Memoirs of the Life of Sir Walter Scott, Bart.
Chapter VII 1809-10
CHAPTER VII.
CASE OF A POETICAL TAILOR CONDEMNED TO DEATH AT EDINBURGH—HIS LETTERS TO
SCOTT—DEATH OF CAMP—SCOTT IN LONDON—MR
MORRITT’S DESCRIPTION OF HIM AS “A LION” IN TOWN—DINNER AT
MR
SOTHEBY’S—COLERIDGE’S FIRE, FAMINE, AND SLAUGHTER—THE QUARTERLY
REVIEW STARTED—FIRST VISIT TO ROKEBY—THE LADY OF THE
LAKE BEGUN—EXCURSION TO THE TROSSACHS AND LOCH LOMOND—LETTER ON
BYRON’S ENGLISH BARDS AND SCOTCH
REVIEWERS—DEATH OF DANIEL SCOTT—CORRESPONDENCE ABOUT
MR CANNING’S DUEL WITH LORD
CASTLEREAGH—MISS BAILLIE’S FAMILY LEGEND ACTED AT EDINBURGH—THEATRICAL
ANECDOTES—KEMBLE—SIDDONS—TERRY—LETTER
ON THE DEATH OF MISS SEWARD.
1809—1810.
In the end of 1808, a young man, by name Andrew Stewart, who had figured for some years before as a
poetical contributor to the Scots Magazine, and
inserted there, among other things, a set of stanzas in honour of The Last Minstrel,* was tried, and capitally convicted, on a
charge of burglary. He addressed, some weeks after his sentence had been pronounced, the
following letters:—
* One verse of this production will suffice.
“Sweetest Minstrel that e’er sung
Of valorous deeds by Scotia done,
‘Whose wild notes warbled in the win’,
Delightful strain!
O’er hills and dales, and vales amang,
We’ve heard again,’ &c.
|
|
240 |
LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. |
|
To Walter Scott, Esq. Castle Street.
“Edinburgh Tolbooth, 20th January, 1809.
“Sir,
“Although I am a stranger to you, yet I am not to
your works, which I have read and admired, and which will continue to be read
and admired as long as there remains a taste for true excellence. Previous to
committing the crime for which I am now convicted, I composed several poems in
the Scottish dialect, which I herewith send for your perusal, and humbly hope
you will listen to my tale of misery. I have been a truly unfortunate follower
of the Muses. I was born in Edinburgh, of poor, but honest parents. My father
is by trade a bookbinder, and my mother dying in 1798, he was left a widower,
with five small children, who have all been brought up by his own industry. As
soon as I was fit for a trade, he bound me apprentice to a tailor in Edinburgh,
but owing to his using me badly, I went to law. The consequence was, I got up
my indentures after being only two years in his service. To my father’s
trade I have to ascribe my first attachment to the Muses. I perused with
delight the books that came in the way; and the effusions of the poets of my
country I read with rapture. I now formed the resolution of not binding myself
to a trade again, as by that means I might get my propensity for reading
followed. I acted as clerk to different people, and my character was
irreproachable. I determined to settle in life, and for that purpose I married
a young woman I formed a strong attachment to. Being out of employment these
last nine months, I suffered all the hardships of want, and saw
‘Poverty with empty hand, And eager look, half-naked stand.’— Fergusson.
|
Reduced to this miserable situation, with my wife
almost starving, and having no friends to render
me the smallest assistance, I resided in a furnished room till I was unable to
pay the rent, and then I was literally turned out of doors, like poor
Dermody, in poverty and rags. Having no kind
hand stretched out to help me, I associated with company of very loose manners,
till then strangers to me, and by them I was led to commit the crime I am
condemned to suffer for. But my mind is so agitated, I can scarce narrate my
tale of misery. My age is only twenty-three, and to all appearance will be cut
off in the prime. I was tried along with my brother, Robert
Stewart, and John M’Intyre, for
breaking into the workshop of Peter More, calico-glazer,
Edinburgh, and received the dreadful sentence to be executed on the 22d of
February next. We have no friends to apply to for Royal Mercy. If I had any
kind friend to mention my case to my Lord Justice-Clerk, perhaps I might get my
sentence mitigated. You will see my poems are of the humorous cast. Alas! it is
now the contrary. I remain your unfortunate humble servant,
To the Same.
“Tolbooth, Sunday.
“Sir I received your kind letter last night,
enclosing one pound sterling, for which I have only to request you will accept
the return of a grateful heart. My prayers, while on earth, will be always for
your welfare. Your letter came like a ministering angel to me. The idea of my
approaching end darts across my brain; and, as our immortal bard, Shakspeare, says, ‘harrows up my
soul.’ Some time since, when chance threw in my way Sir William Forbes’s
Life of Beattie, the
account of the closing scene of Principal
Campbell, as therein
242 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
mentioned, made a
deep impression on my mind. ‘At a time,’ says he,
‘when Campbell was just expiring, and had
told his wife and niece so, a cordial happened unexpectedly to give some
relief. As soon as he was able to speak he said, he wondered to see their
faces so melancholy and covered with tears at the apprehension of his
departure. ‘
At that instant,’ said he,
‘
I felt my mind in such a state in the thoughts
of my immediate dissolution, that I can express my feelings in no other
way than by saying I was in a rapture.’ There is
something awfully satisfactory in the above.
“I have to mention, as a dying man, that it was not
the greed of money that made me commit the crime, but the extreme pressure of
poverty and want.
“How silent seems all—not a whisper is heard,
Save the guardians of night when they bawl;
How dreary and wild appears all around;
No pitying voice near my call.
|
“O life, what are all thy gay pleasures and cares,
When deprived of sweet liberty’s smile?
Not hope in all thy gay charms arrayed,
Can one heavy hour now beguile.
|
“How sad is the poor convict’s sorrowful lot,
Condemned in these walls to remain,
When torn from those that are nearest his heart,
Perhaps ne’er to view them again.
|
“The beauties of morning now burst on my view,
Remembrance of scenes that are past,
When contentment sat smiling, and happy my lot,
Scenes, alas! formed not for to last.
|
“Now fled are the hours I delighted to roam
Scotia’s hills, dales, and valleys among,
And with rapture would list to the songs of her bards,
And love’s tale as it flowed from the tongue.
|
“Nought but death now awaits me, how dread, but true,
How ghastly its form does appear;
Soon silent the muse that delighted to view
And sing of the sweets of the year.
|
“You are the first gentleman I ever sent my poems to,
and I never corrected any of them, my mind has been in such a state. I remain,
sir, your grateful unfortunate servant,
It appears that Scott, and his
good-natured old friend, Mr Manners the bookseller,
who happened at this time to be one of the bailies of Edinburgh, exerted their joint
influence in this tailor-poet’s behalf, and with such success, that his sentence was
commuted for one of transportation for life. A thin octavo pamphlet, entitled, “Poems, chiefly in the
Scottish dialect, by Andrew Stewart; printed for the benefit of the Author’s
Father, and sold by Manners and Miller, and A. Constable and Co., 1809,”
appeared soon after the convict’s departure for Botany Bay. But as to his fortunes in
that new world I possess no information. There seemed to me something so striking in the
working of his feelings as expressed in his letters to Scott, that I
thought the reader would forgive this little episode.
In the course of February, Mr John
Ballantyne had proceeded to London, for the purpose of introducing himself
to the chief publishers there in his new capacity, and especially of taking Mr Murray’s instructions respecting the Scotch
management of the Quarterly Review. As soon as
the spring vacation began, Scott followed him by sea. He
might naturally have wished to be at hand while his new partner was forming arrangements on
which so much must depend; but some
244 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
circumstances in the procedure of
the Scotch Law Commission had made the Lord Advocate
request his presence at this time in town. There he and Mrs
Scott took up their quarters, as usual, under the roof of their kind old
friends the Dumergues; while their eldest girl enjoyed the advantage of being domesticated
with the Miss Baillies at Hampstead. They staid more
than two months, and this being his first visit to town since his fame had been crowned by
Marmion, he was of course more than
ever the object of general curiosity and attention. Mr
Morritt saw much of him, both at his own house in Portland Place and
elsewhere, and I transcribe a few sentences from his memoranda of
the period.
“Scott,” his friend
says, “more correctly than any other man I ever knew, appreciated the value of
that apparently enthusiastic engouement which
the world of London shows to the fashionable wonder of the year. During this sojourn of
1809, the homage paid him would have turned the head of any less gifted man of
eminence. It neither altered his opinions, nor produced the affectation of despising
it; on the contrary, he received it, cultivated it, and repaid it in its own coin.
‘All this is very flattering,’ he would say, ‘and very
civil; and if people are amused with hearing me tell a parcel of old stories, or
recite a pack of ballads to lovely young girls and gaping matrons, they are easily
pleased, and a man would be very ill-natured who would not give pleasure so cheaply
conferred.’ If he dined with us and found any new faces, ‘Well,
do you want me to play lion to-day?’ was his usual question—‘I
will roar if you like it to your heart’s content.’ He would,
indeed, in such cases put forth all his inimitable powers of entertainment and day
after day surprised me by their unexpected extent and variety. Then, as the party
dwindled, and we were left alone, he laughed at himself, quoted, ‘yet know
that I
| MR MORRITT—LONDON MARCH, 1809. | 245 |
one Snug the joiner am—no lion fierce,’ &c.
and was at once himself again.
