Samuel Rogers and his Contemporaries
James Fenimore Cooper to Samuel Rogers, 19 January 1831
‘Paris: January 19th, 1831.
‘My dear Sir,—So long a time has elapsed since we
parted, that I am almost afraid to write you, though the object of my letter is
a tardy but sincere expression of the grateful recollection of all your
kindnesses when in London. I did write to you with the same in tent from
Florence early in 1829, but some circumstances have led me to infer that by an
oversight the letter was never ![]()
![]()
sent—an accident of by no means rare occurrence in my correspondence.
Both Mrs. Cooper and myself retain a
pleasant remembrance of your good offices, and I ought to add, your good
nature, while we were sojourners in the wilderness of your capital. I am
willing to flatter myself with the impression that you still feel sufficient
interest in our welfare not to shut your ears against an account of what we
have been about during the last four years.
‘From London, as you may remember, possibly, we went to
Holland, and, after a short delay in Paris, to Switzerland, where we passed the
summer. In the autumn we crossed the Alps. Our stay in Italy extended to near
two years, and we left it by the Tyrol for Germany. After the late revolution
we came back here for the purpose of giving our girls, of whom there are four,
the advantages of the masters. I regret to say that my nephew, whom you may
remember, a tall stripling, and who grew into a handsome man, died of
consumption in September last. Little Paul often speaks of the Pare
St. Jacques, and Monsieur Rogers, and of an
old woman who sold fresh milk in your neighbourhood. I do not know that you
ought to be much flattered by the association, but you will at least admit that
it is natural.
‘I continue, as George
III. said to Johnson, to
“scribble, scribble, scribble,” though with something less of
advantage to mankind than was the case with the great moralist. In one sense,
however, I am quite his equal, for I do as well as I can. Since I saw you I
have published three tales, and am now hard at work at a fourth. The last was on a subject connected
with Italy, ![]()
| 14 | ROGERS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES | |
![]()
the scene being in Venice, and I frequently
stimulated the imagination by reading your own images and tales of that part of
Europe. I know nothing of its reception among you, though I fancy there will be
a disposition to drive me back again into my own hemisphere. There is a good
deal of Falstaff’s humour about me in
the way of compulsion, and so I may prove hard-headed enough to try my hand
again. Some one told me that I was accused of presumption for laying the scene
of a story in a town rendered immortal by Shakespeare and Byron.
Luckily there is a sort of immunity that is peculiarly the right of
insignificance, and I confess that the idea of invading the domains of your
great poets never crossed my brain. I had a crotchet to be delivered of, and
produced it must be, though it were stillborn. I am far from certain that it
ought to be imputed as a crime to any man that he is not
Shakespeare or Scott, so I shall go on with the confidence of innocence.
‘I heard through Mr.
Wilkes that the picture which I wished you to accept as a feeble
testimony of my recollection of your kindness was sent, and I hope it was not a
bad specimen of the artist’s talent, which I take to be of a very high
order. I hear he is doing wonders, and that he is attracting notice in Italy.
He is studying the figure, they tell me, with signal success. I picked up a
little picture the other day in the open streets that is generally much
esteemed. It is a female portrait of the time of Louis
XIV., of the Flemish school, we think, and certainly an original
from the hand of some eminent painter. I do not remember a dozen better
portraits, though it is something the worse for exposure and time. ![]()
![]()
It cost me just a guinea! The
only account I can find of it is a sort of tradition in a family that owned it
thirty years that it is a portrait, by Teniers, of his own wife. The manner of
Teniers is what may be termed silvery, and that of my
portrait is rather in the style of Correggio. It is exquisitely drawn and coloured, but the face
strikes everybody as being decidedly German, or at least Flemish. Could you
help me to a hint, to a print, or to any book that would be likely to throw
light on the matter.
‘Wonderful changes have occurred since I had the
pleasure of seeing you, but I think greater still are in store. Is not the
tendency of the present spirit obvious? and ought not your aristocracy to throw
themselves into the stream and go with the current, rather than hope to stem a
torrent that in its nature is irresistible? If your system of Government has
had its advantages in its pliable character (and it certainly has avoided many
great dangers by quietly assuming new shades of policy), it has also one great
and menacing disadvantage, that I do not see how it can resist. The
contradiction between theory and practice has left your controlling power
exposed to the unwearied and all-powerful attacks of the press, for though
treason can [not] be written against the king the aristocracy has no such
protection. The idea of defending any limited body by the press against the
assaults of the press seems a desperate experiment, for, right or wrong, there
is but one means of keeping physical force and political power asunder, and
that is the remedy of ignorance. To me at this distance it seems an inevitable
consequence of your actual social condition that both ![]()
| 16 | ROGERS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES | |
![]()
your
church establishment and your peerage must give way. America might furnish a
useful example to warn the English aristocracy if they would consent to study
it. Our gentry put themselves in opposition to the mass, after the revolution,
simply because, being in the habit of receiving their ideas from the most
aristocratic nation of our time, they fancied there were irreconcilable
interests to separate the rich man from the poor man, and that they had nothing
to expect from the latter class should it get into the ascendant. They
consequently supported theories adverse to the amalgamation, and as a matter of
course, the instinct of the multitude warned them against trusting men opposed
to their rights. The error has been discovered, and although individuals among
those who were prominent in supporting exclusive doctrines are necessarily
proscribed by opinion, the nation shows all proper deference to education and
character; when these are united to money and discreetly used they are of
necessity still more certain of notice. Jefferson was the man to whom we owe the high lesson that the
natural privileges of a social aristocracy are in truth no more than their
natural privileges. With us, all questions of personal rights, except in the
case of the poor slaves, are effectually settled, and yet every really valuable
interest is as secure as it is anywhere else.
