Samuel Rogers and his Contemporaries
Chapter VIII. 1818-19.
CHAPTER VIII.
1818-19.
Lines on the Temple at Woburn—Luttrell’s
lines on Rogers’s Seat—Lord
Holland’s Pamphlet—His ‘Dream’ of University
Extension—Sketch of a Poem—Moore and
Rogers at Bowood—Stories of
Sheridan—Rogers to Mrs.
Greg—Sonnet by Lord
Holland—Moore and
Rogers—Crabbe and his
Publisher—Rogers’s ‘Human
Life’—Don Juan on
Rogers—Offers of Help to
Moore—Letter from
Crabbe—Rogers out of Politics—Two
Generations of Literary Talk.
Moore’s Diary begins in August, 1818, and from that time forward Rogers’s life is almost written in it. The first
mention of him is in September, 1818, when Moore says that
Rogers has made a paraphrase, in blank verse, of two lines from
Pindar, for an inscription on the Temple of the
Graces which the Duke of Bedford is building at Woburn.
These are the lines—
Approach with reverence. There are those within
Whose dwelling place is Heaven. Daughters of Jove,
From them flow all the decencies of life;
Without them nothing pleases. Virtue’s self
Admired, not loved; and those on whom they smile,
Great though they be, and wise and beautiful,
Shine forth with double lustre.
|
It was the custom in those days to put up inscriptions of this kind. I have
already given the lines placed by Lord Holland on the
summer-house in the garden of
264 | ROGERS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES | |
Holland House called Rogers’s seat. On the same building there were some
verses by Luttrell, which, many years later, he
showed to Macaulay, adjuring him, with mock pathos,
to spare his blushes. Macaulay read the lines and speaks of them as
very pretty and polished, but too many to be remembered from one reading. They are
preserved in MS. probably as Luttrell sent them to
Rogers—
How charmed is the eye which in summer reposes
On this haunt of the poet o’ershadowed with roses.
I’ll in and be seated, to try, if thus placed,
I can catch but one spark of his feeling and taste;
Can steal a sweet note from his musical strain,
Or a ray of his genius to kindle my brain.
Well—now I am fairly installed in the bower,
How lovely the scene, how propitious the hour.
The breeze is perfumed from the hawthorn it stirs,
All is silent around us, but nothing occurs.
Not a thought, I protest, though I’m here and alone,
Not a line can I hit on that Rogers would
own,
Though my senses are raptured, my feelings in tune,
And Holland’s my host, and the season is
June.
Enough of my trial; nor garden, nor grove,
Though poets amidst them may linger or rove;
Not a seat e’en so hallowed as this can impart
The fancy and fire that must spring from the heart.
So I rise, since the Muses continue to frown,
No more of a poet than when I sat down;
While Rogers, on whom they look kindly, can strike
Their lyre at all times and all places alike.1
|
H. L.
June 2, 1818.
1 There are some slight differences between the lines as given
in the MS. and the actual inscription at Holland House. The poem begins—as there
inscribed—
|
|
LORD HOLLAND'S 'DREAM'
|
265 |
Rogers puts on record an inscription written on a
pane of glass in a dressing-room at Holland House by J. H.
Frere—
May neither fire destroy nor waste impair,
Nor time consume thee to the twentieth heir;
May Taste respect thee, and may Fashion spare.
|
In the year 1818 Lord Holland printed a
small pamphlet, for private circulation, entitled, ‘A Dream; addressed to Samuel Rogers.’ A copy of this
pamphlet was in Rogers’s library;1 and the original manuscript is among the papers he has left. It is
a very striking production, and, more than anything of Lord
Holland’s that has yet been given to the world, shows how far his
views on many subjects were in advance of his time. The dream takes him first ‘to
the spacious apartments of an old castle, and into the presence of a person whose name,
since he is still alive, shall be sacred.’ He is surprised to find this
person’s condition infinitely less dismal than waking fancy had often painted it.
‘Courtesy and good nature (for I am afraid it was not loyalty, and I am sure
it was not hypocrisy) prompted me to inquire, with unusual earnestness, about all that
related to his treatment, his welfare, and his feelings in
‘How happily sheltered is he who reposes In this haunt of the poet o’ershadowed with roses, While the sun is rejoicing, unclouded, on high, And summer’s full majesty reigns in the sky. Let me in and be seated. I’ll try if thus placed,’ &c. |
In the thirteenth line, ‘ravished’ is put instead of
‘raptured,’ and the fifteenth begins, ‘The trial is ended.’ ‘In the catalogue of the sale in 1856, is (Lot 313),
‘Dream, A, by Lord Holland, addressed to S.