“He often lamented the injurious effects for literature and
genius resulting from the influence of London celebrity on weaker minds, especially in
the excitement of ambition for this subordinate and ephemeral reputation du salon. ‘It may be a
pleasant gale to sail with,’ he said, ‘but it never yet led to a
port that I should like to anchor in;’ nor did he willingly endure,
either in London or in Edinburgh, the little exclusive circles of literary society,
much less their occasional fastidiousness and petty partialities.
“One story which I heard of him from Dr Howley, now Archbishop of Canterbury (for I was not present), was
very characteristic. The doctor was one of a grand congregation of lions, where
Scott and Coleridge, cum multis altis,
attended at Sotheby’s. Poets and poetry
were the topics of the table, and there was plentiful recitation of effusions as yet
unpublished, which of course obtained abundant applause. Coleridge
repeated more than one, which, as Dr H. thought, were eulogized by
some of the company with something like affectation, and a desire to humble
Scott by raising a poet of inferior reputation on his
shoulders. Scott, however, joined in the compliments as cordially
as any body, until, in his turn, he was invited to display some of his occasional
poetry, much of which he must, no doubt, have written. Scott said
he had published so much, he had nothing of his own left that he could think worth
their hearing, but he would repeat a little copy of verses which he had shortly before
seen in a provincial newspaper, and which seemed to him almost as good as anything they
had been listening to with so much pleasure. He repeated the stanzas now so well known
of ‘Fire, Famine, and
Slaughter.’ The applauses that ensued were faint—then came slight
criticisms, from
246 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
which Scott defended the
unknown author. At last, a more bitter antagonist opened, and fastening upon one line,
cried ‘this at least is absolute nonsense.’
Scott denied the charge—the Zoilus persisted—until Coleridge, out of all
patience, exclaimed, ‘For God’s sake let Mr Scott
alone—I wrote the poem.’ This exposition of the real worth of dinner
criticism can hardly be excelled.*
“He often complained of the real dulness of parties where each
guest arrived under the implied and tacit obligation of exhibiting some extraordinary
powers of talk or wit. ‘If,’ he said, ‘I encounter men of
the world, men of business, odd or striking characters of professional excellence
in any department, I am in my element, for they cannot lionize me without my
returning the compliment and learning something from them.’ He was much
with George Ellis, Canning, and Croker, and
delighted in them,—as indeed who did not?—but he loved to study eminence of every class
and sort, and his rising fame gave him easy access to gratify all his
curiosity.”
The meetings with Canning,
Croker, and Ellis, to which Mr Morritt alludes,
were, as may be supposed, chiefly occupied with the affairs of the Quarterly
* It may amuse the reader to turn to Mr Coleridge’s own stately account of this lion-show in
Grosvenor Street, in the preface to his celebrated Eclogue. There was one person present, it seems,
who had been in the secret of its authorship—Sir
Humphrey Davy; and no one could have enjoyed the scene more than he
must have done. “At the house,” Coleridge
says, “of a gentleman who, by the principles and corresponding virtues of a
sincere Christian, consecrates a cultivated genius and the favourable accidents of
birth, opulence, and splendid connexions, it was my good fortune to meet, in a
dinner party, with more men of celebrity in science or polite literature than are
commonly found collected around the same table. In the course of conversation, one
of the party reminded an illustrious poet,” &c. &c.—Coleridge’s Poetical
Works. Edition, 1835. Vol. I., P. 274. |
Review. The first number of that Journal appeared
while Scott was in London: it contained three articles
from his pen—namely, one on the Reliques of Burns; another on the Chronicle of the Cid; and a third on Sir John Carr’s Tour through Scotland. His conferences
with the editor and publisher were frequent; and the latter certainly contemplated, at this
time, a most close and intimate connexion with him, not only as a reviewer, but an author;
and, consequently, with both the concerns of the Messrs Ballantyne. Scott continued for some time to be a very
active contributor to the Quarterly Review; nor, indeed, was his
connexion with it ever entirely suspended. But John
Ballantyne transacted business in a fashion which soon cooled, and in no
very long time dissolved, the general “alliance offensive and defensive”
with Murray, which Scott had announced before
leaving Edinburgh to both Southey and
Ellis.
On his return northwards he spent a fortnight in Yorkshire with Mr Morritt; but his correspondence, from which I resume my
extracts, will show, among other things, the lively impression made on him by his first
view of Rokeby.
The next of these letters reminds me, however, that I should have
mentioned sooner the death of Camp, the first of not a few dogs
whose names will be “freshly remembered” as long as their master’s works
are popular. This favourite began to droop early in 1808, and became incapable of
accompanying Scott in his rides; but he preserved his
affection and sagacity to the last. At Ashestiel, as the servant was laying the cloth for
dinner, he would address the dog lying on his mat by the fire, and say, “Camp, my good fellow, the sheriff’s coming home by the
ford—or by the hill;” and the sick animal would immediately bestir himself to
welcome his master, going out at the back door or the front door, according to the
248 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
direction given, and advancing as far as he was able, either towards
the ford of the Tweed, or the bridge over the Glenkinnon burn beyond Laird Nippy’s gate. He died about January 1809, and
was buried in a fine moonlight night, in the little garden behind the house in Castle
Street, immediately opposite to the window at which Scott usually sat
writing. My wife tells me she remembers the whole
family standing in tears about the grave, as her father himself smoothed down the turf
above Camp with the saddest expression of face she had ever seen
in him. He had been engaged to dine abroad that day, but apologized on account of
“the death of a dear old friend;” and Mr
Macdonald Buchanan was not at all surprised that he should have done so,
when it came out next morning that Camp was no more.
To George Ellis, Esq.
“Edinburgh, July 8, 1809.
“We reached home about a fortnight ago, having
lingered a little while at Rokeby Park, the seat of our friend Morritt, and one of the most enviable places I
have ever seen, as it unites the richness and luxuriance of English vegetation
with the romantic variety of glen, torrent, and copse which dignifies our
northern scenery. The Greta and Tees, two most beautiful and rapid rivers, join
their currents in the demesne. The banks of the Tees resemble, from the height
of the rocks, the glen of Roslin, so much and justly admired. The Greta is the
scene of a comic romance,* of which I think I remember giving you the outline.
It concerns the history of a ‘Felon Sowe,’—
‘Which won’d in Rokeby wood, Ran endlong Greta side,’ |
* Scott printed
this Ballad in the Notes to his poem of Rokeby. |
bestowed by Ralph of Rokeby on the
freres of Richmond—and the misadventures of the holy fathers in their awkward
attempts to catch this intractable animal. We had the pleasure to find all our
little folks well, and are now on the point of shifting quarters to Ashestiel.
I have supplied the vacancy occasioned by the death of poor old Camp with a terrier puppy of the old shaggy Celtic
breed. He is of high pedigree, and was procured with great difficulty by the
kindness of
Miss Dunlop of Dunlop; so I
have christened him Wallace, as the donor is a
descendant of the Guardian of Scotland. Having given you all this curious and
valuable information about my own affairs, let me call your attention to the
enclosed, which was in fact the principal cause of my immediately troubling
you.” * * *
The enclosure, and the rest of the letter, refer to the private affairs
of Mr Southey, in whose favour Scott had for some time back been strenuously using his
interest with his friends in the Government. How well he had, while in London, read the
feelings of some of those ministers towards each other, appears from various letters
written upon his return to Scotland. It may be sufficient to quote part of one addressed to
the distinguished author whose fortunes he was exerting himself to promote. To him
Scott says (14th June),—“Mr
Canning’s opportunities to serve you will soon be numerous, or
they will soon be gone altogether; for he is of a different mould from some of his
colleagues, and a decided foe to those half measures which I know you detest as much as
I do. It is not his fault that the cause of Spain is not at this moment triumphant.
This I know, and the time will come when the world will know it too.”
Before fixing himself at Ashestiel for the autumn, he
250 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
had undertaken to have a third poem ready for publication, by
John Ballantyne, by the end of the year, and
probably made some progress in the composition of the Lady of the Lake. On the rising of the Court in July, he went, accompanied by
Mrs Scott and his eldest
daughter, to revisit the localities, so dear to him in the days of his
juvenile rambling, which he had chosen for the scene of his fable. He gave a week to his
old friends at Cambusmore, and ascertained, in his own person, that a good horseman, well
mounted, might gallop from the shore of Loch Vennachar to the rock of Stirling within the
space allotted for that purpose to FitzJames. From
Cambusmore the party proceeded to Ross Priory, and, under the guidance of Mr Macdonald Buchanan, explored the islands of Loch
Lomond, Arrochar, Loch Sloy, and all the scenery of a hundred desperate conflicts between
the Macfarlanes, the Colquhouns, and the Clan
Alpine. At Buchanan House, which is very near Ross Priory, Scott’s
friends, Lady Douglas and Lady Louisa Stuart, were then visiting the Duke of Montrose; he joined them there, and read to them the
Stag Chase, which he had just completed under the full influence of the genius loci.
