken;” and, as far at least
as the political part of the affair was concerned, John Murray’s
sagacity was not at fault. We have seen with what thankful alacrity he accepted a small
share in the adventure of Marmion—and with
what brilliant success that was crowned; nor is it wonderful that a young bookseller,
conscious of ample energies, should now have watched with eagerness the circumstances which
seemed not unlikely to place within his own reach a more intimate
connexion with the first great living author in whose works
he had ever had any direct interest. He forthwith took measures for improving and extending
his relations with James Ballantyne, through whom,
as he guessed, Scott could best be approached. His tenders of
employment for the Canongate press were such, that the apparent head of the firm proposed a
conference at Ferrybridge, in Yorkshire; and there Murray, after
detailing some of his own literary plans—particularly that already alluded to, of a Novelist’s Library—in his turn
sounded Ballantyne so far, as to resolve at once on pursuing his
journey into Scotland. Ballantyne had said enough to satisfy him that
the project of setting up a new publishing house in Edinburgh, in opposition to
Constable, was already all but matured; and he, on the instant,
proposed himself for its active co-operator in the metropolis.
Ballantyne proceeded to open his budget further, mentioning, among
other things, that the author of Marmion had “both
another Scotch poem and a Scotch novel on the stocks;” and had, moreover,
chalked out the design of an Edinburgh Annual
Register, to be conducted in opposition to the politics and criticism of
Constable’s Review. These tidings might have been enough to
make Murray proceed farther northwards; but there was a scheme of his
own which had for some time deeply occupied his mind, and the last article of this
communication determined him to embrace the opportunity of opening it in person at
Ashestiel. He arrived there about the middle of October. The 26th Number of the Edinburgh Review, containing Mr
Brougham’s celebrated article, entitled, “Don Cevallos, on the usurpation of Spain,” had
just been published; and one of the first things Scott mentioned in
conversation was, that he had so highly resented the tone of that essay, as to give orders
that his name 202 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
might be discontinued on the list of subscribers.*
Mr Murray could not have wished better auspices for the matter he
had come to open; and, shortly after his departure, Scott writes as
follows, to his prime political confidant:—
To George Ellis, Esq., Claremont.
“Ashestiel, Nov. 2d, 1808.
“We had, equally to our joy and surprise, a flying
visit from Heber, about three weeks ago.
He staid but three days but, between old stories and new, we made them very
merry in their passage. During his stay, John
Murray, the bookseller in Fleet Street, who has more real
knowledge of what concerns his business than any of his brethren—at least than
any of them that I know—came to canvass a most important plan, of which I am
now, in ‘dern privacie,’ to give you the outline. I had most
strongly recommended to our Lord Advocate† to think of some counter
measures against the Edinburgh
Review, which, politically speaking, is doing incalculable damage. I
do not mean this in a mere party view;—the present ministry are not all that I
could wish them—for (Canning excepted) I
doubt there is among them too much self-seeking, as it
was called in Cromwell’s’
time; and what is their misfortune, if not their fault, there is not among them
one in the decided situation of
* When the 26th Number appeared, Mr Scott wrote to Constable in these terms:
“The Edinburgh
Review had become such as to render it impossible for me
to continue a contributor to it.—Now, it is
such as I can no longer continue to receive or read it.”
The list of the then subscribers exhibits in an indignant dash of
Constable’s pen opposite Mr
Scott’s name, the word “Stopt!!!”’—Letter from Mr R. Cadell. † The Right Hon.
John Campbell Colquhoun, husband of “Scott’s
early friend, Mary Anne Erskine.
|
| THE EDINBURGH REVIEW, ETC.—1808. | 203 |
paramount authority,
both with respect to the others and to the Crown, which is, I think, necessary,
at least in difficult times, to produce promptitude, regularity, and efficiency
in measures of importance. But their political principles are sound English
principles, and, compared to the greedy and inefficient horde which preceded
them, they are angels of light and of 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 commixtures melt.’
|
Were this only to effect a change of hands, I should expect it with more
indifference; but I fear a change of principles is designed. The Edinburgh Review tells you coolly, ‘We foresee
a speedy revolution in this country as well as
Mr Cobbett;’ and, to say the truth, by degrading
the person of the Sovereign—exalting the power of the French armies, and the
wisdom of their counsels—holding forth that peace (which they allow can only be
purchased by the humiliating prostration of our honour) is indispensable to the
very existence of this country—I think, that for these two years past, they
have done their utmost to hasten the accomplishment of their own prophecy. Of
this work 9000 copies are printed quarterly, and no genteel family can pretend
to be without it, because, independent of its politics, it gives the only
valuable literary criticism which can be met with. Consider, of the numbers who
read this work, how many are there likely to separate the literature from the
politics—how many youths are there upon whose minds the flashy and bold
character of the work is likely to make an indelible impression; and think what
the consequence is likely to be.
“Now, I think there is balm in Gilead for all this;
and
204 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
that the cure lies in instituting such a
Review in London as should be
conducted totally independent of bookselling influence, on a plan as liberal as
that of the
Edinburgh, its
literature as well supported, and its principles English and constitutional.
Accordingly, I have been given to understand that
Mr William Gifford is willing to become the conductor of such a
work, and I have written to him, at the Lord Advocate’s desire, a very
voluminous letter on the subject. Now, should this plan succeed, you must hang
your birding-piece on its hooks, take down your old Anti-jacobin armour, and
‘remember your swashing blow.’ It is not that I think
this projected Review ought to be exclusively or principally political—this
would, in my opinion, absolutely counteract its purpose, which I think should
be to offer to those who love their country, and to those whom we would wish to
love it, a periodical work of criticism conducted with equal talent, but upon
sounder principle than that which has gained so high a station in the world of
letters. Is not this very possible? In point of learning, you Englishmen have
ten times our scholarship; and as for talent and genius, ‘Are not
Abana and Pharpar, 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 of blue-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 of expectation—an excellent
plot, excellent friends!’
“Heber’s
fear was, lest we should fail in procuring regular steady contributors; but I
know so much of the interior discipline of reviewing, as to have no
apprehension of that. Provided we are once set a-going by a few dashing
numbers, there would be no fear of enlisting regular contributors; but the
amateurs must bestir them-
| THE QUARTERLY REVIEW PROJECTED—1808. | 205 |
selves in the first instance.
From Government we should be entitled to expect confidential communication as
to points of fact (so far as fit to be made public), in our political
disquisitions. With this advantage, our good cause and St George to boot, we may at least divide the field with our
formidable competitors, who, after all, are much better at cutting than
parrying, and whom uninterrupted triumph has as much unfitted for resisting a
serious attack, as it has done
Buonaparte
for the Spanish war.
Jeffrey is, to be
sure, a man of most uncommon versatility of talent, but what then?
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. I mentioned it to
Robert Dundas, who was here with his lady for two days on a
pilgrimage to Melrose, and he approved highly of it. Though no literary man, he
is judicious,
clair-voyant, and
uncommonly sound-headed, like his father,
Lord
Melville. With the exceptions I have mentioned, the thing
continues a secret.
“I am truly happy you think well of the Spanish
business: they have begun in a truly manly and rounded manner, and barring
internal dissension, are, I think, very likely to make their part good.
Buonaparte’s army has come to
assume such a very motley description as gives good hope of its crumbling down
on the frost of adversity setting in. The Germans and Italians have deserted
him in troops, and I greatly doubt his being able to assemble a very huge force
at the foot of the Pyrenees, unless he trusts that the terror of his name will
be sufficient to keep Germany in subjugation, and Austria in awe. The finances
of your old Russian friends
206 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
are said to be ruined out and
out; such is the account we have from Leith.
“Enough of this talk. Ever yours,
The readiness with which Mr Ellis
entered into the scheme thus introduced to his notice, encouraged Scott to write still more fully; indeed, I might fill half a volume with
the correspondence now before me concerning the gradual organization, and ultimately
successful establishment of the Quarterly
Review. But my only object is to illustrate the liberality and sagacity of
Scott’s views on such a subject, and the characteristic
mixture of strong and playful language in which he developed them; and I conceive that this
end will be sufficiently accomplished, by extracting two more letters of this bulky series.
Already, as we have seen, before opening the matter even to Ellis, he
had been requested to communicate his sentiments to the proposed editor of the work, and he
had done so in these terms:—
To William Gifford, Esq. London.
“Edinburgh, October 25, 1808.