Rogers. Privately printed, morocco, large paper, 1818.’ It was bought
by the late Lord Holland for 18s. |
266 | ROGERS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES | |
a situation so different from that in which he has spent the largest part of a very long
life. . . . He frankly told me he had never been so happy. . . . He added that, old as
he was, and versed as he had been in the great affairs of the world, he had derived
more instruction from the short intercourse of a few months with persons now no more
than he had collected from the conferences of ministers, the deliberations of councils,
the documents of State, or the correspondence with courts for the space of more than
fifty years.’ To this intercourse with the Immortals the Dreamer was
admitted, that he might write down an outline of their talk. The subject for conversation
was to be a certain hundred thousand pounds a-year, which his introducer said he desired to
bequeath ‘in a way creditable to his memory and useful to the world.’ Then,
adds the Dreamer, ‘taking me by the arm, and nodding and whispering to me most
significantly, he opened a door into a large apartment, where I perceived several
persons sitting in easy and unconstrained postures, and whom I immediately recognised
(though I cannot recollect how or why, for I am but an unobservant handler of old
prints) to be no less important personages than Sir Thomas
More, Cardinal Pole, Lord Burghley, Lord
Bacon, Lord Clarendon, Mr. Milton, Mr.
Cowley, Sir William Temple,
Lord Shaftesbury (author of the “Characteristicks”),
Mr. Locke, Lord
Somers, Bishop Berkeley, and
Mr. Addison.’ Sir Isaac Newton had just left the room. The conversation
which follows is long and interesting. After a remark from Cowley on
the new conditions which make authors no longer dependent upon patrons,
Addison points out some | LORD HOLLAND'S 'LITERARY ACADEMY' | 267 |
of the disadvantages which arise from the new
state of things. ‘The novelty which diverts for the moment is nobly, we will not
say extravagantly, encouraged, while genius, when labouring to improve the taste and
morals of mankind, is often neglected, or at least somewhat tardily rewarded. Besides,
this new and gigantic Mæcenas, if he has the
bulk, has also the stomach of a Leviathan. I will not say his appetite is coarse, but
it is exceedingly voracious. There is, therefore, reason to fear that those who study
his palate with a view to their own profit rather than to his health will pay more
attention to the quantity than to the quality of viands with which they supply his
never-ceasing demand.’ Hence, without interfering with the consumption of
paper or the harvests of Grub Street, he would like ‘to place, in point of fortune
as well as consideration, the devoted sons of permanent fame (and here he looked at
John Milton) more nearly upon a level with those who are so
amply remunerated for gratifying contemporary caprice and curiosity. Long and laborious
endeavours may be cherished by the judicious encouragement of the State, and the lovers
of temporary celebrity, like gaudy insects in the sunshine, be left, nevertheless, to
enjoy unmolested the transient but enlivening munificence which has kindled them into
existence.’ The conversation thus begun leads up to the suggestion for the
establishment of a Literary Academy, to which 20,000l. a year is to
be allotted. Then the voices take a higher range, and the advancement of knowledge, and the
improvement and extension of education are discussed, ‘and the influence which
efforts directed to this end might have in consolidating 268 | ROGERS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES | |
the
strength, concentrating the talent, and uniting the hearts of our countrymen, and
thereby exalting the name of Great Britain among the nations of the earth.’
In the conversation which follows, the Dreamer is struck with the cordial agreement of the
extraordinary personages before him. ‘The enthusiasm of Sir Thomas
More, of Milton and Bishop
Berkeley, was directed to a common object; Cardinal
Pole, Mr. Locke, and Lord
Shaftesbury concurred in the necessity of rendering education
subservient to the ends of religious freedom and national union.’
Sir William Temple at length produces a scheme by which England is
to establish a great and universal system of education, with the object of preserving,
‘by means of colleges, academies, schools, and universities in various parts
of her dominions, English habits of thinking, English manners, and English
language.’ Three great universities, with dependencies of schools, military
and naval academies, lecturing and travelling professorships, museums, libraries and
observatories, are to be established in three distinct quarters of the globe, within the
jurisdiction of the throne of Great Britain. One is to be in Canada or the West Indies,
another at Fort William in the East, and the third at Malta, Gibraltar, or some possession
in the Mediterranean. They are to be intimately connected with one another as well as with
the establishments of Marlow and Hertford, the colleges of Eton, Westminster, Winchester,
and Maynooth, and the universities of Dublin, Edinburgh, Oxford, and Cambridge. There is to
be absolute religious freedom. In the university at Malta, which is first to be
established, there | 'THIS UNSUBSTANTIAL PAGEANT FADED' | 269 |
are to be
four Christian churches, a mosque, and a synagogue. The scheme of the Maltese University is
worked out into minute details; but the Dreamer wakes before the conversation is finished.
This is but a meagre outline of an idea of University Extension sketched by
the great Whig potentate for the amusement of his friend. Of course, it was not a serious
proposal, and it is only of value as indicating the views and feelings entertained at
Holland House before the great war against Napoleon
had reached its close. The moral is—‘How many Maltese universities would the
expenses of a single campaign have endowed? What knowledge might not be purchased, what
genius might not have been rewarded with a sum equal to the cost of some senseless and
tedious festival, some fantastic and unprofitable building.’ The fantastic
and unprofitable building was then still growing at Brighton, where the dream was dreamed.