It was on this occasion, at Buchanan House, that he first saw Lord Byron’s “English Bards and Scotch Reviewers.” On this subject
he says, in his Introduction to Marmion of
1830—“When Byron wrote his famous satire, I had my share
of flagellation among my betters. My crime was having written a poem for a thousand
pounds, which was no otherwise true than that I sold the copyright for that sum. Now,
not to mention that an author can hardly be censured for accepting such a sum as the
booksellers are willing to give him, especially as the gentlemen of the trade made no
complaints of their bargain, I thought the interference with
my private affairs was rather beyond the limits of
literary satire. I was, moreover, so far from having had any thing to do with the
offensive criticism in the Edinburgh, that
I had remonstrated with the editor, because I
thought the ‘Hours of
Idleness’ treated with undue severity. They were written, like all
juvenile poetry, rather from the recollection of what had pleased the author in others,
than what had been suggested by his own imagination; but nevertheless I thought they
contained passages of noble promise.”
I need hardly transcribe the well-known lines—
“Next view in state, proud prancing on his roan, The golden-crested haughty Marmion,”
|
down to “For this we spurn Apollo’s
venal son, And bid a long ‘good night to Marmion,’” |
with his lordship’s note on the last line—“Good night to Marmion, the pathetic and also prophetic exclamation of
Henry Blount, Esquire, on the death of honest
Marmion.” But it may entertain my readers to compare the style in which
Scott alludes to Byron’s assault in the preface of 1830 with that of one of his
contemporary letters on the subject. Addressing (August 7, 1809) the gentleman in whose behalf he had been interceding with
Mr Canning, he says “By the way, is the
ancient ****, whose decease is to open our quest,
thinking of a better world? I only ask because about three years ago I accepted the office
I hold in the Court of Session, the revenue to accrue to me only on the death of the
old incumbent. But my friend has since taken out
a new lease of life, and unless I get some Border lad to cut his throat, may, for aught I
know, live as long as 252 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
I shall;—such odious deceivers are these
invalids. Mine reminds me of Sindbad’s Old Man of the Sea, and will certainly
throttle me if I can’t somehow dismount him. If I were once in possession of my
reversionary income, I would, like you, bid farewell to the drudgery of literature, and do
nothing but what I pleased, which might be another phrase for doing very little. I was
always an admirer of the modest wish of a retainer in one of Beaumont and Fletcher’s plays— I would not be a serving man To carry the cloak-bag still, Nor would I be a falconer, The greedy hawks to fill; But I would live in a good house, And have a good master too, And I would eat and drink of the best, And no work would I do.’ |
In the mean time, it is funny enough to see a whelp of a young Lord Byron abusing me, of whose circumstances he knows nothing, for
endeavouring to scratch out a living with my pen. God help the bear if, having little else
to eat, he must not even suck his own paws. I can assure the noble imp of fame it is not my
fault that I was not born to a park and L.5000 a-year, as it is not his lordship’s
merit, although it may be his great good fortune, that he was not born to live by his
literary talents or success. Adieu, my dear friend. I shall be impatient to hear how your
matters fadge.”
This gentleman’s affairs are again alluded to in a letter to
Ellis, dated Ashestiel, September
14:—“I do not write to whet a purpose that is not blunted, but to express
my anxious wishes that your kind endeavours may succeed while it is called to-day, for, by all tokens, it will soon be yesterday with this Ministry. And they
| ASHESTIEL—SEPTEMBER, 1809. | 253 |
well deserve it, for
crossing, jostling, and hampering the measures of the only man among them fit
to be intrusted with the salvation of the country. The spring-tide may for
ought I know, break in this next session of Parliament. There is an evil fate
upon us in all we do at home and abroad, else why should the
conqueror of Talavera be retreating from the
field of his glory at a moment when, by all reasonable calculation, he should
have been the soul and mover of a combined army of 150,000 English, Spaniards,
and Portuguese? And why should
Gifford
employ himself at home in the thriftless exercise of correction, as if
Mercury, instead of stretching to a
race himself, were to amuse himself with starting a bedrid cripple, and making
a pair of crutches for him with his own hand? Much might have been done, and
may yet be done; but we are not yet in the right way. Is there no one among you
who can throw a Congreve rocket among the gerunds and supines of that model of
pedants,
Dr Philopatris Parr? I
understand your foreign lingos too little to attempt it, but pretty things
might be said upon the memorable tureen which he begged of Lord Somebody, whom
he afterwards, wished to prove to be mad. For example, I would adopt some of
the leading phrases of
independent, high-souled,
contentus parvo, and so forth, with which he is
bespattered in the
Edinburgh, and declare it our
opinion, that, if indulged with the three wishes of
Prior’s tale, he would answer, like
the heroine Corisca—
‘A ladle to my silver dish Is all I want, is all I wish.’ |
I did
not review Miss Edgeworth, nor do I think it all well done; at least, it
falls below my opinion of that lady’s merits. Indeed, I have contributed
nothing to the last Review, and am, therefore, according to all rules,
254 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
the more entitled to criticise it freely. The conclusion
of the
article on
Sir John Moore is transcendently written; and
I think I can venture to say, ‘
aut Erasmus, aut
Diabolus’ Your
sugar-cake is very far from being a
heavy
bon-bon; but there I think we stop. The
Missionaries, though
very good, is on a subject rather stale, and much of the rest is absolute
wading.
“As an excuse for my own indolence, I have been in
the Highlands for some time past; and who should I meet there, of all fowls in
the air, but your friend Mr Blackburn,
to whom I was so much obliged for the care he took of my late unfortunate relative, at your friendly
request. The recognition was unfortunately made just when I was leaving the
country, and as he was in a gig, and I on the driving-seat of a carriage, the
place of meeting a narrow Highland road, which looked as if forty patent
ploughs had furrowed it, we had not time or space for so long a greeting as we
could have wished. He has a capital good house on the banks of the Leven, about
three miles below its discharge from the lake, and very near the classical spot
where Matthew Bramble and his whole family
were conducted by Smollett, and where
Smollett himself was born. There is a new inducement
for you to come to Caledon. Your health, thank God, is now no impediment; and I
am told sugar and rum excel even whisky, so your purse must be proportionally
distended.”
The unfortunate brother, the blot of the family, to whom Scott alludes in this letter, had disappointed all the hopes
under which his friends sent him to Jamaica. It may be remarked, as characteristic of
Scott at this time, that in the various letters to Ellis concerning Daniel, he speaks of him as his relation, never as
his brother; and it must also be mentioned as a circumstance
suggesting that Daniel had retained, after all, some
| DEATH OF DANIEL SCOTT. | 255 |
sense of pride, that his West Indian
patron was allowed by himself to remain, to the end of their connexion, in ignorance of
what his distinguished brother had thus thought fit to suppress. Mr Blackburn, in fact, never knew that
Daniel was Walter Scott’s brother,
until he was applied to for some information respecting him on my own behalf, after this
narrative was begun. The story is shortly, that the adventurer’s habits of
dissipation proved incurable; but he finally left Jamaica under a stigma which
Walter Scott regarded with utter severity. Being employed in some
service against a refractory or insurgent body of negroes, he had exhibited a lamentable
deficiency of spirit and conduct. He returned to Scotland a dishonoured man; and though he
found shelter and compassion from his mother, his brother would never see him again. Nay,
when soon after, his health, shattered by dissolute indulgence, and probably the
intolerable load of shame, gave way altogether, and he died as yet a young man, the poet
refused either to attend his funeral or to wear mourning for him like the rest of the
family. Thus sternly, when in the height and pride of his blood, could
Scott, whose heart was never hardened against the distress of an
enemy, recoil from the disgrace of a brother. It is a more pleasing part of my duty to add,
that he spoke to me, twenty years afterwards, in terms of great and painful contrition for
the austerity with which he had conducted himself on this occasion. I must add, moreover,
that he took a warm interest in a natural child whom
Daniel had bequeathed to his mother’s care; and after the
old lady’s death, religiously supplied her place as the boy’s protector.
About this time the edition of
Sir Ralph Sadler’s State Papers, &c. (3 vols. royal 4 to) was at
length completed by Scott, and published by Constable; but the letters which passed between the Editor
and the bookseller show
256 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
that their personal estrangement had as yet
undergone slender alteration. The collection of the Sadler papers was chiefly the work of Mr Arthur
Clifford—but Scott drew up the Memoir and Notes, and
superintended the printing. His account of the Life of Sadler* extends to thirty pages; and both it and his notes are written
with all that lively solicitude about points of antiquarian detail, which accompanied him
through so many tasks less attractive than the personal career of a distinguished statesman
intimately connected with the fortunes of Mary Queen of
Scots. Some volumes of the edition of Somers’s Tracts (which he had undertaken for Mr Miller and other booksellers of London two or three
years before) were also published about the same period; but that compilation was not
finished (13 vols. royal 4to) until 1812. His part in it (for which the booksellers paid
him 1300 guineas) was diligently performed, and shows abundant traces of his sagacious
understanding and graceful expression. His editorial labours on Dryden, Swift, and these other collections, were gradually storing his mind with that
minute and accurate knowledge of the leading persons and events both of Scotch and English
history, which made his conversation on such subjects that of one who had rather lived with
than read about the departed; while, unlike other antiquaries, he always preserved the
keenest interest in the transactions of his own time.