“Sir,
“By a letter from the Lord Advocate of Scotland, in
consequence of a communication between his Lordship and Mr Canning on the subject of a new Review to be attempted in London, I
have the pleasure to understand that you have consented to become the editor, a
point which, in my opinion, goes no small way to ensure success to the
undertaking. In offering a few observations upon the details of such a plan, I
only obey the commands of our distinguished friends, without having the vanity
to hope that I can point out any thing which was not likely to have at once
occurred to a person of Mr
| LETTER TO GIFFORD—OCT. 1808. | 207 |
Gifford’s literary experience and
eminence. I shall, however, beg permission to offer you my sentiments, in the
miscellaneous way in which they occur to me. The extensive reputation and
circulation of the
Edinburgh
Review is chiefly owing to two circumstances: First, that it is
entirely uninfluenced by the booksellers, who have contrived to make most of
the other Reviews merely advertising sheets to puff off their own publications;
and, secondly, the very handsome recompense which the editor not only holds
forth to his regular assistants, but actually forces upon those whose
circumstances and rank make it a matter of total indifference to them. The
editor, to my knowledge, makes a point of every contributor receiving this
bonus, saying, that
Czar Peter, when working
in the trenches, received pay as a common soldier. This general rule removes
all scruples of delicacy, and fixes in his service a number of persons who
might otherwise have felt shy in taking the price of their labours, and even
the more so because it was an object of convenience to them. There are many
young men of talent and enterprise who are extremely glad of a handsome apology
to work for fifteen or twenty guineas, although they would not willingly be
considered as hired reviewers. From this I deduce two points of doctrine:
first, that the work must be considered as independent of all bookselling
influence; secondly, that the labours of the contributors must be regularly and
handsomely recompensed, and that it must be a rule that each one shall accept
of the price of his labour.
John Murray
of Fleet Street, a young bookseller of capital and enterprise, and with more
good sense and propriety of sentiment than fall to the share of most of the
trade, made me a visit at Ashestiel a few weeks ago, and as I found he had had
some communication with you upon the subject, I did not hesitate to communicate
my sentiments to him on
208 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
these and some other points of
the plan, and I thought his ideas were most liberal and satisfactory.
“The office of the editor is of such importance, that
had you not been pleased to undertake it, I fear the plan would have fallen
wholly to the ground. The full power of control must, of course, be vested in
the editor for selecting, curtailing, and correcting the contributions to the
Review. But this is not all; for, as he is the person immediately responsible
to the bookseller that the work (amounting to a certain number of pages, more
or less) shall be before the public at a certain time, it will be the
editor’s duty to consider in due time the articles of which each number
ought to consist, and to take measures for procuring them from the persons best
qualified to write upon such and such subjects. But this is sometimes so
troublesome, that I foresee with pleasure you will be soon obliged to abandon
your resolution of writing nothing yourself. At the same time, if you will
accept of my services as a sort of jackal or lion’s provider, I will do
all in my power to assist in 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 by which 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 the criticisms relate; and
as such are often of stupifying mediocrity, he renders them palatable by
throwing in a handful of spice—namely, any lively paragraph or entertaining
illustration that occurs to him in reading them over. By this sort of
veneering, he converts, without loss of time, or hinderance of business,
articles which, in their original state, might hang in the market, into such
goods as are not likely to disgrace those among which they are placed. This
seems to be
| LETTER TO GIFFORD—OCT. 1808. | 209 |
a point in
which an editor’s assistance is of the last consequence, for those who
possess the knowledge necessary to review books of research or abstruse
disquisition, are very often unable to put the criticism into a readable, much
more a pleasant and captivating form; and as their science cannot be attained
‘for the nonce,’ the only remedy is to supply their deficiencies,
and give their lucubrations a more popular turn.
“There is one opportunity possessed by you in a
particular degree—that of access to the best sources of political information.
It would not, certainly, be advisable that the work should assume, especially
at the outset, a professed political character. On the contrary, the articles
on science and miscellaneous literature ought to be of such a quality as might
fairly challenge competition with the best of our contemporaries. But as the
real reason of instituting the publication is the disgusting and deleterious
doctrine with which the most popular of our Reviews disgraces its pages, it is
essential to consider how this warfare should be managed. On this ground, I
hope it is not too much to expect from those who have the power of assisting
us, that they should on topics of great national interest furnish the
reviewers, through the medium of their editor, with accurate views of points of
fact, so far as they are fit to be made public. This is the most delicate, and
yet most essential part of our scheme. On the one hand, it is certainly not to
be understood that we are to be held down to advocate upon all occasions the
cause of administration. Such a dereliction of independence would render us
entirely useless for the purpose we mean to serve. On the other hand, nothing
will render the work more interesting than the public learning, not from any
vaunt of ours, but from their own observation, that we have access to early and
accurate information in point of fact. The Edinburgh
210 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
Review has profited much by the pains which the
Opposition party have taken to possess the writers of all the information they
could give them on public matters. Let me repeat that you, my dear sir, from
enjoying the confidence of
Mr Canning
and other persons in power, may easily obtain the confidential information
necessary to give credit to the work, and communicate it to such as you may
think proper to employ in laying it before the public.
“Concerning the mode and time of publication, I think
you will be of opinion that monthly, in the present dearth of good subjects of
Review, would be too often, and that a quarterly publication would both give
you less trouble, and be amply sufficient for discussing all that is likely to
be worth discussion. The name to be assumed is of some consequence, though any
one of little pretension will do. We might, for example, revive the
‘English Review,’
which was the name of Gilbert
Stewart’s. Regular correspondents ought to be sought
after, but I should be little afraid of finding such, were the reputation of
the Review once decidedly established by three or four numbers of the very
first order. As it would be essential to come on the public by surprise, that
no unreasonable expectation or artificial misrepresentation might prejudice its
success, the authors employed in the first number ought to be few and of the
first rate. The choosing of subjects would also be a matter of anxious
consideration: for example, a good and distinct essay on Spanish affairs would
be sufficient to give a character to the work. The lucubrations of the Edinburgh Review, on that subject,
have done the work great injury with the public, and I am convinced that of the
many thousands of copies now distributed of each Number, the quantity might be
reduced one-half at least, by any work appearing, which, with the same
liter-
| LETTER TO GIFFORD—OCT. 1808. | 211 |
ary talent and
independent character, should speak a political language more familiar to the
British ear than that of subjugation to France. At the same time, as I before
hinted, it will be necessary to maintain the respect of the public by impartial
disquisition; and I would not have it said, as may usually be predicated of
other Reviews, that the sentiments of the critic were less determined by the
value of the work than by the purpose it was written to serve. If a weak
brother will unadvisedly put forth his hand to support even the ark of the
constitution, I would expose his arguments, though I might approve of his
intention and of his conclusions. I should think an open and express
declaration of political tenets, or of opposition to works of a contrary
tendency, ought for the same reason to be avoided. I think, from the little
observation I have made, that the Whigs suffer most deeply from cool sarcastic
reasoning and occasional ridicule. Having long had a sort of command of the
press, from the neglect of all literary assistance on the part of those who
thought their good cause should fight its own battle, they are apt to feel with
great acuteness any assault in that quarter; and having been long accustomed to
push, have in some degree lost the power to parry. It will not, therefore, be
long before they make some violent retort, and I should not be surprised if it
were to come through the Edinburgh Review. We might
then come into close combat with a much better grace than if we had thrown down
a formal defiance. I am, therefore, for going into a state of hostility without
any formal declaration of war. Let our forces for a number or two consist of
volunteers and amateurs, and when we have acquired some reputation, we shall
soon levy and discipline forces of the line.
“After all, the matter is become very serious,—eight
or nine thousand copies of the Edinburgh
Review are
212 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
regularly distributed, merely
because there is no other respectable and independent publication of the kind.
In this city, where there is not one Whig out of twenty men who read the work,
many hundreds are sold; and how long the generality of readers will continue to
dislike politics, so artfully mingled with information and amusement, is worthy
of deep consideration. But it is not yet too late to stand in the breach; the
first number ought, if possible, to be out in January, and if it can burst
among them like a bomb, without previous notice, the effect will be more
striking. Of those who might be intrusted in the first instance, you are a much
better judge than I am. I think I can command the assistance of a friend or two
here, particularly
William Erskine, the
Lord Advocate’s brother-in-law and my most intimate friend. In London you
have
Malthus,
George Ellis,
the Roses,
cum pluribus aliis.
Richard Heber was with me when
Murray came to my farm, and knowing his zeal
for the good cause, I let him into our counsels. In
Mr Frere we have the hopes of a potent ally. The
Rev. Reginald Heber would be an excellent
coadjutor, and when I come to town I will sound
Matthias. As strict secrecy would of course be observed, the
diffidence of many might be overcome;—for scholars you can be at no loss while
Oxford stands where it did,—and I think there will be no deficiency in the
scientific articles.