At breakfast the Dreamer felt that the unsubstantial pageant belonged only to the world of
dreams. The sent1ments the talk of the Immortals had raised in his mind seemed
‘trite, sickly, and impracticable morality,’ and when he took up the
newspaper, ‘I smiled,’ he says, ‘though I yawned at reading a long
debate on the excesses of expenditure in the Master of the Horse and the Lord
Chamberlain’s departments.’ The manuscript was sent to Rogers, after some delay, with the following letter.
‘Dear Rogers,—I send you my promised letter under a cover to
Colonel Bunbury, who will transmit
it to you. It was, indeed, necessary to convey it gratis; at least, it
270 | ROGERS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES | |
would have been unpardonable to make you pay for such
nonsense. As it is, my presumption is not small in submitting so crude a
rhapsody to you, who, with a fertile invention, have the good sense of
subjecting it always to the control of a severe judgment and a correct taste,
but qu’yfaire, when one is full of a thing, one
must write it, and when one has written it, one must show it within twenty-four
hours or not at all. I had promised you the dissertation. If I keep it till
to-morrow I shall never let you see it, and up to this time I am under the
illusion of thinking it all perfection.
‘I have no other copy of it, so pray preserve the
precious MS., as I should like to shew it to my uncle
Ossory and my sister.
‘Yours,
Rogers read and approved. It was a prose poem, and
he could only suggest that it should be shortened. Lord
Holland replied—
‘Dear Rogers,—Your long-expected letter arrived this morning and
has lost nothing of its sweetness on the road. Praise is delightful, and I hope
it is good for me. I like your notion of compression much. The whole thing is
too long, and that, if there were not other objections, would form a strong one
against any previous description of the individuals. Let me have my MS., for I
have no copy and wish much to show it to my uncle
Ossory, and if possible, to compress it. Mark the parts you
think susceptible of compression with a pencil,
—you shall have it back again, if you wish it,
the moment I have taken a copy.
‘Yours,
There was much correspondence with Richard
Sharp on Rogers’s forthcoming
poem. As with his earlier writings, so with this, many of the lines were subjected to
critical discussion and revision. The idea in the following letter may have been suggested
by Wordsworth’s most exquisite poem.
‘My dear Friend,—What would you say, and what
would Wordsworth say, if I throw what
follows into verse? Perhaps you would not recommend it. Besides, the thought is
yours, and to be twice stolen is a fate reserved only for the bronze horses of
Lysippus.
‘When first we come, a light divine is on all
Nature—on earth, and sea, and sky; but, like the Bologna-stone in the
dark, we shed it all ourselves. It came with us; it issues from us; and soon,
like that stone of lustre, we shed it no longer. It grows fainter and fainter,
and at last it dies. Where we imbibed it, we know not. We did not find it here;
and when it goes, nothing, nothing can bring it back again. It goes, leaving us
to all the flat realities of this life; and nothing can supply its place but
the opening gleams of a better.
‘S. R.
‘If you don’t mean to use it yourself,
perhaps you will help me a little.’
272 |
ROGERS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES
|
|
A further letter recalls an old matter of anxiety—
‘My dear Friend,—It is now twenty years since
we discussed together in Norbury Park the subject of “Columbus and the
Spirits” and its merits as a poetical subject. Now, may I ask you what
you would have said then, and what you have now to say, in answer to an
objection which has been triumphantly brought against it, and which Mackintosh seems to admit to be
unanswerable—the impropriety of blending truth and fiction together, when
the real circumstances are so recent and so well known?
‘Perhaps you would rather state your sentiments in
conversation than in writing. If so, and you can eat a cutlet with me at six
o’clock any day this week, I shall be very happy to see you.
‘I have drawn up a short answer, with which I mean to
let the subject rest for ever, but I am not quite satisfied with it.
‘Yours ever,
‘St. James’s Place: Monday [Aug. 17, 1818].
Moore’s Diary continues—
‘October 18, 1818.—As the morning
was fine, set out to Bowood to see Rogers;
caught him in the garden on the way to Bowles’s; walked with him; talked much about Sheridan. . . Sheridan once told
Rogers of a scene that
occurred in a French theatre in 1772, where two French
officers stared a good deal at his wife, and S., not knowing a word of French, could do
nothing but put his arms a-kimbo and look bluff and defying at them, which they, not
knowing a word of English, could only reply to by the very same attitude and look. He
once mentioned to Rogers that he was aware he ought to have made a
love scene between Charles and Maria in the “School for Scandal” and would have done it
but that the actors who played the parts were not able to do such a scene justice.