The reader has seen that during his stay in London in the spring of this
year, Scott became strongly impressed with a suspicion
that the Duke of Portland’s Cabinet could not
much longer hold together; and the letters which have been quoted, when considered along
with the actual course of subsequent events, can leave little doubt
| CANNING AND CASTLEREAGH—1809. | 257 |
that he had gathered this
impression from the tone of Mr Canning’s
private conversation as to the recent management of the War Department by Lord Castlereagh. It is now known that, as early as Easter,
the Secretary for Foreign Affairs had informed the head of the Government that, unless the
Secretary for War and the Colonies were replaced by a more competent person, he himself
must withdraw from the Ministry; that the Duke of Portland and the
majority of the Cabinet concurred in the necessity of Lord
Castlereagh’s removal, but pressed Mr Canning to
allow the matter to lie over until the conclusion of the Parliamentary Session; that
Mr Canning, reluctantly agreeing to this delay, continued to sit
for some months in the same Cabinet with the colleague whose eventual dismissal had been
conceded to his representation; and that when, on the 20th of September, the Duke
of Portland at length informed him of Mr
Canning’s resolution, with the date of its original communication to
his Grace and the other Ministers, Lord Castlereagh tendered his
resignation, and wrote the same day to Mr Canning, reproaching him
with double dealing. “Having,” he said, “pronounced it unfit
that I should remain charged with the conduct of the war, and made my situation as a
Minister of the Crown dependent on your will and pleasure, you continued to sit in the
same Cabinet with me, and leave me not only in the persuasion that I possessed your
confidence and support as a colleague, but allowed me, in breach of every principle of
good faith, both public and private, to originate and proceed in the execution of a new
enterprise of the most arduous and important nature (the Walcheren Expedition) with
your apparent concurrence and ostensible approbation. You were fully aware that, if my
situation in the government had been disclosed to me, I could not have submitted to
remain one moment in office, without 258 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
the entire abandonment of my
private honour and public duty. You knew I was deceived, and you continued to deceive
me.”
The result was a duel on the morning of the 21st, in which Mr Canning was attended by Mr
Charles Ellis (now Lord Seaford) as his second.
Mr Canning, at the second fire, was severely wounded in the thigh,
while his antagonist, had a narrow escape, a button on the lapel of his coat having been
shot off. In consequence of this quarrel, both Lord Castlereagh and
Mr Canning retired from office; their example was followed by the
Duke of Portland himself; and after fruitless
negotiations with Lords Grey and Grenville, Mr Percival
became First Lord of the Treasury, as well as Chancellor of the Exchequer; while the
Marquis Wellesley took the Seals of the Foreign
Department, and Lord Liverpool removed from the Home
Office to that which Lord Castlereagh had occupied.
There were some other changes, but Scott’s friend,
Mr R. Dundas (now Lord
Melville), remained in his place at the head of the Board of Control.
While the public mind was occupied with the duel and its yet uncertain
results, Scott wrote as follows to the nearest relation
and most intimate friend of Mr Canning’s second:—
To George Ellis, Esq.
“Ashestiel, Sept. 26, 1809.
“Your letter gave me great pleasure, especially the
outside, for Canning’s frank
assured me that his wound was at least not materially serious. So for once the
envelope of your letter was even more welcome than the contents. That harebrained Irishman’s letter car-
ries absurdity upon the face of it,
for surely he would have had much more reason for personal animosity had
Canning made the matter public, against the wishes of
his uncle and every other person concerned, than for his consenting, at their
request, that it should remain a secret, and leaving it to them to make such
communication to Lord C. as they should think proper, and
when they should think proper. I am ill situated here for the explanations I
would wish to give, but I have forwarded copies of the letters to
Lord Dalkeith, a high-spirited and independent
young nobleman, in whose opinion Mr Canning would, I
think, wish to stand well. I have also taken some measures to prevent the good
folks of Edinburgh from running after any straw that may be thrown into the
wind. I wrote a very hurried note to
Mr C.
Ellis the instant I saw the accident in the papers, not knowing
exactly where you might be, and trusting he would excuse my extreme anxiety and
solicitude upon the occasion.
“I see, among other reports, that my friend,
Robert Dundas, is mentioned as
Secretary at War. I confess I shall be both vexed and disappointed if he, of
whose talents and opinions I. think very highly, should be prevailed on to
embark in so patched and crazy a vessel as can now be lashed together, and that
upon a sea which promises to be sufficiently boisterous. My own hopes of every
kind are as low as the heels of my boots, and methinks I would say to any
friend of mine as Tybalt says to Benvolio—‘What! art thou drawn among
these heartless hinds?’ I suppose the
Doctor will be move the first, and then
the Whigs will come in like a land-flood, and lay the country at the feet of
Buonaparte for peace. This, if his
devil does not fail, he will readily patch up, and send a few hundred thousands
among our coach-driving noblesse, and perhaps among our Princes of the
260 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
Blood. With the influence acquired by such
gages d’amitié, and by
ostentatious hospitality at his court to all those idiots who will forget the
rat-trap of the
detenus, and crowd
there for novelty, there will be, in the course of five or six years, what we
have never yet seen, a real French party in this country. To this you are to
add all the Burdettites, men who, rather than want combustibles, will fetch
brimstone from hell. It is not these whom I fear, however, it is the vile and
degrading spirit of
egoisme so
prevalent among the higher ranks, especially among the highest. God forgive me
if I do them injustice, but I think champagne duty free would go a great way to
seduce some of them; and is it not a strong symptom when people, knowing and
feeling their own weakness, will, from mere selfishness and pride, suffer the
vessel to drive on the shelves rather than she should be saved by the only
pilot capable of the task? I will be much obliged to you to let me know what is
likely to be done—whether any fight can yet be made, or if all is over.
Lord Melville had been furious for some
time against this Administration—I think he will hardly lend a hand to clear
the wreck. I should think, if
Marquis
Wellesley returns, he might form a steady Administration, but
God wot he must condemn most of the present rotten planks before he can lay
down the new vessel. Above all, let me know how
Canning’s recovery goes on. We must think what is to be
done about the Review. Ever yours truly,
W. S.”
Scott’s views as to the transactions of this
period, and the principal parties concerned in them, were considerably altered by the
observation of subsequent years; but I have been much interested with watching the course
of his sentiments and opinions on such subjects; and, in the belief that others may feel in
the same way
with myself, I shall insert,
without comment, some further extracts from this correspondence:
To the Same.
“Ashestiel, Nov. 3, 1809.
“I had your letter some time ago, which gave me less
comfort in the present public emergency than your letters usually do. Frankly,
I see great doubts, not to say an impossibility, of Canning’s attaining that rank among the Opposition which
will enable him to command the use of their shoulders to place him where you
cannot be more convinced that I am—he is entitled to stand. The condottieri of the Grenvilles,—for they have no political principles, and
therefore no political party, detached from their immense influence over
individuals—will hardly be seduced from their standard to that of
Canning, by an eloquence which has been exerted upon
them in vain, even when they might have hoped to be gainers by listening to it.
The soi-disant Whigs stick together
like burs. The ragged regiment of Burdett and Folkstone is
under yet stricter discipline, for you may have observed that no lover was ever
so jealous of his mistress as Sir Francis is of his mob
popularity—witness the fate of Paull,
Tierney, even Wardle; in short, of whomsoever presumed to
rival the brazen image whom the mob of Westminster has set up. That either, or
both of these parties, will be delighted with the accession of our
friend’s wisdom and eloquence, cannot for a moment be disputed. That the
Grenvilles, in particular, did he only propose to
himself a slice of the great pudding, would allow him to help himself where the
plums lie thickest, cannot be doubted. But I think it is very doubtful whether
they, closely banded and confident of
262 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
triumph as they at
present are, will accept of a colleague upon terms which would make him a
master; and unless Canning has these, it appears to me
that we (the Republic) should be no better than if he had retained his office
in the present, or rather late, Administration. But how far, in throwing
himself altogether into the arms of Opposition at this crisis,
Canning will injure himself with the large and sound
party who profess
Pittism, is, I really think, worthy of
consideration. The influence of his name is at present as great as you or I
could wish it; but those who wish to undermine it want but, according to our
Scottish proverb, ‘a hair to make a tether of.’ I admit his hand is
very difficult to play, and much as I love and admire him, I am most interested
because it is the decided interest of his country, that he should pique,
repique, and capot his antagonists. But you know much of the delicacy of the
game lies in
discarding—so I hope he will be in no hurry
on throwing out his cards.