“Once more I have to apologize for intruding on you
this hasty, and therefore long, and probably confused letter; I trust your
goodness will excuse my expressing any apology for submitting to your better
judgment my sentiments on a plan of such consequence. I expect to be called to
London early in the winter, perhaps next month. If you see Murray, as I suppose you will, I presume you
will communicate to him such of my sentiments as have the good fortune to
coincide with
| LETTER TO ELLIS—NOV. 1808. | 213 |
yours. Among
the works in the first Number,
Fox’s history,
Grattan’s
speeches, a notable subject for a quizzing article, and any tract or pamphlet
that will give an opportunity to treat of the Spanish affairs, would be
desirable subjects of criticism. I am, with great respect, sir, your most
obedient servant,
On the 18th of November, Scott enclosed to Mr
Ellis “the rough scroll” (that now transcribed) of
his letter to Mr Gifford; “this
being,” he says, “one of the very few epistles of which
I thought it will be as well to retain a copy.” He then proceeds
as follows: “Supposing you to have read said scroll, you must know
further, that it has been received in a most favourable manner by Mr
Gifford, who approves of its contents in all respects, and that
Mr Canning has looked it over, and
promised such aid as is therein required. I therefore wish you to be apprised
fully of what could hardly be made the subject of writing, unless in all the
confidence of friendship. Let me touch a string of much delicacy—the political
character of the Review. It
appears to me that this should be of a liberal and enlarged nature, resting
upon principles—indulgent and conciliatory as far as possible upon mere party
questions—but stern in detecting and exposing all attempts to sap our
constitutional fabric. Religion is another slippery station; here also I would
endeavour to be as impartial as the subject will admit of. This character of
impartiality, as well as the maintenance of a high reputation in literature, is
of as great consequence to such of our friends as are in the Ministry, as our
more direct efforts in their favour; for these will only be successful in
proportion to the influence we shall acquire by an extensive circulation; to
procure which, the former qualities will be essen-
214 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
tially
necessary. Now,
entre nous, will not
our editor be occasionally a little warm and pepperish?—essential qualities in
themselves, but which should not quite constitute the leading character of such
a publication. This is worthy of a
memento.
“As our start is of such immense consequence,
don’t you think Mr Canning, though
unquestionably our Atlas, might for a day
find a Hercules on whom to devolve the
burthen of the globe, while he writes us a review? I know what an audacious
request this is; but suppose he should, as great statesmen sometimes do, take a
political fit of the gout, and absent himself from a large ministerial dinner,
which might give it him in good earnest,—dine at three on a chicken and pint of
wine,—and lay the foundation at least of one good article? Let us but once get
afloat, and our labour is not worth talking of; but, till then, all hands must
work hard.
“Is it necessary to say that I agree entirely with
you in the mode of treating even delinquents? The truth is, there is policy, as
well as morality, in keeping our swords clear as well as sharp, and not
forgetting the gentlemen in the critics. The public appetite 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 every thing that reached
even mediocrity. The Edinburgh folks squeezed into their sauce plenty of acid,
and were popular from novelty as well as from merit. The minor Reviews and
other periodical publications, have outrèd the matter still farther, and given us all
abuse, and no talent. But by the time the language of vituperative criticism
becomes general (which is now pretty nearly the case) it affects the tympanum
of the public ear no more than rogue or rascal
| LETTER TO ELLIS—NOV. 1808. | 215 |
from the cage of a parrot, or
blood-and-wounds from a horse-barrack. This, therefore, we have to trust to,
that decent, lively, and reflecting criticism, teaching men not to abuse books
only, but to read and to judge them, will have the effect of novelty upon a
public wearied with universal efforts at blackguard and indiscriminating
satire. I have a long and very sensible letter from
John Murray the bookseller, in which he touches upon this point
very neatly. By the by, little
Weber may
be very useful upon antiquarian subjects, in the way of collecting information
and making remarks; only, you or I must rewrite his lucubrations. I use him
often as a pair of eyes in consulting books and collating, and as a pair of
hands in making extracts.
Constable, the
great Edinburgh editor, has offended me excessively by tyrannizing over this
poor Teutcher, and being rather rude when I interfered. It is a chance but I
may teach him that he should not kick down the scaffolding before his house is
quite built. Another bomb is about to break on him besides the Review. This is
an
Edinburgh Annual Register, to
be conducted under the auspices of
James
Ballantyne, who is himself no despicable composer, and has
secured excellent assistance. I cannot help him, of course, very far, but I
will certainly lend him a lift as an adviser. I want all my friends to befriend
this work, and will send you a
prospectus when it is
published. It will be
valde
anti-Foxite. This is a secret for the present.
“For heaven’s sake do not fail to hold a
meeting as soon as you can. Gifford will
be admirable at service, but will require, or I mistake him much, both a spur
and a bridle—a spur on account of habits of literary indolence induced by weak
health—and a bridle because, having renounced in some degree general society,
he cannot be supposed to have the habitual and instinctive feeling ena-
216 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
bling him to judge at once and decidedly on the mode of
letting his shafts fly down the breeze of popular opinion. But he has worth,
wit, learning, and extensive information; is the friend of our friends in
power, and can easily correspond with them; is in no clanger of having private
quarrels fixed on him for public criticism; nor very likely to be embarrassed
by being thrown into action in public life alongside of the very people he has
reviewed, and probably offended. All this is of the last importance to the
discharge of his arduous duty. It would be cruel to add a word to this
merciless epistle, excepting love to
Mrs
Ellis and all friends.
Leyden, by the by, is triumphant at Calcutta—a
Judge, of all things!—and making money! He has
flourished like a green bay tree under the auspices of
Lord Minto, his countryman. Ever yours,
Among others whom Scott endeavoured to
enlist in the service of the new Review was his brother Thomas, who on the breaking up of his affairs in Edinburgh, had retired to
the Isle of Man, and who shortly afterwards obtained the office in which he died, that of
paymaster to the 70th regiment. The poet had a high opinion of his brother’s literary
talents, and thought that his knowledge of our ancient dramatists, and his vein of comic
narration, might render him a very useful recruit. He thus communicates his views to
Thomas Scott, on the 19th November, and, as might be expected, the
communication is fuller and franker than any other on the subject.
To Thomas Scott, Esq., Douglas, Isle of Man.
“Owing to certain pressing business I have not
| LETTER TO THOMAS SCOTT—NOV. 1808. | 217 |
yet had time to
complete my collection of
Shadwell* for
you, though it is now nearly ready.—I wish you to have all the originals to
collate with the edition in 8vo. But I have a more pressing employment for your
pen, and to which I think it particularly suited. You are to be informed, but
under the seal of the strictest secrecy, that a plot has been long hatching by
the gentlemen who were active in the
Anti-jacobin paper, to countermine the
Edinburgh Review, by establishing one which
should display similar talent and independence with a better strain of
politics. The management of this work was much pressed upon me;† but
though great prospects of emolument were held out, I declined so arduous a
task, and it has devolved upon
Mr
Gifford, author of the
Baviad, with whose wit and learning you are
well acquainted. He made it a stipulation, however, that I should give all the
assistance in my power, especially at the commencement; to which I am, for many
reasons, nothing loth. Now, as I know no one who possesses more power of humour
or perception of the ridiculous than yourself, I think your leisure hours might
be most pleasantly passed in this way. Novels, light poetry, and quizzical
books of all kinds might be sent you by the packet; you glide back your reviews
in the same way, and touch, upon the publication of the number (quarterly), ten
guineas per printed sheet of sixteen pages. If you are shy of communicating
directly with Gifford, you may, for some time at least,
send your com-
* Mr T. Scott
had meditated an edition of Shadwell’s plays,—which, by the way, his brother
considered as by no means meriting the utter neglect into which they
have fallen, chiefly in consequence of Dryden’s satire. † This circumstance was not revealed to
Mr Murray. I presume,
therefore, the invitation to Scott must have
proceeded from Mr Canning. |
218 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
munications through me, and I will revise them. We want
the matter to be a
profound secret till the first number
is out. If you agree to try your skill I will send you a novel or two. You must
understand, as Gadshill tells the
Chamberlain, that you are to be leagued with ‘Trojans that thou
dreamest not of, the which for sport sake are content to do the profession
some grace;’ and thus far I assure you that, if by paying
attention to your style and subject you can distinguish yourself creditably, it
may prove a means of finding you powerful friends were any thing opening in
your island.