Talked of Hastings and the impeachment; asked
Rogers whether it was not now looked upon even by the
Opposition themselves as a sort of dramatic piece of display, got up by the Whigs of
that day from private pique, vanity, &c., &c.,—Francis first urging them on from his hostility to
Hastings; Burke running
headlong into it from impetuosity of temper; and Sheridan seizing
with avidity the first great opportunity that offered of showing off his talent. He
said it was so considered now, and in addition to all this,
Mr. Pitt gave in to the prosecution with much
satisfaction, because it turned away the embattled talent of the time from himself and
his measures, and concentrated it all against one individual whom he was most happy to
sacrifice, so he could thereby keep them employed. . . . Sat with
Rogers in his room till dinner. Told me that Beckford (the Beckford) is
delighted with “Lalla
Rookh.” Heard so from Beckford himself when I met him
at Rogers’s in the spring. Beckford
wishes me to go to Fonthill with R., anxious that I should look over his “Travels” (which were printed some years ago but
afterwards suppressed by him) and prepare 274 | ROGERS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES | |
them for the press.
Rogers supposes he would give me something magnificent—a
thousand pounds, perhaps; but if he were to give me a hundred times that sum I would
not have my name coupled with his. . . . Rogers asked me whether
the “Parody on Horace,” lately in the
“Chronicle,” was mine;
said how Luttrell was delighted with it at
Ampthill and pronounced it to be mine, reading it out to Lords Jersey and Duncannon, who were also
much pleased with it. Told me also that he had heard the verses to Sir Hudson Lowe praised at Brookes’s.
‘19th.—Had promised Rogers, who was coming to me this morning, to meet him
half-way. Mrs. Phipps, upon whom I called as I went, came out with
me in order to get a glimpse of “Memory
Rogers.” He and I walked to my cottage, much delighted with
the scenery around; said he preferred the valley and village before us to the laid-out
grounds of Bowood. Shewed him some of my Sheridan papers. He mentioned “Memoirs of
Jackson, of Exeter,”
written by himself, which he saw in MS. some years ago, and in which he remembered
there was a most glowing description of his pupil, Miss
Linley, standing singing by his side, and so beautiful “you might
think you were looking into the face of an angel.”
‘20th.—. . . Looked over Rogers’s poem and marked some lines with pencil.
. . . Rogers thinks I must not give extracts from Mr. T. Grenville’s letters, he being still
living.
‘21st.—. . . Walked to meet
Rogers, who said he
1 Rogers
had recorded in his Commonplace Book, that Jackson ‘had known Mrs.
Sheridan before her marriage. He spoke of Mrs.
Sheridan’s countenance when singing as like nothing
earthly’ (Early Life, p. 401). |
| SHERIDAN'S PRACTICAL JOKES | 275 |
would call upon me. Talked chiefly
of Sheridan. Told me several anecdotes, some of
which I have written down in my note-book as fit to use; the rest, practical jokes not
easily tellable. His strewing the hall or passage with plates and dishes, and then
tempting Tickell (with whom he was always at
some frolic or other) to pursue him into the thick of them.
Tickell fell among them and was almost cut to pieces, and next
day, in vowing vengeance to Lord John Townshend
against S. for this trick, he added (with the true spirit of an amateur in practical
jokes), “but it was amazingly well done.” At another time, when the women
(Mrs. Crewe, Mrs.
Tickell, &c.) had received the gentlemen after dinner in disguises
which puzzled them to make out which was which, the gentlemen one day sent to the
ladies to come down to them in the dining-room. The ladies on entering saw them all
dressed as Turks, holding bumpers in their hands, and, after looking amongst them and
saying, “This is Mr. Crewe”; “No, this is
he,” &c., &c., they heard a laugh at the door and there saw all the
gentlemen in propriis personis, for ‘twas the maids they
had dressed up in Turkish habits. S. was always at these tricks at country houses.
‘22nd.—. . . Met R. at the park gate
and came on towards the cottage. Told him my delicacy on the subject of the Coalition;
unwilling as I should be to offend Lord Holland,
yet still feeling it my duty to speak sincerely what I thought of Fox’s conduct in that instance. He said there was
much to be advanced in palliation, if not in vindication, of that and other coalitions;
bid me talk on the subject to Lord Holland and Allen, who
276 | ROGERS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES | |
had staggered him by
their arguments. Lord H.’s idea of three distinct periods in
his uncle’s life: the first when he was opposed to Lord
North and when his eloquence was bold, careless, vehement, vituperative;
the second, when Pitt was his antagonist and when
he found it necessary to be more cool, cautious and logical; during both these periods
ambition of power and distinction was his ruling passion; but in the third and
concluding portion of his life all this had passed away, and his sole, steady, chastened-down desire was that of doing good. . . . Rogers, Lord St.
John (I think), and Lord Lauderdale
were in Mr. Fox’s room in Stable Yard a short time before
his death, when Sheridan called. “I must
see him, I suppose,” said Fox, and when S. came in put out
his hand to him. S. has since told Rogers that when
Fox called him over and shook him by the hand he said in a low
voice, “My dear Sheridan, I love you; you are, indeed, my
friend, as for these others I merely,” &c., &c. This was an
excellent invention of Sheridan, who knew no one would contradict
him. Talked of the Scotch novels. . . . Scott gave
his honour to the Prince Regent, they were not his;
and Rogers heard him do the same to Sheridan.