“I am the more anxious on this score, because I feel
an internal conviction that neither Marquis
Wellesley nor Lord Melville
will lend their names to bolster out this rump of an Administration. Symptoms
of this are said to have transpired in Scotland, but in this retirement I
cannot learn upon what authority. Should this prove so, I confess my best
wishes would be realized, because I cannot see how Percival could avoid surrendering at discretion, and taking,
perhaps, a peerage. We should then have an Administration à la Pitt, which is a much better thing than an Opposition,
howsoever conducted or headed, which, like a wave of the sea, forms indeed but
a single body when it is rolling towards the shore, but dashes into foam and
dispersion the instant it reaches its object. Should Canning and the above named noble peers come
to understand each other, joined to all among the present Ministry whom their
na-
| POLITICKS CANNING, ETC.—1809. | 263 |
tive good sense,
and an attachment to good warm places, will lead to hear reason, it does seem
to me that we might form a deeper front to the enemy than we have presented
since the death of Pitt, or rather since the dissolution
of his first Administration. But if this be a dream, as it may very probably
be, I still hope Canning will take his own ground in
Parliament, and hoist his own standard. Sooner or later it must be successful.
So much for politics—about which, after all, my neighbours the
black-cocks know about as much as I do.
“I have a great deal to write you about a new poem which I have on the
anvil—also, upon the melancholy death of a favourite greyhound bitch—rest her
body, since I dare not say soul! She was of high blood and excellent promise.
Should any of your sporting friends have a whelp to spare, of a good kind, and
of the female sex, I would be grateful beyond measure, especially if she has
had the distemper. As I have quite laid aside the gun, coursing is my only and
constant amusement, and my valued pair of four-legged champions, Douglas and Percy, wax old
and unfeary. Ever yours truly,
W. S.”
To Walter Scott, Esq.
“Gloucester Lodge, Nov. 13, 1809.
“My dear Sir,
“I am very sensibly gratified by your kind
expressions, whether of condolence or congratulation, and I acknowledge, if not
(with your Highland writer) the
synonymousness of the two terms, at least the union of the two sentiments, as
applied to my present circumstances. I am not so heroically fond of being out
(quátenus out), as not
to consider that a matter of condolence. But I am at the same time sufficiently
convinced of the desirableness of not being in, when one should be in to no
purpose,
264 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
either of public advantage or personal credit,
to be satisfied that on that ground I am entitled to your congratulations.
“I should be very happy indeed to look forward, with
the prospect of being able to realize it, to the trip to Scotland which you
suggest to me; and still more to the visit included therein, which, as you hold
it out, would not be the least part of my temptation. Of this, however, I hope
we shall have opportunities of talking before the season arrives; for I reckon
upon your spring visit to London, and think of it, I assure you, with great
pleasure, as likely to happen at a period when I shall have it more in my power
than I have had on any former occasion to enjoy the advantage of it. You will
find me not in quite so romantic a scene of seclusion and tranquillity here as
that which you describe—but very tranquil and secluded nevertheless, at a mile
and a half’s distance from Hyde Park Corner—a distance considerable
enough, as I now am, to save me from any very overwhelming ‘unda salutantium.’
“Here, or any where else, I beg you to believe in the
very sincere satisfaction which I shall derive from your society, and which I
do derive from the assurance of your regard and good opinion. Ever, my dear
sir, very truly and faithfully yours,
“P.S.—I expect, in the course of this week, to
send you a copy of a more ample statement of the circumstances of my
retirement, which the misrepresentations of some who, I think, must have known they were misrepresenting (though that I must not say), have
rendered necessary.”
I could not quote more largely from these political letters without
trespassing against the feelings of dis-
tinguished individuals still alive. I believe the extracts which I have given are
sufficient to illustrate the sagacity with which Scott
had at that early period apprehended the dangers to which the political career of Mr Canning was exposed, by the jealousy of the old Tory
aristocracy on the one hand, and the insidious flatteries of Whig intriguers on the other.
Even in communications which he must have known would pass under Mr
Canning’s own eye, I think we may trace something of the lurking
suspicion, that a propensity to tamper with intrigue might eventually develope itself in
that great statesman’s otherwise noble character. In after years he certainly
expressed himself concerning the quarrel of 1809 as if, on a cool retrospect, he considered
the “harebrained Irishman” to have been
much more sinned against than sinning; but his original impressions on this point had of
course been modified by the subsequent lives of the two antagonists—as, indeed, his
correspondence will be found to confess. I willingly turn from
Scott’s politics to some other matters, which about this
time occupied a large share of his thoughts.
He had from his boyish days a great love for theatrical representation;
and so soon as circumstances enabled him to practise extended hospitality, the chief actors
of his time, whenever they happened to be in Scotland, were among the most acceptable of
his guests. Mr Charles Young was, I believe, the
first of them of whom he saw much: As early as 1803 I find him writing of that gentleman to
the Marchioness of Abercorn as a valuable addition to
the society of Edinburgh; and down to the end of Scott’s life
Mr Young was never in the north without visiting him.
Another graceful and intelligent performer in whom he took a special
interest, and of whom he saw a great
266 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
deal in his private circle, was
Miss Smith, afterwards Mrs
Bartley. But at the period of which I am now treating, his principal
theatrical intimacy was with John Philip Kemble, and
his sister Mrs Siddons, both of whom he appears to
have often met at Lord Abercorn’s villa near
Stanmore, during his spring visits to London after the first establishment of his poetical
celebrity. Of John Kemble’s personal character and manners, he
has recorded his impressions in a pleasing reviewal of Mr Boaden’s Memoir.* The great tragedian’s love
of black-letter learning, especially of dramatic antiquities, afforded a strong bond of
fellowship; and I have heard Scott say that the only man who ever
seduced him into very deep potations in his middle life was Kemble. He
was frequently at Ashestiel, and the “fat Scotch butler,” whom Mr Skene has described to us, by name John Macbeth, made sore complaints of the bad hours kept
on such occasions in one of the most regular of households; but the watchings of the night
were not more grievous to “Cousin Macbeth,” as
Kemble called the honest beauffetier, than were the hazards and fatigues of the morning to
the representative of the Scotch usurper. Kemble’s miseries
during a rough gallop were quite as grotesque as those of his namesake, and it must be
owned that species of distress was one from the contemplation of which his host could never
derive any thing but amusement.
I have heard Scott chuckle with
particular glee over the recollection of an excursion to the vale of the Ettrick, near
which river the party were pursued by a bull. “Come, King John,” said he, “we must even take the
water,” and accordingly he and his daughter
plunged into the stream. But King
John, halting on the bank and surveying the river, which happened to be full
and turbid, exclaimed, in his usual solemn manner, —“The flood is angry, Sheriff, Methinks I’ll get me up into a tree.”* |
It was well that the dogs had succeeded in diverting the bull, because there was no
tree at hand which could have sustained King John, nor, had that been
otherwise, could so stately a personage have dismounted and ascended with such alacrity as
circumstances would have required. He at length followed his friends through the river with
the rueful dignity of Don Quixote.
It was this intercourse which led Scott to exert himself very strenuously, when some change in the
administration of the Edinburgh stage became necessary—(I believe in 1808),—to prevail on
Mr Henry Siddons, the nephew of Kemble, to undertake the lease and management. Such an
arrangement would, he expected, induce both Kemble and his sister to be more in Scotland than hitherto; and what he
had seen of young Siddons himself led him to prognosticate a great
improvement in the whole conduct of the northern stage. His wishes were at length
accomplished in the summer of 1809. On this occasion he purchased a share, and became one
of the acting trustees for the general body of proprietors; and thenceforth, during a long
series of years, he continued to take a very lively concern in the proceedings of the
Edinburgh company. In this he was plentifully encouraged by his domestic camarilla; for his wife had all a Frenchwoman’s passion for the
* John Kemble’s
most familiar table-talk often flowed into blank verse; and so indeed did his
sister’s. Scott (who was a capital mimic) often repeated her tragic
exclamation to a footboy during a dinner at Ashestiel, “You’ve brought me water, boy,—I asked for beer.” |
|
268 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
spectacle; and the elder of the two Ballantynes (both equally devoted to the company of players) was a regular
newspaper critic of theatrical affairs, and in that capacity had already attained a measure
of authority supremely gratifying to himself.
The first new play produced by Henry
Siddons was the Family
Legend of Joanna Baillie. This was, I
believe, the first of her dramas that ever underwent the test of representation in her
native kingdom; and Scott appears to have exerted
himself most indefatiga.bly in its behalf. He was consulted about all the minutiæ of costume, attended every rehearsal, and supplied the prologue. The
play was better received than any other which the gifted authoress has since subjected to
the same experiment; and how ardently Scott enjoyed its success will
appear from a few specimens of the many letters which he addressed to his friend on the
occasion.