Constable, or rather that
Bear his partner, has behaved to me
of late not very civilly, and I owe
Jeffrey a flap with a fox-tail on account of his
review of Marmion, and thus
doth the whirligig of time bring about my revenges. The late articles on Spain
have given general disgust, and many have given up the Edinburgh Review on account of them.
“My mother holds out very well, and talks of writing
by this packet. Her cask of herrings, as well as ours, red and white, have
arrived safe, and prove most excellent. We have been both dining and supping
upon them with great gusto, and are much obliged by your kindness in
remembering us. Yours affectionately,
W. S.”
I suspect, notwithstanding the opinion to the contrary expressed in the
following extract, that the preparations for the new journal did not long escape the notice
of either the editor or the publishers of the Edinburgh Review. On receiving the celebrated
Declaration of Westminster on the subject of the Spanish war, which bears date the 15th
December, 1808, Scott says to Ellis—“I cannot help writing a few lines to
congratulate you on the royal declaration. I suspect by this time the author
| RUPTURE WITH CONSTABLE, ETC. | 219 |
is at Claremont,* for, if I mistake
not egregiously, this spirited composition, as we say in Scotland, fathers itself in the
manliness of its style. It has appeared, too, at a most fortunate time, when neither friend
nor foe can impute it to temporary motives. Tell Mr
Canning that the old women of Scotland will defend the country with their
distaffs, rather than that troops enough be not sent to make good so noble a pledge. Were
the thousands that have mouldered away in petty conquests or Liliputian expeditions united
to those we now have in that country, what a band would Moore have under him! . . . . . . Jeffrey has offered
terms of pacification, engaging that no party politics should again appear in his Review. I
told him I thought it was now too late, and reminded him that I had often pointed out to
him the consequences of letting his work become a party tool. He said ‘he did not
care for the consequences—there were but four men he feared as opponents.’—‘Who
were these?’—‘Yourself for one.’—‘Certainly you pay me a great
compliment; depend upon it I will endeavour to deserve it.’—‘Why, you would not
join against me?’—‘Yes I would, if I saw a proper opportunity: not against you
personally, but against your politics.’—‘You are privileged to be
violent.’—‘I don’t ask any privilege for undue violence. But who are your
other foemen?’—‘George Ellis and
Southey.’ The fourth he did not name. All
this was in great good-humour; and next day I had a very affecting note from him, in answer
to an invitation to dinner. He has no suspicion of the Review whatever; but I thought I
could not handsomely suffer him to infer that I would be influenced * Scott’s friend
had mentioned that he expected a visit from Mr
Canning, at Claremont, in Surrey; which beautiful seat continued in
the possession of the Ellis family, until it was purchased by
the crown, on the marriage of the Princess Charlotte of
Wales, in 1816. |
220 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
by those private feelings respecting him, which, on more than one
occasion, he has laid aside when I was personally concerned.”
As to Messrs Constable and Co,, it
is not to be supposed that the rumours of the rival journal would tend to soothe those
disagreeable feelings between them and Scott, of which I
can trace the existence several months beyond the date of Mr
Murray’s arrival at Ashestiel. Something seems to have occurred before
the end of 1808 which induced Scott to suspect that, among other
sources of uneasiness had been a repentant grudge in the minds of those booksellers as to
their bargain about the new edition of Swift;
and on the 2d of January, 1809, I find him requesting, that if, on reflection, they thought
they had hastily committed themselves, the deed might be forthwith cancelled. On the 11th
of the same month, Messrs Constable reply as follows:—
To Walter Scott, Esq.
Sir,
“We are anxious to assure you that we feel no
dissatisfaction at any part of our bargain about Swift. Viewing it as a safe and respectable
speculation, we should be very sorry to agree to your relinquishing the
undertaking, and indeed rely with confidence on its proceeding as originally
arranged. We regret that you have not been more willing to overlook the
unguarded expression of our Mr Hunter
about which you complain. We are very much concerned that any circumstance
should have occurred that should thus interrupt our friendly intercourse; but
as we are not willing to believe that we have done any thing which should
prevent our being again friends, we may at least be permitted to express a hope
that matters may hereafter be restored to their old footing between us, when
the misrepresentations of interested
| RUPTURE WITH CONSTABLE. | 221 |
persons may cease to be remembered. At any
rate, you will always find us, what we trust we have ever been, Sir, your
faithful servants,
Scott answers:
To Messrs Constable and Co.
“Edinburgh, 12th January, 1809.
“Gentlemen,
“To resume, for the last time, the disagreeable
subject of our difference, I must remind you of what I told Mr Constable personally, that no single
unguarded expression, much less the misrepresentation of any person whatever,
would have influenced me to quarrel with any of my friends. But if Mr Hunter will take the trouble to recollect
the general opinion he has expressed of my undertakings, and of my ability to
execute them, upon many occasions during the last five months, and his whole
conduct in the bargain about Swift, I think he ought to be the last to wish his interest
compromised on my account. I am only happy the breach has taken place before
there was any real loss to complain of, for although I have had my share of
popularity, I cannot expect it to be more lasting than that of those who have
lost it after deserving it much better.
“In the present circumstances, I have only a parting
favour to request of your house, which is, that the portrait for which I sat to
Raeburn shall be considered as done
at my debit, and for myself. It shall be of course forthcoming for the
fulfilment of any engagement you may have made about engraving, if such exists,
Sadler will now be soon out,
when we will have a settlement of our accounts. I am, gentlemen, your obedient
servant,
222 |
LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. |
|
Mr Constable declined, in very handsome terms, to
give up the picture. But for the present the breach was complete. Among other negotiations
which Scott had patronised twelve months before, was one
concerning the publication of Miss Seward’s Poems. On the 19th of March, 1809, he writes as follows to that
lady:—“Constable, like many other folks who learn to
undervalue the means by which they have risen, has behaved, or rather suffered his
partner to behave, very uncivilly towards me. But they may both live to know that they
should not have kicked down the ladder till they were sure of their footing. The very
last time I spoke to him on business was about your poems, which he promised faithfully
to write about. I understood him to decline your terms, in which I think he acted
wrong; but I had neither influence to change his opinion, nor inclination to interfere
with his resolution. He is a very enterprising, and, I believe, a thoroughly honest
man, but his vanity in some cases overpowers his discretion.”
One word as to the harsh language in which Constable’s then partner is mentioned in several of the preceding
letters. This Mr Hunter was, I am told by friends of
mine who knew him well, a man of considerable intelligence and accomplishments, to whose
personal connexions and weight in society the house of Constable and
Co. owed a great accession of business and influence. He was, however, a very keen
politician; regarded Scott’s Toryism with a fixed
bitterness; and, moreover, could never conceal his impression that
Scott ought to have embarked in no other literary undertakings
whatever, until he had completed his edition of
Swift. It is not wonderful that, not having been bred regularly to the
bookselling business, he should have somewhat misapprehended the obligation which
Scott had incurred when
| JOHN BALLANTYNE AND CO.—1809. | 223 |
the bargain for that work was made; and his feeling
of his own station and consequence was no doubt such as to give his style of conversation
on doubtful questions of business, a tone for which Scott had not been
prepared by his previous intercourse with Mr Constable. The defection
of the poet was, however, at once regretted and resented by both these partners; and
Constable, I am told, often vented his wrath in figures as lofty
as Scott’s own. “Ay,” he would say, stamping
on the ground with a savage smile, “Ay, there is such a thing as rearing the oak
until it can support itself.”
All this leads us to the second stage, one still more unwise and
unfortunate than the first, in the history of Scott’s commercial connexion with the
Ballantynes. The scheme of starting a new bookselling house in
Edinburgh, begun in the shortsighted heat of pique, had now been matured;—I cannot add,
either with composed observation or rational forecast for it was ultimately settled that
the ostensible and chief managing partner should be a person without capital, and neither
by training nor by temper in the smallest degree qualified for such a situation; more
especially where the field was to be taken against long experience, consummate skill, and
resources which, if not so large as all the world supposed them, were still in comparison
vast, and admirably organized. The rash resolution was, however, carried into effect, and a
deed, deposited, for secrecy’s sake, in the hands of Scott,
bound him as one-third partner, James Ballantyne
having also a share, in this firm of John Ballantyne
and Co., booksellers, Edinburgh—“Rigdumfunnidos” was installed in Hanover Street as the avowed
rival of “The Crafty.”
The existing bond of copartnership is dated in July 1809; but I suspect
this had been a revised edition. It is certain that the new house were openly mustering
their forces
224 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
some weeks before Scott desired to withdraw his Swift from the hands of the old one in January. This appears from several of
the letters that passed between him and Ellis while
Gifford was arranging the materials for the
first number of the Quarterly Review, and also
between him and his friend Southey, to whom,
perhaps, more than any other single writer, that journal owed its ultimate success.