. . . We walked through the Devizes fields to meet Crowe. . . . Talked of Milton;
his greater laxity of metre in the “Paradise Regained” than in the “Paradise Lost.” R.
thought this was from system; but Crowe and I thought it from
laziness.’
In November Rogers was at home
again, after a summer which had first been broken by a serious illness in June, then by a
visit of convalescence to Worthing, and
after
that to Bowood, where Moore met him. Soon after his
return he wrote the following letter.
‘My dear Friend,—Thank you most sincerely for
your kind letter. I should, I believe, have answered it that same day—so
grateful did I feel for it—but that I waited to make some enquiries
respecting Mr. Cogan’s school.
Mr. Towgood has sent all his sons
there but one who was not very strong and has never been to any school but as a
day boarder; the youngest is there now, and is just fourteen, so that he
can’t give a stronger proof of his opinion of it. Only the two eldest of
the Sharpes, from some circumstances, have been there, but
Miss Sharpe says that she much
prefers it to any school she ever heard of, as the boys are not only made to
learn while there but are inspired with the love of it, which is certainly of
the greatest importance, for what is learnt at school is of trifling
consequence provided it is not followed up afterwards. Mrs. Cogan is a very kind and good nurse, but
as the house is too much crowded to allow of any rooms being set apart for the
sick, it would not be so eligible a situation for a delicate boy whose friends
live at a distance, and the majority are certainly under fourteen. Now, if
there is anything more you wish to learn about it, do but write and I will send
you every particular, which will be no trouble to me to procure. With regard to
health, I ought to mention that two physicians whom we know have had all their
sons there—Dr. Pett and Dr. Lister—and are, of
278 | ROGERS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES | |
course, satisfied or they would not have sent one after
the other. . . . My spring campaign was cut very short by a short but severe
illness which I had in the beginning of June, the effect of which, as far at
least as my looks are concerned, my friends tell me I have but just recovered;
in other respects, however, I have been quite well some time, but I have spent
a very unsettled summer, as I was some time at Worthing for the benefit of the
sea air, and then, with that and visits to different friends, I have only been
settled at home since last Wednesday, but now I mean to remain stationary for
some time. And so this is a long history of myself, which you kindly asked for
or I would not have given you so much of. And now I must scold you a little for
saying nothing, absolutely nothing, about one in whom I am sure you know I am
so much interested,—I need not say I mean you; I trust, however, that you
are well. I dined on Friday with Dr.
Holland in St. James’s Place; as he had so lately returned
out of Cheshire I hoped to have heard a great deal about you, and to my
disappointment he had not even seen you. He is delighted with his journey to
Spa, and well he may. I hear from other quarters that he was so much engaged
there professionally that he had scarcely a minute to himself, and could
scarcely have cleared less than a thousand pounds,—on Friday he went away
to a consultation as soon as we had left the dining-room, and, indeed, almost
always is obliged to do so. There can be no doubt of his getting great
practice. I am sure your heart must have ached for the Romillys
1 and for poor 1 Sir Samuel
Romilly’s death, in a moment of aberration caused
by the death of his wife three days before, occurred on the 2nd of
November. |
Dr. Roget. Of those that are left, I
think I feel most for him at present; to him I am sure the consequences will be
very, very lasting; the young people will sooner recover. No event ever excited
a deeper feeling, not only amongst their friends but in every circle. I was
very much pleased with the “Life of Mrs. Hamilton.” I took it
up without the least expectation, as I thought the account of any person living
in retirement, however amiable and superior in abilities, could not be very
interesting, and, likewise, I was not much prejudiced in favour of the author;
she has, however, I think, contrived to make me quite in love with her subject
and to be sorry to lay the book down, so, then, for the future, I must, I
think, admire the author; and, indeed, I ought to say that I had no reason for
my former prejudice, excepting that her appearance and manners were unlike
other people. Poor Miss
Edgeworth’s visits to England must be sadly clouded. I am
sorry to hear that she does not mean to publish her father’s life; it must have been very entertaining, but,
with a daughter’s feelings, I almost wonder how it was ever thought of.
Lord Byron is soon to appear before the
public again. You did not like “Beppo” and won’t be glad. Ought I to be ashamed to say
how much it entertained me? . . . I am very glad to hear of
Sam’s having a home, though in the city, as I
hope you may be induced to visit him, now that you can do so with so little
trouble. It seems to me much longer than usual since I have seen you, and I can
scarcely persuade myself it is only two years. This is the first summer I have
missed being in Worcestershire for many years. I am sorry to say my sister Towgood has still got a sick house, her
second girl 280 | ROGERS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES | |
has been unwell for some time, though I hope
not alarmingly so. The rest of us are well. The two eldest
Sharpes have been making tours on the Continent, the
third is still in Hamburg and is now in a counting-house there. Accept my
brother’s and my united kind regards, and believe me, ever very
affectionately yours,
The following from Lord Holland seems
to belong to this period.