The first of these letters is dated Edinburgh, October 27, 1809. He had
gone into town for the purpose of entering his eldest
boy at the High School:—
“On receiving your long kind letter yesterday, I
sought out Siddons, who was equally
surprised and delighted at your liberal arrangement about the Lady of the Rock.
I will put all the names to rights, and retain enough of locality and
personality to please the antiquary, without the least risk of bringing the
clan Gillian about our ears. I went through the theatre,
which is the most complete little thing of the kind I ever saw, elegantly
fitted up, and large enough for every purpose. I trust, with you, that in this
as in other cases, our Scotch poverty may be a counterbalance to our Scotch
pride, and that we shall not need in my time a larger or more expensive
building. Siddons himself observes, that even for the
purposes of show (so paramount now-
| JOANNA BAILLIE’S FAMILY LEGEND. | 269 |
adays) a moderate stage is
better fitted than a large one, because the machinery is pliable and manageable
in proportion to its size. With regard to the equipment of the
Family Legend, I have been
much diverted with a discovery which I have made. I had occasion to visit our
Lord Provost (by profession a
stocking-weaver),* and was surprised to find the worthy magistrate filled with
a new born zeal for the drama. He spoke of Mr
Siddons’ merits with enthusiasm, and of
Miss Baillie’s powers almost with tears
of rapture. Being a curious investigator of cause and effect, I never rested
until I found out that this theatric rage which had seized his lordship of a
sudden, was owing to a large order for hose, pantaloons, and plaids for
equipping the rival clans of Campbell and
Maclean, and which Siddons was
sensible enough to send to the warehouse of our excellent provost. . . . .
The Laird† is just gone to the
High School, and it is with inexpressible feeling that I hear him trying to
babble the first words of Latin, the signal of commencing serious study, for
his acquirements hitherto have been under the mild dominion of a governess. I
felt very like Leontes—
“Looking on the lines Of my boy’s face, methought I did recall Thirty good years”— |
* This magistrate was Mr
William Coulter, who died in office in April, 1810, and
is said to have been greatly consoled on his deathbed by the prospect
of so grand a funeral as must needs occur in the case of an actual Lord
Provost of Auld Reekie. Scott used
to take him off as, saying at some public meeting, “Gentlemen,
though doomed to the trade of a stocking-weaver, I was born with the
soul of a Sheepio!”
(Scipio.) † Young Walter
Scott was called Gilnockie, the Laird of
Gilnockie, or simply the Laird,
in consequence of his childish admiration for Johnnie Armstrong, whose ruined tower
is still extant at Gilnockie on the Esk, nearly opposite Netherby. |
270 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
And O my dear Miss Baillie, what a
tale thirty years can tell even in an uniform and unhazardous course of life!
How much I have reaped that I have never sown, and sown that I have never
reaped! Always, I shall think it one of the proudest and happiest circumstances
of my life that enables me to subscribe myself your faithful and affectionate
friend,
W. S.”
Three months later he thus communicates the result of the experiment.
To Miss Joanna Baillie, Hampstead.
“Jan. 30th, 1810.
“You have only to imagine all that you could wish to
give success to a play, and your conceptions will still fall short of the
complete and decided triumph of the Family Legend. The house was crowded to a most extraordinary
degree; many people had come from your native capital of the west; every thing
that pretended to distinction, whether from rank or literature, was in the
boxes, and in the pit such an aggregate mass of humanity as I have seldom if
ever witnessed in the same space. It was quite obvious from the beginning, that
the cause was to be very fairly tried before the public, and that if any thing
went wrong, no effort, even of your numerous and zealous friends, could have
had much influence in guiding or restraining the general feeling. Some
good-natured persons had been kind enough to propagate reports of a strong
opposition, which, though I considered them as totally groundless, did not by
any means lessen the extreme anxiety with which I waited the rise of the
curtain. But in a short time I saw there
| THE FAMILY LEGEND—1810. | 271 |
was no ground whatever for apprehension, and
yet I sat the whole time shaking for fear a scene-shifter, or a carpenter, or
some of the subaltern actors should make some blunder, and interrupt the
feeling of deep and general interest which soon seized on the whole pit, box,
and gallery, as Mr Bayes has it. The scene
on the rock struck the utmost possible effect into the audience, and you heard
nothing but sobs on all sides. The banquet-scene was equally impressive, and so
was the combat. Of the greater scenes, that between Lorn and Helen in the
castle of Maclean, that between Helen and her lover, and the examination of
Maclean himself in Argyle’s castle, were applauded to the very
echo.
Siddons announced the play
‘
for the rest of the week,’ which was
received not only with a thunder of applause, but with cheering and throwing up
of hats and handkerchiefs.
Mrs Siddons
supported her part incomparably, although just recovered from the indisposition
mentioned in my last. Siddons himself played Lorn very well indeed, and moved and looked with
great spirit. A
Mr Terry, who promises
to be a fine performer, went through the part of the Old Earl with great taste
and effect. For the rest I cannot say much, excepting that from highest to
lowest they were most accurately perfect in their parts, and did their very
best. Malcolm de Grey was tolerable but
stickish—Maclean
came off decently—but the conspirators were sad hounds. You are, my dear
Miss Baillie, too much of a democrat in your writings;
you allow life, soul, and spirit to these inferior creatures of the drama, and
expect they will be the better of it. Now it was obvious to me, that the poor
monsters, whose mouths are only of use to spout the vapid blank verse which
your modern playwright puts into the part of the confidant and subaltern
villain of his piece, did not know what to make of the energetic and poetical
diction which
272 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
even these subordinate departments abound
with in the Legend. As the play greatly exceeded the usual length (lasting till
half-past ten), we intend, when it is repeated to-night, to omit some of the
passages where the weight necessarily fell on the weakest of our host, although
we may hereby injure the detail of the plot. The scenery was very good, and the
rock, without appearance of pantomime, was so contrived as to place
Mrs Siddons in a very precarious situation to all
appearance. The dresses were more tawdry than I should have judged proper, but
expensive and showy. I got my
brother
John’s Highland recruiting party to reinforce the garrison
of Inverary, and as they mustered beneath the porch of the castle, and seemed
to fill the court-yard behind, the combat scene had really the appearance of
reality. Siddons has been most attentive, anxious,
assiduous, and docile, and had drilled his troops so well that the
prompter’s aid was unnecessary, and I do not believe he gave a single
hint the whole night; nor were there any false or ridiculous accents or
gestures even among the underlings, though God knows they fell often far short
of the true spirit. Mrs Siddons spoke the epilogue*
extremely well: the prologue,† which I will send you in its revised
state, was also very well received.
Mrs
Scott sends her kindest compliments of congratulation; she had a
party of thirty friends in one small box, which she was obliged to watch like a
clucking hen till she had gathered her whole flock, for the crowd was
insufferable. I am going to see the Legend to-night,
when I shall enjoy it quietly, for last night I was so much interested in its
reception that I cannot say I was at leisure to attend to the feelings arising
from the representation itself. People are dying to read it. If you think of
suffering a single edition to be
printed to gratify their curiosity, I
will take care of it. But I do not advise this, because until printed no other
theatres can have it before you give leave. My kind respects attend
Miss Agnes Baillie, and believe me ever your
obliged and faithful servant,
“P.S. A friend of
mine writes dramatic criticism now and then. I have begged
him to send me a copy of the Edinburgh paper in which he inserts his
lucubrations, and I will transmit it to you: he is a play-going man, and
more in the habit of expressing himself on such subjects than most
people.—In case you have not got a playbill, I enclose one, because I think
in my own case I should like to see it.”
The Family Legend had
a continuous run of fourteen nights, and was soon afterwards printed and published by the
Ballantynes.
The theatrical critic alluded to
in the last of these letters was the elder of those brothers; the newspaper in which his
lucubrations then appeared was the Edinburgh Evening Courant; and so it continued until 1817, when the
Edinburgh Weekly
Journal was purchased by the printing company in the Canongate; ever
after which period it was edited by the prominent member of that firm, and from time to
time was the vehicle of many fugitive pieces by the unseen partner.
In one of these letters there occurs, for the first time, the name of a
person who soon obtained a large share of Scott’s
regard and confidence—the late ingenious comedian, Mr Daniel
Terry. He had received a good education, and been regularly trained as an
architect; but abandoned that profession, at an early period of life, for the stage, and
was now beginning to attract attention as a va-
274 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
luable and efficient
actor in Henry Siddons’s new company at
Edinburgh. Already he and the Ballantynes were constant companions,
and through his familiarity with them, Scott had abundant
opportunities of appreciating his many excellent and agreeable qualities. He had the
manners and feelings of a gentleman. Like John
Kemble, he was deeply skilled in the old literature of the drama, and he
rivalled Scott’s own enthusiasm for the antiquities of
vertu. Their epistolary correspondence in
after days was frequent, and will supply me with many illustrations of
Scott’s minor tastes and habits. As their letters lie before
me, they appear as if they had all been penned by the same hand.