To Ellis, for
example, he says, on the 13th December, 1808 “Now let me call your
earnest attention to another literary undertaking, which is, in fact, a
subsidiary branch of the same grand plan. I transmit the prospectus of an Edinburgh Annual Register. I have
many reasons for favouring this work as much as I possibly can. In the first
place, there is nothing even barely tolerable of this nature, though so
obviously necessary to future history. Secondly, Constable was on the point of arranging one on the footing of
the Edinburgh Review, and
subsidiary thereunto, a plan which has been totally disconcerted by our
occupying the vantage-ground. Thirdly, this work will be very well managed. The
two Mackenzies,* William
Erskine, cum plurimis
aliis, are engaged in the literary department, and that of
science is conducted by Professor
Leslie, a great philosopher, and as abominable an animal as I ever
saw. He writes, however, with great eloquence, and is an enthusiast in
mathematical, chemical, and mineralogical pursuits. I hope to draw upon you in
this matter, particularly in the historical department, to which your critical
labours will naturally turn your attention. You will ask what I propose to do
myself. In fact, though something will be expected, I cannot propose to be very
active, unless the Swift is
abandoned, of which I think there is some prospect, as I have reason to
complain of
very indifferent usage, not indeed
from Constable, who is reduced to utter despair by the
circumstance, but from the stupid impertinence of his
partner, a sort of Whig run mad. I have some
reason to believe that
Ballantyne, whose
stock is now immensely increased, and who is likely to enlarge it by marriage,
will commence publisher. Constable threatened him with
withdrawing his business from him as a printer, on account of his being a
Constitutionalist. He will probably by this false step establish a formidable
rival in his own line of publishing, which will be most just retribution. I
intend to fortify Ballantyne by promising him my continued
friendship, which I hope may be of material service to him. He is much liked by
the literary people here; has a liberal spirit, and understanding business very
completely, with a good general idea of literature, I think he stands fair for
success.
“But, Oh! Ellis, these cursed, double cursed news, have sunk my spirits
so much, that I am almost at disbelieving a Providence. God forgive me! But I
think some evil demon has been permitted, in the shape of this tyrannical
monster whom God has sent on the nations visited in his anger. I am confident
he is proof against lead and steel, and have only hopes that he may be shot
with a silver bullet,* or drowned in the torrents of blood which he delights to
shed. Oh! for True Thomas and Lord Soulis’s cauldron.† Adieu, my
dear Ellis. God
* See note, “Proof against shot given by
Satan.”—Waverley Novels, vol. x. p. 40. † “On a circle of stones they placed the pot, On a circle of stones but barely nine; They heated it red and fiery hot, Till the burnish’d brass did glimmer and
shine. They roll’d him up in a sheet of lead, A sheet of lead for a funeral pall; |
|
226 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
bless you! I have been these three days writing this by
snatches.”
The “cursed news” here alluded to were those of Napoleon’s advance by Somosierra, after the dispersion
of the armies of Blake and Castaños. On the 23d of the same month, when the
Treason of Morla and the fall of Madrid were known in Edinburgh, he thus resumes:—(Probably
while he wrote, some cause with which he was not concerned was occupying the Court of
Session:)
“Dear Ellis,—I
have nothing better to do but to vent my groans. I cannot but feel exceedingly
low. I distrust what we call thoroughbred soldiers terribly, when any thing
like the formation of extensive plans, of the daring and critical nature which
seems necessary for the emancipation of Spain, is required from them. Our army
is a poor school for genius—for the qualities which naturally and deservedly
attract the applause of our generals, are necessarily exercised upon a small
scale. I would to God Wellesley were now at
the head of the English in Spain. His late examination shows his acute and
decisive talents for command;* and although I believe in my conscience, that
when he found himself superseded, he suffered the pigs to run through the
busi-
They plunged him in the cauldron red, And melted him, lead, and bones and all.”
|
See the Ballad of Lord
Soulis, and notes Border
Minstrelsy, vol. iv. pp. 235-266. * This refers to Sir Arthur
Wellesley’s evidence before the Court of Inquiry
into the circumstances which led to the Convention (miscalled) of
Cintra. For the best answer to the then popular suspicion, which
Scott seems to have partaken, as
to the conduct of Sir Arthur when superseded in
the moment of victory at Vimiero, I refer to the contemporary
despatches lately published in Colonel
Gurwood’s invaluable compilation. |
ness, when he might in some measure
have prevented them—
‘Yet give the haughty devil his due, Though bold his quarterings, they are true.’ |
Such a man, with an army of 40,000, or 50,000 British, with the remains of
the Gallician army, and the additional forces which every village would furnish
in case of success, might possess himself of Burgos, open a communication with
Arragon, and even Navarre, and place
Buonaparte in the precarious situation of a general with
100,000 enemies between him and his supplies; for I presume neither
Castaños nor
Palafox are so broken as to be altogether
disembodied. But a general who is always looking over his shoulder, and more
intent on saving his own army than on doing the service on which he is sent,
will hardly, I fear, be found capable of forming or executing a plan which its
very daring character might render successful. What would we think of an
admiral who should bring back his fleet and tell us old
Keppel’s story of a lee-shore, and the risk of his
Majesty’s vessels? Our sailors have learned that his Majesty’s
ships were built to be stranded, or burnt, or sunk, or at least to encounter
the risk of these contingencies, when his service requires it; and I heartily
wish our generals would learn to play for the gammon, and not to sit down
contented with a mere saving game. What, however, can we say of
Moore, or how judge of his actions, since the
Supreme Junta have shown themselves so miserably incapable of the arduous
exertions expected from them? Yet, like Pistol, they spoke bold words at the bridge too, and I admired
their firmness in declaring
O’Farrel, and the rest of the Frenchified Spaniards,
traitors. But they may have Roman pride, and want Roman talent to support it;
and in short, unless God Almighty should raise among them one of those
extraordinary geniuses who
228 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
seem to be created for the
emergencies of an oppressed people, I confess I still incline to despondence.
If
Canning could send a portion of his
own spirit with the generals he sends forth, my hope would be high indeed. The
proclamation was truly gallant.
“As to the Annual Register, I do agree that the Prospectus is in too stately a
tone—yet I question if a purer piece of composition would have attracted the
necessary attention. We must sound a trumpet before we open a show. You will
say we have added a tambourin; but the mob will the more readily stop and gaze;
nor would their ears be so much struck by a sonata from Viotti. Do you know the Review begins to get wind here? An Edinburgh
bookseller asked me to recommend him for the sale here, and said he heard it
confidentially from London.—Ever yours,
W. S.”
I may also introduce here a letter of about the same date, and referring
chiefly to the same subjects, addressed by Scott to his
friend, Mr Charles Sharpe,* then at Oxford. The
allusion at the beginning is to a drawing of Queen
Elizabeth, as seen “dancing high and disposedly,” in her
private chamber, by the Scotch ambassador, Sir James
Melville, whose description of the exhibition is one of the most amusing
things in his Memoirs. This production
of Mr Sharpe’s pencil, and the delight with which Scott used to
expatiate on its merits, must be well remembered by every one that ever visited the poet at
Abbotsford.—Some of the names mentioned in this letter as counted on by the projectors of
the Quarterly Review will, no doubt, amuse the
reader.
|
LETTER TO MR SHARPE—DEC. 1808. |
229 |
To Charles Kirkpatrick Sharpe, Esq., Christ Church,
Oxford.
“Edinburgh, 30th December, 1808.
“The inimitable virago came safe, and was welcomed by
the inextinguishable laughter of all who looked upon her caprioles. I was
unfortunately out of town for a few days, which prevented me from acknowledging
instantly what gave me so much pleasure, both on account of its intrinsic
value, and as a mark of your kind remembrance. You have, I assure you, been
upmost in my thoughts for some time past, as I have a serious design on your
literary talents, which I am very anxious to engage in one or both of the two
following schemes. Imprimis, it has
been long the decided resolution of Mr
Canning and some of his literary friends, particularly Geo. Ellis, Malthus, Frere,
W. Rose, &c., that something of
an independent Review ought to be started ill London. This plan is now on the
point of being executed, after much consultation. I have strongly advised that
politics be avoided, unless in cases of great national import, and that their
tone be then moderate and manly; but the general tone of the publication is to
be literary. William Gifford is editor,
and I have promised to endeavour to recruit for him a few spirited young men
able and willing to assist in such an undertaking. I confess you were chiefly
in my thoughts when I made this promise; but it is a subject which for a
thousand reasons I would rather have talked over than written about—among
others more prominent, I may reckon my great abhorrence of pen and ink, for
writing has been so long a matter of duty with me, that it is become as utterly
abominable to me as matters of duty usually are. Let me entreat you, therefore,
to lay hold of Macneill,* or any other
new book you like, and
230 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
give us a good hacking review of it. I retain so much the
old habit of a barrister, that I cannot help adding the fee is ten guineas a
sheet, which may serve to buy an odd book now and then—as good play for
nothing, you know, as work for nothing; but besides this, your exertions in
this cause, if you shall choose to make any, will make you more intimately
acquainted with a very pleasant literary coterie than introductions of a more
formal kind; and if you happen to know George Ellis
already, you must, I am sure, be pleased to take any trouble likely to produce
an intimacy between you.