‘You are too indulgent to my verse. I have been
altering, I hope correcting, it ever since I sent it you.
‘I transcribe the new edition on the other half
[sheet], and I had half a mind, so linked is rhyming with vanity, to send a
copy of it to Lord Grenville, who used most
properly to rebuke me for my heterodoxy about Milton. I have been compulsus intrare,
and this is my amende honorable.
‘Excellent as you are both as poet and critic, you
don’t shine in logic; for your reason for not coming to Brighton is,
according to the best forms of syllogism, a reason for coming.
‘When a man is cold he should go to the warmest place
he can find. Rogers is cold, and
Brighton is the warmest place he can find. Ergo, Rogers
should go to Brighton.
‘Yours,
‘You liked the seventh line with “smoothest
poesy.” I laboured hard to change it, and
thought I had improved
it,
but your approbation shakes me—I had written fouler, and am not sure
“grosser” is better—tell me. “Tales” for
“toys” is an improvement certainly. I am as full of my own
verses as our friend Jack Townshend
(who is pretty well) could be.
‘Good-bye.
That held entranced my youthful thoughts so long,
With dames, and loves, and deeds of chivalry,
E’en now delight me,—from the noisy throng
Thither I fly to sip the sweets that he
Enclosed in tenderest folds of poesy,
Oft as for ease my weary spirits long.
But when recoiling from the grosser scene
Of sordid vice, or rank, atrocious crime,
My sinking soul pants for the pure serene
Of loftier regions,—quitting tales and rhyme,
I turn to Milton, and his
heights sublime,
Too long by me unsought, I strive to climb.’
|
Before the end of November Moore
was in London again, and his Diary continues—
‘November 26.—Went to Holland House.
. . . The party at dinner: Lord John, Tierney, Sharp,
Whishaw, Roger
Wilbraham, Rogers, and Mrs. Sydney Smith.
‘November 27.—Slept at Holland
House. Walked before breakfast with Tierney,
Rogers, &c., in the garden, and read
Luttrell’s very pretty verses1 written under Lord
Holland’s in the seat called
“Rogers’s seat.” The breakfast very
agreeable. Lord Holland full of sunshine
282 | ROGERS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES | |
as usual. “He always comes down to breakfast,” says
Rogers very truly, “like a man on whom some sudden good
fortune has just fallen.” . . . Party at dinner: Rogers,
Tierney, Sharp, and
Mrs. Smith. . . . Had the pleasure of
putting into Rogers’s hand a draft for my long-owed debt of
five hundred pounds.
‘25th.—Rogers wished me to go and dine this day with his brother and sister at
Highbury. I assented if he would take upon himself to stand the brunt of Lady Holland’s displeasure on the occasion. In for
a very amusing scene between them on the subject. She insisting upon keeping me, and he
most miraculously courageous and persevering in taking me away.
“Why,” says she to me, “do you allow him to dispose of you
thus like a little bit of literary property?” Dined at Highbury.
Miss Rogers very agreeable.
‘December 1st.—Had some conversation with Rogers before dinner about his poem which he is daily adding couplets
to.
‘December 6th.—Breakfasted at Rogers’s. Told me of Crabbe’s negotiation with Murray for his new volume of tales1 consisting
of near twelve thousand lines.
‘7th.—Called upon Rogers at half-past four, when I found that Lord Holland had written to the Longmans to meet him there on Crabbe’s business. At five Rees came, and I left them to their deliberations. . . . Went to
Rees at nine o’clock. Told me the particulars of the
conference at Rogers’s; said he had prefaced the offer he
had made by telling them they must not expect
| CRABBE AND MOORE AT ROGERS'S | 283 |
anything like what would be given
for a work of mine . . . and for the new work and the old had only offered 1000l.
‘8th.—. . . Paddled back through the
swimming streets to Rogers, who had fixed, too,
for me to call. Found him in consternation about Crabbe, who had written to Murray immediately after the interview with Rees, to say he would accept his offer, but had not heard from him
since. Rogers proposed we should go together to
Murray, as he wanted to speak to him about his own poem, which
he thinks of publishing with him in shares. Went to Murray, and
after Rogers had talked to him about his own poem and told
Murray that he was printing it himself, to see how it looked;
he said, carelessly, “I am glad to find, Mr. Murray, that
you have settled with Mr. Crabbe for his new work.”
This clinched the business. Murray answered very cheerfully that
he had, so we set off to poor Crabbe (who was moping dismally at
home and had nearly given up all hope of his thousands) to tell him the news which, of
course, set his mind perfectly at ease.
‘11th.—. . . Rogers, on the last morning I was with him in town,
took out of a little cabinet the draft I had given him a week before, and said,
“What am I to do with this?” I laughed, and said, “Present it for
payment, to be sure, my dear Rogers.” “Well,” he
answered, “if it is any convenience to you in your Bermuda business to enable you
to allege that you have no means, I will keep it for you.”’