Terry’s idolatry of his new friend induced him to imitate
his writing so zealously, that Scott used to say, if he were called on
to swear to any document, the utmost he could venture to attest would be, that it was
either in his own hand or in Terry’s. The actor, perhaps
unconsciously, mimicked him in other matters with hardly inferior pertinacity. His small
lively features had acquired, before I knew him, a truly ludicrous cast of
Scott’s graver expression; he had taught his tiny eyebrow
the very trick of the poet’s meditative frown; and to crown all, he so habitually
affected his tone and accent that, though a native of Bath, a stranger could hardly have
doubted he must be a Scotchman. These things afforded Scott and all
their mutual acquaintances much diversion; but perhaps no Stoic could have helped being
secretly gratified by seeing a clever and sensible man convert himself into a living type
and symbol of admiration.
Charles Mathews and Terry were once thrown out of a gig together, and the former received an
injury which made him halt ever afterwards, while the latter escaped unhurt.
“Dooms, Dauniel,” said
Mathews when they next met, “what a pity that it wasna
your luck to get
the game leg, mon!
Your Shirra wad hae been the very thing, ye ken,
an’ ye wad hae been croose till ye war coffined!”
Terry, though he did not always relish bantering on this subject,
replied readily and good-humouredly by a quotation from Peter
Pindar’s Bozzy and Piozzi:— “When his leg by some
misfortune broke, Says I to Johnson, all by way of joke, Sam, sir, in Paragraph
will soon be clever, He’ll take off Peter better now
than ever.” |
Mathews’s mirthful caricature of Terry’s sober mimicry of Scott was one of the richest extravaganzas of his social hours; but indeed
I have often seen this Proteus dramatize the whole
Ballantyne group with equal success while Rigdumfunnidos screamed with delight, and Aldiborontiphoscophornio faintly chuckled, and the
Sheriff, gently smiling, pushed round his decanters.
Miss Seward died in March, 1809. She bequeathed her
poetry to Scott, with an injunction to publish it
speedily, and prefix a sketch of her life; while she made her letters (of which she had
kept copies) the property of Mr Constable, in the
assurance that due regard for his own interests would forthwith place the whole collection
before the admiring world. Scott superintended accordingly the edition of the lady’s verses,
which was published in three volumes in August, 1810, by John
Ballantyne and Co.; and Constable lost no time in
announcing her correspondence, which
appeared a year later, in six volumes. The following letter alludes to these productions,
as well as a comedy by Mr Henry Siddons, which he
had recently brought out on the Edinburgh stage; and lastly, to the Lady of the Lake, the printing of which had by this time made
great progress.
276 |
LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. |
|
To Miss Joanna Baillie.
“Edinburgh, March 18, 1810.
“Nothing, my dear Miss
Baillie, can loiter in my hands, when you are commanding
officer. I have put the play
in progress through the press, and find my publishers, the Ballantynes, had previously determined to make
Mr Longman, the proprietor of your
other works, the offer of this. All that can be made of it in such a cause
certainly shall, and the booksellers shall be content with as little profit as
can in reason be expected. I understand the trade well, and will take care of
this. Indeed, I believe the honour weighs more with the booksellers here than
the profit of a single play. So much for business. You are quite right in the
risk I run of failure in a third
poem; yet I think I understand the British public well enough to set
every sail towards the popular breeze. One set of folks pique themselves upon
sailing in the wind’s eye another class drive right before it; now I
would neither do one or t’other, but endeavour to go, as the sailors
express it, upon a wind, and make use of it to carry me my own way, instead of
going precisely in its direction; or, to speak in a dialect with which I am
more familiar, I would endeavour to make my horse carry me, instead of
attempting to carry my horse. I have a vain-glorious presentiment of success
upon this occasion, which may very well deceive me, but which I would hardly
confess to any body but you, nor perhaps to you neither, unless I knew you
would find it out whether I told it you or no,—
“You are a sharp observer, and you look Quite through the eyes of men.— |
“I plead guilty to the charge of ill-breeding to
Miss ***. The despair which I used
to feel on receiving poor
| MISS SEWARD’S LETTERS, ETC. | 277 |
Miss Seward’s letters, whom I
really liked, gave me a most unsentimental horror for sentimental letters. The
crossest thing I ever did in my life was to poor, dear Miss
Seward; she wrote me in an evil hour (I had never seen her, mark
that!) a long and most passionate epistle upon the death of a dear friend, whom
I had never seen neither, concluding with a charge not to attempt answering the
said letter, for she was dead to the world, &c. &c. &c. Never were
commands more literally obeyed. I remained as silent as the grave, till the
lady made so many enquiries after me, that I was afraid of my death being
prematurely announced by a sonnet or an elegy. When I did see her, however, she
interested me very much, and I am now doing penance for my ill-breeding, by
submitting to edite her
posthumous poetry, most of which is absolutely execrable. This,
however, is the least of my evils, for when she proposed this bequest to me,
which I could not in decency refuse, she combined it with a request that I
would publish her whole
literary
correspondence. This I declined on principle, having a particular
aversion at perpetuating that sort of gossip; but what availed it? Lo! to
ensure the publication, she left it to an
Edinburgh
bookseller; and I anticipate the horror of seeing myself
advertised for a live poet like a wild beast on a painted streamer, for I
understand all her friends are depicted therein in body, mind, and manners. So
much for the risks of sentimental correspondence.
“Siddons’ play was truly flat, but not unprofitable; he
contrived to get it well propped in the acting, and—though it was such a thing
as if you or I had written it (supposing, that is, what in your case, and I
think even in my own, is impossible) would have been damned seventyfold,—yet it
went through with applause. Such is the humour of the multitude; and they will
quarrel with venison for being dressed a day sooner than fashion
278 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
requires, and batten on a neck of mutton, because, on the
whole, it is rather better than they expected; however,
Siddons is a good lad, and deserves success, through
whatever channel it comes. His
mother is
here just now. I was quite shocked to see her, for the two last years have made
a dreadful inroad both on voice and person; she has, however, a very bad cold.
I hope she will be able to act Jane de
Montfort, which we have long planned. Very truly yours,
W. S.”
Agnes Baillie (1760-1861)
The daughter of the Scottish cleric James Baillie and elder sister of the poet Joanna
Baillie with whom she lived in Hampstead for many decades.
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.
Sarah Bartley [née Williamson] (1783-1850)
English tragic actress who made her London debut at Covent Garden in 1805; in 1814 she
married the actor George Bartley (1782?-1858).
Francis Beaumont (1585-1616)
English playwright, often in collaboration with John Fletcher; author of
The Knight of the Burning Pestle (1607).
John Blackburn (1756-1840)
Glasgow merchant in the West India trade; he was a mutual friend of Walter Scott and
George Ellis.
James Boaden (1762-1839)
English playwrite and biographer; he was editor of The Oracle (1789) and published
biographies of John Philip Kemble (1825), Sarah Siddons (1827), and Dorothy Jordan
(1831).
William Pleydell- Bouverie, third earl of Radnor (1779-1869)
Son of the second earl (d. 1828); educated at Brasenose College, Oxford, he was Whig MP
for Downton (1801) and Salisbury (1802-28), and an associate of Sir Francis Burdett and
Samuel Whitbread.
Hector Macdonald Buchanan of Drumnakiln (d. 1828)
Of Ross Priory, son of Coll Macdonald of Boisdale; he was Writer to the Signet (1791) and
Principal Clerk of Session (1805-1828). He assumed the name of his wife, Jean Buchanan,
whom he married in 1793.
Sir Francis Burdett, fifth baronet (1770-1844)
Whig MP for Westminster (1807-1837) who was imprisoned on political charges in 1810 and
again in 1820; in the 1830s he voted with the Conservatives.
George Campbell (1719-1796)
Principal of Marischal College (1759-92) and professor of divinity (1771-92); he answered
David Hume in
A Dissertation on Miracles (1762).
George Canning (1770-1827)
Tory statesman; he was foreign minister (1807-1809) and prime minister (1827); a
supporter of Greek independence and Catholic emancipation.
Sir John Carr (1772-1832)
English travel writer educated at Rugby School who, beginning with
The
Stranger in Paris (1803), published popular volumes on Ireland, Holland, Scotland,
and Spain.
Arthur Clifford (1777-1830)
English antiquary and writer educated at the English College at Douai; an associate of
Walter Scott, he edited the Sadler Papers (1809) and published
Tixall
Poetry (1813).
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.
Archibald Constable (1774-1827)
Edinburgh bookseller who published the
Edinburgh Review and works
of Sir Walter Scott; he went bankrupt in 1826.
William Coulter (1760-1810)
Originally a stocking-weaver, he was Lord Provost of Edinburgh (1808-10).
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 Humphry Davy, baronet (1778-1829)
English chemist and physicist, inventor of the safety lamp; in Bristol he knew Cottle,
Wordsworth, Coleridge, and Southey; he was president of the Royal Society (1820).
Thomas Dermody (1775-1802)
Prolific Irish poet whose early promise a child prodigy went unfulfilled; after the
publication of James Grant Raymond's 1806 biography he became a type of the wastrel
bard.