The Hebers are also
engaged,
item Rogers,
Southey,
Moore
(Anacreon), and others whose reputations
Jeffrey has murdered, and who are rising to
cry wo upon him, like the ghosts in
King Richard; for your acute and
perspicacious judgment must ere this have led you to suspect that this same new
Review, which by the way is to be called ‘
the Quarterly,’ is intended as a rival to
the
Edinburgh; and if it contains
criticism not very inferior in point of talent, with the same independence on
booksellers’ influence (which has ruined all the English Reviews), I do
not see why it should not divide with it the public favour. Observe carefully
this plan is altogether distinct from
one which has been proposed by the veteran
Cumberland, to which is annexed the
extraordinary proposal that each contributor shall place his name before his
article, a stipulation which must prove fatal to the undertaking. If I did not
think this likely to be a very well managed business, I would not recommend it
to your consideration; but you see I am engaged with no ‘fool land
rakers, no long staff sixpenny strikers, but with nobility and
tranquillity, burgomasters, and great oneyers,’ and so forth.
“The other plan refers to the enclosed prospectus,
and has long been a favourite scheme of mine, of William Erskine’s, and some of my other cronies here. Mr
| LETTER TO MR SHARPE—DEC. 1809. | 231 |
Ballantyne, the editor, only undertakes
for the inferior departments of the work, and for keeping the whole matter in
train. We are most anxious to have respectable contributors, and the smallest
donation in any department, poetry, antiquities, &c. &c., will be most
thankfully accepted and registered. But the historical department is that in
which I would chiefly wish to see you engaged. A lively luminous picture of the
events of the last momentous year, is a task for the pen of a man of genius; as
for materials, I could procure you access to many of a valuable kind. The
appointments of our historian are L.300 a-year—no deaf nuts. Another person*
has been proposed, and written to, but I cannot any longer delay submitting the
thing to your consideration. Of course, you are to rely on every assistance
that can be afforded by your humble comdumble, as
Swift says. I hope the great man will give us his answer
shortly and if his be negative, pray let yours be positive. Our politics we
would wish to be constitutional, but not party. You see, my good friend, what
it is to show your good parts before unquestionable judges.
“I am forced to conclude abruptly. Thine entirely,
Mr Morritt was by this time beginning to correspond
with the poet pretty frequently. The first of their letters, however, that serves to throw
light on Scott’s personal proceedings, is the following:—
To J. B. S. Morritt, Esq. Rokeby Park
Yorkshire.
“Edinburgh, 14th January, 1809.
My dear Sir,
For a long while I thought my summons to
* Mr
Southey—who finally undertook the task proposed to him. |
232 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
London would have been immediate, and that I should have
had the pleasure to wait upon you at Rokeby Park in my way to town. But, after
due consideration, the commissioners on our Scottish reform of judicial
proceedings resolved to begin their sittings at Edinburgh, and have been in
full activity ever since last St Andrew’s day. You are not ignorant that
in business of this nature, very much of the detail and of preparing the
materials for the various meetings, necessarily devolves upon the clerk, and I
cannot say but that my time has been fully occupied.
“Mean while, however, I have been concocting, at the
instigation of various loyal and well disposed persons, a grand scheme of
opposition to the proud critics of Edinburgh. It is now matured in all its
branches, and consists of the following divisions. A new review in London, to
be called the Quarterly, William Gifford to be the editor; George Ellis, Rose, Mr Canning if
possible, Frere, and all the ancient
Anti-Jacobins to be concerned. The first number is now in hand, and the allies,
I hope and trust, securely united to each other. I have promised to get them
such assistance as I can, and most happy should I be to prevail upon you to put
your hand to the ark. You can so easily run off an article either of learning
or of fun, that it would be inexcusable not to afford us your assistance. Then
sir, to turn the flank of Messrs Constable and Co. and to avenge myself of certain impertinences
which, in the vehemence of their Whiggery, they have dared to indulge in
towards me, I have prepared to start against them at Whitsunday first the
celebrated printer, Ballantyne (who had
the honour of meeting you at Ashestiel), in the shape of an Edinburgh
publisher, with a long purse and a sound political creed, not to mention an
alliance offensive and defensive with young John
Murray of Fleet
| LETTER TO MR MORRITT—JAN. 1809. | 233 |
Street, the most enlightened and
active of the London trade. By this means I hope to counterbalance the
predominating influence of Constable and Co., who at
present have it in their power and inclination to forward or suppress any book
as they approve or dislike its political tendency. Lastly, I have caused the
said Ballantyne to venture upon an
Edinburgh Annual Register, of which I send you a
prospectus. I intend to help him myself as far as time will admit, and hope to
procure him many respectable coadjutors.
“My own motions southwards remain undetermined, but
I conceive I may get to town about the beginning of March, when I expect to
find you en famille in Portland
Place. Our Heber will then most likely
be in town, and altogether I am much better pleased that the journey is put off
till the lively season of gaiety.
“I am busy with my edition of Swift, and treasure your kind hints
for my direction as I advance. In summer I think of going to Ireland to pick up
any thing that may be yet recoverable of the Dean of St
Patrick’s. Mrs Scott
joins me in kindest and best respects to Mrs
Morritt. I am, with great regard, dear sir, your faithful humble
servant,
The two following letters seem to have been written at the clerk’s
table, the first shortly before, and the second very soon after, the news of the battle of
Corunna reached Scotland:
To Robert Southey, Esq., Keswick.
Edinburgh, 14th January, 1809.
“I have been some time from home in the course of
the holidays, but immediately on my return set about
234 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
procuring the books you wished to see. There are only three of them in our
library, namely—
Dobrizzhoffer de Abiponibus, 3 vols.
A French translation of Gomella’s
History of Oronoquo.
Ramuzio Navigazioni, &c. &c.
Of these I can only lay my hands immediately on Dobrizzhoffer, which I have sent off by the
Carlisle coach, addressed to the care of Jollie the bookseller for you. I do this at my own risk,
because we never grant license to send the books out of Scotland, and should I
be found to have done so I may be censured, and perhaps my use of the library
suspended. At the same time, I think it hard you should take a journey in this
deadly cold weather, and trust you will make early enquiry after the book. Keep
it out of sight while you use it, and return it as soon as you have finished. I
suppose these same Abipones were a nation to my own heart’s content,
being, as the titlepage informs me, bellicosi et
equestres, like our old Border lads. Should you think of
coming hither, which perhaps might be the means of procuring you more
information than I can make you aware of, I bespeak you for my guest. I can
give you a little chamber in the wall, and you shall go out and in as quietly
and freely as your heart can desire, without a human creature saying ‘why
doest thou so?’ Thalaba is in parturition too, and you should in decent curiosity
give an eye after him. Yet I will endeavour to recover the other books (now
lent out), and send them to you in the same way as Dob. travels, unless you recommend
another conveyance. But I expect this generosity on my part will rather stir
your gallantry to make us a visit when this abominable storm has passed away.
My present occupation is highly unpoetical—clouting, in short, and cobbling our
old Scottish
| LETTER TO MR SOUTHEY—JAN. 1809. | 235 |
system
of jurisprudence, with a view to reform. I am clerk to a commission under the
authority of Parliament for this purpose, which keeps me more than busy enough.
“I have had a high quarrel with Constable and Co. The Edinburgh Review has driven them quite crazy, and
its success led them to undervalue those who have been of most use to them—but
they shall dearly abye it. The worst is that, being out of a publishing house,
I have not interest to be of any service to Coleridge’s intended paper.* Ballantyne, the printer, intends to open shop here on the part
of his brother, and I am sure will do
all he can to favour the work. Does it positively go on?