The story of the negotiations for Crabbe with Murray had a sequel, set
forth in the following letter—
284 |
ROGERS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES
|
|
‘Trowbridge, Wilts: January 11, 1819.
‘My dear Sir,—Hitherto when I have parted from
you in town, I resigned myself to the evil, and knowing that you loved not what
is called correspondence—too often, I grant, a very grievous tax on time
and patience—I said in my heart, “Farewell till we meet
again,” but I have not this time the former resignation. I want to know
where you dwell, how you are, what you are doing, and sometimes whether you
think of me. I want to read your verses as they come and while they are yet in
that changeable state between their first birth and their commitment into the
furnace of the compositor.
‘I miss your morning conversation—your
anecdotes—your good humour, and even your tyranny and arbitrary rule over
me, for which Heaven forgive you.
‘I ordered two clean notes from my brother Timbrell’s bank—brother by a kind
of civil latitude of speech; our children married—and a clerk has sent me
the things I repay you with, indeed, I can command none more unsullied.
‘Mr. Murray
keeps me employed, but I have a sad affair to communicate. Mr. Colburn, at whose library I was accustomed
to meet Miss Carr, and whom I have known and dealt with,
by subscription to his collection of novels, &c., and who knew that I was
employed in writing a poem (which he calls Recollections, not recollecting the
name I gave it), and who always appeared to wish that he might publish for me,
though he never in any one speech approximated to the business, nor were any
terms
| CRABBE'S BUSINESS ANXIETIES | 285 |
offered by him or by
me, nor, in short, was there engagement or tendency to engagement, and yet,
notwithstanding, has this man not only bitterly complained that I passed him
by, and not only affirmed that he would have given me 500l. more than any other man, but beside all this, he threatens me with
a process of law, on what founded I protest to you I cannot tell: there was a
time when I would have listened to him and most certainly should have accepted
such proposal as he says he would have made, provided my assurance of his
fulfilling his part of the conditions had been well established, but he gave no
occasion for my assent to, or rejection of, his terms. Have you any notion,
Sir, of what this threatener is to do? I sent his letter to Mr.
Murray and told all I knew, for I have nothing to conceal. It
appears to me that Mr. Colburn is going to law with me for
not getting him that work which he never offered to buy; and I am weak enough
to be troubled, though not alarmed. The law, I too well know, is open to all
men, and I will not say what a mind of certain stamp, urged by disappointment,
may do, and not the less because the disappointment originated in his own
folly. Forgive me this—I was vexed, and our friends cannot entirely
escape our vexations.
‘I hope you are entirely well, and all at Highbury.
My son John, who is with me, wants much
to know a gentleman who is so kind to his father. My Hampstead friends are
detained by the sickness of one in the family and come not yet to Bath. Would
that you loved that place of comfort and repose, at least to all who are not
members of its peculiar clubs and associations.
286 |
ROGERS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES
|
|
‘But I will not detain you. I could not keep to
myself this attack upon my peace, but I cannot seriously apprehend mischief.
Mr. Colburn talks of his damages,
they are 3,000l., for, he says, a publisher expects to
gain as much as he gives. The information is curious, and the note Mr. C. makes
of it still more so.
‘My best remembrances to Miss Rogers and her brother.
‘Will you not tell me how you proceed? I shall be
unfeignedly glad to hear.
‘I was invited to meet Mr. Moore lately, but the place was too distant and the night
too cold, and I did not go. Fortune is against our meeting, but has been very
kind in some others, and I ought not to complain.
‘If you should see Mr.
Murray, would you speak of this man’s claim on
me?—though I know not what it is,—but he probably considers it as
beneath his notice, and that is what I would do, but I am not sure that I can.
‘This is very blameably begging your
time—pardon me.
‘I am, your very obliged, &c.,
‘Thanks for the loan of the notes, I had nearly
omitted them—grateful people are not the most thankful, are
they?’
Rogers, of course, had no difficulty in coming to an
arrangement with Mr. Colburn and reassuring
Crabbe. Moore writes—
‘Jan. 28th, 1819.—Went to Breakfast with Rogers,
who
is in the very agonies of parturition; shewed me the work ready printed and in boards,
but he is still making alterations; told me that Byron’s “Don
Juan” is pronounced by Hobhouse
and others as unfit for publication. . . . Crabbe’s delight at having three thousand pounds in his pocket.
Rogers offered to take care of them for him, but no, he must
take them down to shew them to his son John.
“Would not copies do?” “No, must shew John the
actual notes.” Dined with Rogers. He had cancelled the note
about Lord Ossory at Lord
Holland’s suggestion; it alluded to Lord
Ossory’s habit of transacting his magisterial business out of
doors, which procured for him the name of Lord chief Justice in Eyre (air).
Lord Holland did not wish this joke to remain.’