Lady Frances Douglas [née Scott] (1750-1817)
The daughter of Francis Scott, earl of Dalkeith (1721-1750); in 1783 she became the
second wife of Archibald, Lord Douglas. She resided at Bothwell Castle and was the friend
of Sir Walter Scott and other literati.
Lady Lucy Douglas [née Graham] (1751-1780)
The daughter of William Graham, second Duke of Montrose; in 1771 she married Archibald
James Edward Douglas, first Baron Douglas of Douglas
Charles Dumergue (1768-1852)
Of York Place, Portman Square; he was surgeon-dentist to the royal family and a friend of
Sir Walter Scott, who was godfather to one of his children.
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).
Keith Dunlop (1772-1858)
The fourth daughter of John Dunlop of Dunlop. She was an acquaintance of Walter Scott.
She was the “blooming Keith” of Burns's “New Year's Day” (1790).
Maria Edgeworth (1768-1849)
Irish novelist; author of
Castle Rackrent (1800)
Belinda (1801),
The Absentee (1812) and
Ormond (1817).
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.
Robert Fergusson (1750-1774)
Scottish poet renowned for his Scots verse first published in the
Weekly Magazine; he was memorialized by Robert Burns.
John Fletcher (1579-1625)
English playwright, author of
The Faithful Shepherdess (1610) and
of some fifteen plays in collaboration with Francis Beaumont.
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).
James Graham, third duke of Montrose (1755-1836)
Son of the second duke whom he succeeded in 1790; he was educated at Trinity College,
Cambridge and was MP for Richmond (1780-84) and Great Bedwin (1784-90) and was lord justice
general for Scotland from 1795.
William Wyndham Grenville, baron Grenville (1759-1834)
Educated at Eton and Christ Church, Oxford, he was a moderate Whig MP, foreign secretary
(1791-1801), and leader and first lord of the treasury in the “All the Talents” ministry
(1806-1807). He was chancellor of Oxford University (1810).
Charles Grey, second earl Grey (1764-1845)
Whig statesman and lover of the Duchess of Devonshire; the second son of the first earl
(d. 1807), he was prime minister (1831-34).
Anne Jane Hamilton, marchioness of Abercorn [née Gore] (1763-1827)
Daughter of the earl of Arran; in 1783 she married Henry Hatton (d. 1793), in 1800 John
James Hamilton, first marquess of Hamilton. She entertained literary figures at her villa
at Stanmore, among them Lady Morgan.
Margaret Hodson [née Holford] (1778-1852)
English poet popular in the interval between Anna Seward and Felicia Hemans; she
published
Wallace, or, The Fight of Falkirk (1809) and
Margaret of Anjou (1816). She married Septimus Hodson in
1826.
George Home of Wedderburn and Paxton (1734-1820)
The son of Alexander Home of Sardenfield; he was Writer to the Signet (1763) and the
Principal Clerk of Session (1781-1812) Walter Scott replaced.
William Howley, archbishop of Canterbury (1766-1848)
Educated at Winchester and New College, Oxford, he was regius professor of Divinity
(1809-13), bishop of London (1813-28), and archbishop of Canterbury (1828-48).
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.
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).
John Philip Kemble (1757-1823)
English actor renowned for his Shakespearean roles; he was manager of Drury Lane
(1783-1802) and Covent Garden (1803-1808).
William Laidlaw (1779-1845)
The early friend of James Hogg and Sir Walter Scott's steward and amanuensis.
Thomas Norton Longman (1771-1842)
A leading London publisher whose authors included Southey, Wordsworth, Scott, and
Moore.
James M'Beith (1818 fl.)
Walter Scott's servant, who became insane in 1818.
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).
James Macpherson (1736-1796)
Scottish poet who attributed his adaptations of Gaelic poetry to the blind bard Ossian;
author of the prose epics
Fingal (1761) and
Temora (1763).
Alexander Manners (d. 1825)
Edinburgh bookseller in partnership with Robert Miller from 1794 to 1825. He was an
acquaintance of Walter Scott.
Queen Mary of Scotland (1542-1587)
The controversial queen of Scotland (1561-1567) who found a number of champions in the
romantic era; Sir Walter Scott treats her sympathetically in
The
Abbott (1820).
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.
William Richard Beckford Miller (1769-1844)
Albemarle-Street bookseller; he began publishing in 1790; shortly after he rejected
Byron's
Childe Harold in 1811 his stock and premises were purchased
by John Murray.
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.
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).
Samuel Parr (1747-1825)
English schoolmaster, scholar, and book collector whose strident politics and assertive
personality involved him in a long series of quarrels.
James Paull (1778-1808)
East India trader who was MP for Newtown (1805) and twice stood unsuccessfully for
Westminster; he died a suicide.
Spencer Perceval (1762-1812)
English statesman; chancellor of the exchequer (1807), succeeded the Duke of Portland as
prime minister (1809); he was assassinated in the House of Commons.
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 Ralph Sadler (1507-1587)
English diplomat in the service of Thomas Cromwell; he was afterwards one of the
commissioners treating with Mary Queen of Scots.
Scipio Africanus (236 BC-183 BC)
He defeated Hannibal in the Second Punic War at the battle of Zama.
Daniel Scott (1776 c.-1806)
The dissolute younger brother of Sir Walter Scott who emigrated to Jamaica in
1804.
John Scott (1769-1816)
Walter Scott's elder brother who served in the 73rd Regiment before retiring to Edinburgh
in 1810.
Sir Walter Scott, second baronet (1801-1847)
The elder son and heir of Sir Walter Scott; he was cornet in the 18th Hussars (1816),
captain (1825), lieut.-col. (1839). In the words of Maria Edgeworth, he was
“excessively shy, very handsome, not at all literary.”
William Scott (1800 c.-1869)
The illegitimate child of Daniel Scott and Carrie Lamb, supported by his uncle Sir Walter
Scott; he emigrated to Canada in 1828.
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.
Henry Siddons (1774-1815)
English actor and playwright, the son of the actress Sarah Siddons; with the assistance
of Walter Scott he obtained patent of the Edinburgh Theatre Royal in 1809.
Sarah Siddons [née Kemble] (1755-1831)
English tragic actress, sister of John Philip Kemble, famous roles as Desdemona, Lady
Macbeth, and Ophelia. She retired from the stage in 1812.
James Skene of Rubislaw (1775-1864)
A life-long friend of Sir Walter Scott, who dedicated a canto of
Marmion to him.
Tobias Smollett (1721-1771)
Scottish physician and man of letters; author of the novels
Roderick
Random (1747) and
Humphry Clinker (1771).
William Sotheby (1757-1833)
English man of letters; after Harrow he joined the dragoons, married well, and published
Poems (1790) and became a prolific poet and translator,
prominent in literary society.
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).
Andrew Stewart (1786 c.-1809 fl.)
Edinburgh tailor and poet convicted with his brother Robert and one other of robbing
Peter More, calico glazer in Edinburgh. Walter Scott arranged for his sentence to be
reduced to transportation.
Lady Louisa Stuart (1757-1851)
The youngest child of John Stuart, third earl of Bute; she corresponded with Sir Walter
Scott. Several volumes of her writings and memoirs were published after her death.
Daniel Terry (1789-1829)
English actor; after a career in provincial theater made his London debut in 1812. A
close friend of Walter Scott, he performed in theatrical adaptations of Scott's
novels.
George Tierney (1761-1830)
Whig MP and opposition leader whose political pragmatism made him suspect in the eyes of
his party; he fought a bloodless duel with Pitt in 1798. He is the “Friend of Humanity” in
Canning and Frere's “The Needy Knife-Grinder.”
Nicholas Walton (1734 c.-1810)
Of Newcastle; one of the receivers of the revenue of Greenwich Hospital. In 1809 Robert
Southey considering applying for his office.
Gwyllym Lloyd Wardle (1762-1833)
Military officer and MP for Okehampton (1807-1811); with the assistance of the courtesan
Mary Anne Clarke he forced the resignation of the Duke of York as commander-in-chief. She
later turned on Wardle, who retired to Italy where he died.
Richard Wellesley, first marquess Wellesley (1760-1842)
The son of Garret Wesley (1735-1781) and elder brother of the Duke of Wellington; he was
Whig MP, Governor-general of Bengal (1797-1805), Foreign Secretary (1809-12), and
Lord-lieutenant of Ireland (1821-28); he was created Marquess Wellesley in 1799.
John Wolcot [Peter Pindar] (1738-1819)
English satirist who made his reputation by ridiculing the Royal Academicians and the
royal family.
Charles Mayne Young (1777-1856)
English Shakespearean actor who began his professional career in 1798; he was admired in
Hamlet. He was a friend of Sir Walter Scott.
Edinburgh Evening Courant. (1718-). An Edinburgh newspaper originally published thrice weekly; it was edited by George Houy
(1826-27) and David Buchanan (1827-48).
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.
The Scots Magazine. 65 vols (1739-1803). Continued as
The Scots Magazine and Edinburgh Literary Miscellany
(1804-17) and
The Edinburgh Magazine and Literary Miscellany
(1817-26).