“I have read Wordsworth’s lucubrations in the Courier,† and much agree with him. Alas! we
want every thing but courage and virtue in this desperate contest. Skill,
knowledge of mankind, ineffable unhesitating villany, combination of movement
and combination of means, are with our adversary. We can only fight like
mastiffs, boldly, blindly, and faithfully. I am almost driven to the pass of
the Covenanters, when they told the Almighty in their prayers, he should no
longer be their God; and I really believe, a few Gazettes more will make me
turn Turk or Infidel. Believe me, in great grief of spirit, dear Southey, ever yours,
“Mrs Scott
begs kind remembrance to Mrs
Southey. The bed in the said chamber in the wall is a double
one.”
236 |
LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. |
|
To the Same.
“Edinburgh, 31st January, 1809.
“Yesterday I received your letter, and to-day I
despatched Gomella and the
third volume of Ramuzio, The other two volumes can also be sent, if you should find it
necessary to consult them. The parcel is addressed to the paternal charge of
your Keswick carrier. There is no hurry in returning these volumes, so
don’t derange your operations by hurrying your extracts, only keep them
from any profane eye. I dipped into Gomella while I was waiting for intelligence from you, and was
much edified by the bonhommie with
which the miracles of the Jesuits are introduced.
“The news from Spain gave me such a mingled feeling,
that I never suffered so much in my whole life from the disorder of spirits
occasioned by affecting intelligence. My mind has naturally a strong military
bent, though my path in life has been so very different. I love a drum and a
soldier as heartily as ever Uncle Toby did,
and between the pride arising from our gallant bearing, and the deep regret
that so much bravery should run to waste, I spent a most disordered and
agitated night, never closing my eyes but what I was harassed with visions of
broken ranks, bleeding soldiers, dying horses—‘and all the current of
a heady fight.’ I agree with you that we want energy in our
cabinet—or rather their opinions are so different, that they come to wretched
compositions between them, which are worse than the worst course decidedly
followed out. Canning is most anxious to
support the Spaniards, and would have had a second army at Corunna, but for the
positive demand of poor General Moore
that empty transports should be sent thither. So the reinforcements were
disembarked. I
| LETTER TO MR SOUTHEY—JAN. 1809. | 237 |
fear
it will be found that Moore was rather an excellent
officer than a general of those comprehensive and daring views necessary in his
dangerous situation. Had
Wellesley been
there the battle of Corunna would have been fought and won at Somosierra, and
the ranks of the victors would have been reinforced by the population of
Madrid. Would to God we had yet 100,000 men in Spain. I fear not
Buonaparte’s tactics. The art of fence may
do a great deal, but ‘
a la
staccato,’ as Mercutio says, cannot carry it away from national valour and
personal strength. The Opposition have sold or bartered every feeling of
patriotism for the most greedy and selfish
egoisme.
“Ballantyne’s
brother is setting up here as a bookseller, chiefly for
publishing. I will recommend Coleridge’s paper to him as strongly as I can. I hope
by the time it is commenced he will be enabled to send him a handsome order.
From my great regard for his brother, I
shall give this young publisher what assistance I can. He is understood to
start against Constable and the
Reviewers, and publishes the Quarterly. Indeed he is in strict alliance, offensive and
defensive, with John Murray of Fleet
Street. I have also been labouring a little for the said Quarterly, which I believe you will detect. I hear very high things
from Gifford of your article. About your
visit to Edinburgh, I hope it will be a month later than you now propose,
because my present prospects lead me to think I must be in London the whole
month of April. Early in May I must return, and will willingly take the lakes
in my way in hopes you will accompany me to Edinburgh, which you positively
must not think of visiting in my absence.
“Lord
Advocate, who is sitting behind me, says the Ministers have
resolved not to abandon the Spaniards coute qui
coute. It is a spirited determination—but they
238 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
must find a general who has, as the Turks say,
le Diable au corps, and who,
instead of standing staring to see what they mean to do, will teach them to
dread those surprises and desperate enterprises by which they have been so
often successful. Believe me, dear
Southey, yours affectionately,
“Mrs Scott
joins me in best compliments to Mrs
Southey. I hope she will have a happy hour. Pray, write me
word when the books come safe. What is Wordsworth doing, and where the devil is his Doe? I am not sure if he
will thank me for proving that all the Nortons escaped
to Flanders, one excepted. I never knew a popular tradition so totally
groundless as that respecting their execution at York.”
Joanna Baillie (1762-1851)
Scottish poet and dramatist whose
Plays on the Passions
(1798-1812) were much admired, especially the gothic
De Montfort,
produced at Drury Lane in 1800.
James Ballantyne (1772-1833)
Edinburgh printer in partnership with his younger brother John; the company failed in the
financial collapse of 1826.
John Ballantyne (1774-1821)
Edinburgh publisher and literary agent for Walter Scott; he was the younger brother of
the printer James Ballantyne.
Joaquín Blake y Joyes (1759-1827)
Spanish military officer, son of an Irish father, who fought against the British in the
American war of Independence and against the French in the Peninsular War.
Henry Peter Brougham, first baron Brougham and Vaux (1778-1868)
Educated at Edinburgh University, he was a founder of the
Edinburgh
Review in which he chastised Byron's
Hours of Idleness; he
defended Queen Caroline in her trial for adultery (1820), established the London University
(1828), and was appointed lord chancellor (1830).
Robert Cadell (1788-1849)
Edinburgh bookseller who partnered with Archibald Constable, whose daughter Elizabeth he
married in 1817. After Constable's death and the failure of Ballantyne he joined with Scott
to purchase rights to the
Waverley Novels.
George Canning (1770-1827)
Tory statesman; he was foreign minister (1807-1809) and prime minister (1827); a
supporter of Greek independence and Catholic emancipation.
Princess Charlotte Augusta (1796-1817)
The only child of George IV; she married Prince Leopold of Saxe-Coburg in 1816 and died
in childbirth the following year.
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 Campbell Colquhoun (1754-1820)
Originally Campbell; he was Lord Advocate (1807) and MP for Elgin (1807-10) and
Dumbartonshire (1810-20); he was a friend of Walter Scott.
Mary Ann Colquhoun [née Erskine] (d. 1833)
The sister of William Erskine (1769-1822) and early friend of Walter Scott; in 1796 she
married the Scottish MP Archibald Campbell (later Colquhoun).
Archibald Constable (1774-1827)
Edinburgh bookseller who published the
Edinburgh Review and works
of Sir Walter Scott; he went bankrupt in 1826.
Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658)
English general and statesman; fought with the parliamentary forces at the battles of
Edgehill (1642) and Marston Moor (1644); led expedition to Ireland (1649) and was named
Lord Protector (1653).
Richard Cumberland (1732-1811)
English playwright and man of letters caricatured by Sheridan as “Sir Fretful Plagiary.”
Memoirs of Richard Cumberland, written by himself was published
in two volumes (1806-07).
Martin Dobrizhoffer (1717-1791)
Austrian missionary to Paraguay, whose account was translated by Sara Coleridge (1822)
and became the basis for Robert Southey's
Tale of Paraguay
(1825).
Henry Dundas, first viscount Melville (1742-1811)
Scottish politician, president of the board of control (1793-1801), secretary of war
(1794-1801); first lord of the Admiralty (1804-05).
Anne Ellis [née Parker] (1773 c.-1862)
The daughter of Admiral Sir Peter Parker; in 1800 she married the antiquary George Ellis
of Sunninghill.
Charles Rose Ellis, first baron Seaford (1771-1845)
English MP; he was the cousin of George Ellis and friend of George Canning, who had him
created Lord Seaford in 1826. He had been Canning's second in the 1809 duel with
Castlereagh.
George Ellis (1753-1815)
English antiquary and critic, editor of
Specimens of Early English
Poets (1790), friend of Walter Scott.
William Erskine, Lord Kinneder (1768-1822)
The son of an episcopal clergyman of the same name, he was a Scottish advocate and a
close friend and literary advisor to Sir Walter Scott.
Charles James Fox (1749-1806)
Whig statesman and the leader of the Whig opposition in Parliament after his falling-out
with Edmund Burke.
John Hookham Frere (1769-1846)
English diplomat and poet; educated at Eton and Cambridge, he was envoy to Lisbon
(1800-02) and Madrid (1802-04, 1808-09); with Canning conducted the
The
Anti-Jacobin (1797-98); author of
Prospectus and Specimen of an
intended National Work, by William and Robert Whistlecraft (1817, 1818).