‘It is curious to note the effect of the present
condition of England. When the prerogative was in the ascendant, Charles made six Dukes of his illegitimate sons
(Monmouth included), and George IV. scarce dared his progeny. Even the
first of the Hanoverian princes presumed
to make a Duchess of his mistress, ![]()
| FRENCH POLITICS IN 1831 | 17 |
![]()
but all that power disappeared
before the increasing ascendancy of the nobles. Now the many and the few are in
opposition, the King comes into the account, and we hear of lords and ladies
among his offspring. A bold and able monarch would in such a crisis regain his
authority, and we should again hear the phrase “Le roi
y pensera.” The experiment would be delicate, but it might
succeed by acting on the fears of the middle classes, the fundholders, and the
timid. With the cast of character that has actually been made by Providence, I
think, however, there is little probability that the drama will receive this
dénouement.
‘Here we have just got out of the provisoire. The furor of moderation is likely
enough, I think, to put us all back again. There is an unfortunate and material
distinction between the interests of those who rule and those who are ruled to
come in aid of the floundering measures of the ministry. The intentions of the
“juste milieu”
are obviously to make the revolution a mere change of dynasties, while the
people have believed in a change of principles. Could the different sections of
the Opposition unite, the present state of things would not endure a month.
Neither the National Guard nor the Army is any security against a great
movement, for they are more likely to go against the Government than with it.
There have been some very serious steps taken in the courts here of late which
look grave. The judges have exercised a right of sentencing prisoners that a
jury had acquitted. There is probably some show of law for the measure, but it
is a very grave and hazardous course. On the whole, I am of opinion that
King Louis Philippe’s
![]()
| 18 | ROGERS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES | |
![]()
Civil List may be worth some two or three years’
purchase. I would not give him three.
‘But I am boring you with politics, when apology for
writing at all is the most material matter. Mrs.
Cooper desires to be remembered to Miss Rogers and yourself, and I beg also to be mentioned to
your sister. I should like exceedingly, did you not think it encroaching on
your good nature, to be mentioned to Dr.
and Mrs. Somerville.
‘I can tell you nothing of Parisian society, not having
dined or passed an evening out of my own house in five months. Nobody comes to
see me, and I go to see nobody, or next to nobody. I have a pleasant and happy
fireside of my own, and am quite content. I should be very glad to see you
among us. There was a report some time since that you were about to visit
Paris, and I had hopes of meeting you here. Perhaps you did come, and I was
ignorant of your presence, for I am so much out of the world that it might very
well happen. Should you not have been, and should you in truth come, I trust
you will take the trouble to send a card with your address to me, and I add my
street and number not to miss the occasion of seeing you.
‘Believe me, dear Sir,
‘Very truly and faithfully yours,
‘Rue St. Dominique St. Germain, No. 59.’
James Fenimore Cooper (1789-1851)
American novelist educated at Yale College; he was author of
The Last
of the Mohicans (1826) and the other Leatherstocking Tales.
Thomas Jefferson (1843-1826)
Governor of Virginia, President of the United States, founder of the University of
Virginia.
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).
Louis Philippe, king of the French (1773-1850)
The son of Louis Philippe II, Duke of Orléans; he was King of France 1830-48; he
abdicated following the February Revolution of 1848 and fled to England.
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).
James Scott, duke of Monmouth (1649-1685)
The illegitimate son of Charles II and claimant to the throne; he was the subject of
Dryden's poem Absalom and Achitophel (1681).
Mary Somerville [née Fairfax] (1780-1872)
Mathematician and science writer, daughter of Admiral William George Fairfax (1739-1813)
and friend of Ada Byron; she spent her later years in Italy. She was twice married.
William Somerville (1771-1860)
Scottish physician, son of the historian Thomas Somerville and friend of Sir John Barrow
and John Murray, husband of the writer Mary Fairfax Somervillle; he was physician to
Chelsea Hospital (1819-38).
Charles Wilkes (1764-1833)
President of the Bank of New York and patron of James Fenimore Cooper.