William Gifford (1756-1826)
Poet, scholar, and editor who began as a shoemaker's apprentice; after Oxford he
published
The Baviad (1794),
The Maeviad
(1795), and
The Satires of Juvenal translated (1802) before becoming
the founding editor of the
Quarterly Review (1809-24).
Henry Grattan (1746-1820)
Irish statesman and patriot; as MP for Dublin he supported Catholic emancipation and
opposed the Union.
Joseph Gumilla (1686-1750)
Spanish Jesuit who published a natural history of the Orinoco River.
John Gurwood (1790-1845)
After service in the Peninsular War he was private secretary to the Duke of Wellington;
he died a suicide.
Reginald Heber, bishop of Calcutta (1783-1826)
English poet and Bishop of Calcutta, author of
Palestine: a Prize
Poem (1807) and the hymn “From Greenland's Icy Mountains.” He was the half-brother
of the book-collector Richard Heber.
Richard Heber (1774-1833)
English book collector, he was the elder half-brother of the poet Reginald Heber and the
friend of Walter Scott: member of the Roxburghe Club and MP for Oxford 1821-1826.
Richard Howe, earl Howe (1726-1799)
He was MP for Dartmouth (1757-82), sailed with Anson, fought in the Seven Years’ War,
created Earl Howe (1788), commander of the Channel Fleet (1790); vice-admiral of England
(1792-96).
William Howe, fifth viscount Howe (1729-1814)
British general in the American War of Independence; after succeeding Gage as
commander-in-chief (1775) he defeated Washington at the Battle of Brandywine and resigned
in 1778.
Alexander Gibson Hunter (1771-1812)
The eldest son of David Hunter, of Blackness; he was a Writer to the Signet (1797) who in
1804 became a partner of the Edinburgh bookseller Archibald Constable.
Francis Jeffrey, Lord Jeffrey (1773-1850)
Scottish barrister, Whig MP, and co-founder and editor of the
Edinburgh
Review (1802-29). As a reviewer he was the implacable foe of the Lake School of
poetry.
Augustus Keppel, viscount Keppel (1725-1786)
Naval officer in the Seven Years' War and the American War of Independence, when he was
first lord of the Admiralty.
Sir John Leslie (1766-1832)
Professor of Mathematics at Edinburgh University, author of
Experimental Enquiries into the Nature and Properties of Heat (1804), and
contributor to the
Edinburgh Review.
John Leyden (1775-1811)
Scottish antiquary, poet, and orientalist who assisted Walter Scott in compiling the
Minstrelsy of the Scottish Border.
Colin Mackenzie of Portmore (1770-1830)
Scottish advocate; he was Principal Clerk of Session (1804-08) and Deputy Keeper of the
Signet (1820-28). He was a schoolmate and friend of Sir Walter Scott.
Henry Mackenzie (1745-1831)
Scottish man of letters, author of
The Man of Feeling (1770) and
editor of
The Mirror (1779-80) and
The
Lounger (1785-87).
Hector Macneill (1746-1818)
Scottish poet and West Indian merchant; author of
Scotland's Skaith,
or, The History of Will and Jean (1795) and other popular ballads and
lyrics.
Thomas Robert Malthus (1766-1834)
English political economist educated at Jesus College, Cambridge; he was author of
An Essay on the Principles of Population (1798; 1803).
Charles Mathews (1776-1835)
Comic actor at the Haymarket and Covent Garden theaters; from 1818 he gave a series of
performances under the title of
Mr. Mathews at Home.
Thomas James Mathias (1755-1835)
English satirist, the anonymous author of
Pursuits of Literature
(1794-98) and editor of
The Works of Thomas Gray, 2 vols (1814).
From 1817 he lived in Italy, where he translated classic English poets into Italian.
Sir John Moore (1761-1809)
A hero of the Peninsular Campaign, killed at the Battle of Corunna; he was the son of Dr.
John Moore, the author of
Zeluco.
Thomas Moore (1779-1852)
Irish poet and biographer, author of the
Irish Melodies (1807-34),
The Fudge Family in Paris (1818), and
Lalla
Rookh (1817); he was Byron's close friend and designated biographer.
Katherine Morritt [née Stanley] (d. 1815)
The daughter of the Reverend Thomas Stanley, rector of Winwick in Lancashire; in 1803 she
married John Morritt of Rokeby.
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.
Emperor Napoleon I (1769-1821)
Military leader, First Consul (1799), and Emperor of the French (1804), after his
abdication he was exiled to Elba (1814); after his defeat at Waterloo he was exiled to St.
Helena (1815).
William Pitt the younger (1759-1806)
The second son of William Pitt, earl of Chatham (1708-1778); he was Tory prime minister
1783-1801.
Sir Henry Raeburn (1756-1823)
Scottish portrait painter and friend of Sir Walter Scott.
Samuel Rogers (1763-1855)
English poet, banker, and aesthete, author of the ever-popular
Pleasures of Memory (1792),
Columbus (1810),
Jaqueline (1814), and
Italy (1822-28).
George Rose (1744-1818)
British statesman and ally of William Pitt; he was MP for Launceston (1784-88), Lymington
(1788-90), Christchurch (1790-1818), and secretary to the Treasury (1782-83,
1784-1801).
William Stewart Rose (1775-1843)
Second son of George Rose, treasurer of the navy (1744-1818); he introduced Byron to
Frere's
Whistlecraft poems and translated Casti's
Animale parlante (1819).
Thomas Scott (1774-1823)
The younger brother of Walter Scott rumored to have written
Waverley; after working in the family legal business he was an officer in the
Manx Fencibles (1806-10) and Paymaster of the 70th Foot (1812-14). He died in
Canada.
Anna Seward [the Swan of Lichfield] (1742-1809)
English poet, patron, and letter-writer; she was the center of a literary circle at
Lichfield. Her
Poetical Works, 3 vols (1810) were edited by Walter
Scott.
Thomas Shadwell (1640 c.-1692)
English poet who succeeded John Dryden as poet laureate; Dryden mocked him in
MacFleckno (1682).
Charles Kirkpatrick Sharpe (1781-1851)
Scottish poet, painter, editor, antiquary, and eccentric; he edited James Kirkton's
Secret and True History of the Church of Scotland (1817) with
elaborate notes mocking his author.
Edith Southey [née Fricker] (1774-1837)
The daughter of Stephen Fricker, she was the first wife of Robert Southey and the mother
of his children; they married in secret in 1795.
Robert Southey (1774-1843)
Poet laureate and man of letters whose contemporary reputation depended upon his prose
works, among them the
Life of Nelson, 2 vols (1813),
History of the Peninsular War, 3 vols (1823-32) and
The Doctor, 7 vols (1834-47).
Gilbert Stuart (1743-1786)
Scottish journalist and historian; editor of the
Edinburgh Magazine and
Review and
English Review; he was author of
View of Society in Europe (1778).
Jonathan Swift (1667-1745)
Dean of St Patrick's, Scriblerian satirist, and author of
Battle of the
Books with
Tale of a Tub (1704),
Drapier
Letters (1724),
Gulliver's Travels (1726), and
A Modest Proposal (1729).
Thomas of Erceldoune (1220 c.-1297 c.)
Scottish poet and prophet; author (or supposed author) of the romance,
Sir Tristrem.
Giovanni Battista Viotti (1755-1824)
Italian violinist and composer who worked in London following the French
Revolution.
Henry William Weber (1783-1818)
The son of a Moravian father and English mother, he published an edition of the works of
John Ford and Beaumont and Fletcher; after working as an editorial assistant to Walter
Scott he spent his latter years in a lunatic asylum.
William Wordsworth (1770-1850)
With Coleridge, author of
Lyrical Ballads (1798), Wordsworth
survived his early unpopularity to succeed Robert Southey as poet laureate in 1843.
The Anti-Jacobin. (1797-1798). A weekly magazine edited by William Gifford with contributions by George Canning, John
Hookham Frere, and George Ellis. It was the model for many later satirical
periodicals.
The Courier. (1792-1842). A London evening newspaper; the original proprietor was James Perry; Daniel Stuart, Peter
Street, and William Mudford were editors; among the contributors were Samuel Taylor
Coleridge and John Galt.
London Review. (1809). Edited by Richard Cumberland; only two numbers appeared; in a departure from usual
practice the reviews were signed.
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.
William Wordsworth (1770-1850)
Concerning the Relations of Great Britain, Spain, and Portugal, to each other,
and to the common Enemy, at this Crisis; and specifically as affected by the Convention of
Cintra the whole brought to the Test of those Principles, by which alone the Independence
and Freedom of Nations can be preserved or recovered. (London: Longman, Hurst, Rees, and Orme, 1809). Originally published in
The Courier.