The poem which Moore saw ready
printed and in boards in January, and to which Rogers was still making alterations, came out finally in the spring under
the title ‘Human Life.’ He
always regarded it as the best of his poems, perhaps because he felt that he had put into
it the best of his life and of himself. No reader of my account of
Rogers’s early years can fail to see what the inspiration of
this poem is. It is full of his early experiences. The boy is himself; the home is the home
he had lived in at Newington Green; the mother is the true and tender woman who wrote the
letters to her “ever dear T. R.”; and the whole philosophy of life which the
poem teaches is that which he had learned from Dr.
Price. At various stages of this biography I have found it necessary to
refer to this poem, and have
288 | ROGERS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES | |
pointed out how his family affections and
his political friendships had got expression in his verse. He was in his fifty-sixth year
when it was published. There was a good deal of debate with Sharp as to the reference to— Young Byron in the groves of Academe, |
and it was finally resolved to print only the initial (B * * * *),
as Byron himself had originally printed
Rogers’s name in ‘Beppo.’1 Rogers was staying at Althorp with Lord Spencer when this point had to be settled. There were
with him in the house the Bessboroughs, the Lytteltons, the Duncannons, Vernon, Macdonald and others, when
Byron’s ‘Don
Juan’ arrived, and Rogers writes to Richard
Sharp that its appearance is ‘another reason for hastening out my
panegyric before the gall and wormwood in the Dedication appear.’ So
‘Human Life,’ after six years of incubation, was
hurried out at last.
The gall and wormwood in the dedication were not for Rogers. The references to him, both in the dedication and
in the body of the poem, are altogether complimentary, and consistent with Byron’s view of Rogers as a poet.
Probably most of the guests at Althorp, and the educated public generally, agreed with
Byron’s estimate of the relative position of the poets he
attacks, but Time has reversed it. Seventy years have passed since these lines were
addressed to Southey and Wordsworth, the trial has taken place, and so far as
1 ‘Men of the world, who know the world like
men, Who think of something else besides the pen.’ Beppo, stanza 76. |
|
Wordsworth is concerned, the verdict is the very reverse of that which
Byron anticipated—
The field is universal and allows
Scope to all such as feel the inherent glow;
‘Gainst you the question with posterity.
|
So Byron wrote, and so many thought.
Hence the publication of a new poem by Rogers was
regarded all through cultivated society as an important literary event, though there were
many who saw that he belonged to the school which must decrease, while Wordsworth and Coleridge belonged to that which must increase. There was nothing
remarkable in Rogers being put by Byron on a
level with Scott, Crabbe, Campbell and Moore. That was his natural position, and it was equally
natural in those days that they should all be put together on a higher level than that of
the Lake Poets. In Don Juan’s words the orthodox
faith still was—
Because the first is crazed beyond all hope,
The second drunk, the third so quaint and mouthy;
With Crabbe it may be difficult to cope,
Commit—flirtation with the muse of Moore.
|
Sydney Smith, writing of Rogers’s poem before he had seen it, says, ‘The Hollands have read Rogers’s poem and like it. . . . Luttrell approves.’ Writing after he had read it, he says,
‘There are some very good descriptions—the mother and the child,
Mr. Fox at St. Anne’s
290 | ROGERS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES | |
Hill, and several more. The beginning of the verses on Paestum are very good
too.’ The author of ‘The Man of Feeling’ wrote to
Rogers a letter of genial criticism, telling him he had
‘pitched “Human Life” too high,’ and
incidentally remarking of Crabbe that ‘he
traces Nature amid the filth of its mense-lanes and blind alleys in which the Muse, if
she does not forget her proper rank, soils her petticoats and begrimes her
face.’ There is a characteristic letter of Erskine’s, asking Rogers to send him a copy of
the poem, and adding, ‘I am coming to town next week, but I am invisible to the
naked eye, and therefore, when you ask me to dinner, I shall take up no
room.’
In May, Moore was again in London,
and, as usual, his Diary is full of Rogers. It is
‘breakfasted with Rogers,’ ‘dined with
Rogers,’ ‘took a bed at
Rogers’s,’ ‘went with
Rogers making visits,’ and so forth, day after day.
Luttrell is constantly at
Rogers’s, and one day Grattan is there, and Moore finds him still very
delightful. Another day it is Maltby and Crabbe, and still another it is Mr. Hibbert and his daughters, with
Luttrell, Sharp, and
Miss Rogers. Luttrell and
Rogers are one morning ‘going on the water to follow the
Fishmongers’ barge and enjoy the music;’ another morning
Moore records that Rogers objects to his
making himself a slave to the booksellers, and thinks he ought to accept the offers of
friends. ‘There is my 500l.,’ he said, ‘ready for
you. Your friend Richard Power will, of course,
advance another.’ ‘I answered,’ says Moore,
‘No, my dear Rogers, your 500l. has done
its duty most amply, and I am resolved never more, if I can help it, to owe any money
| JEFFREY'S OFFER TO MOORE | 291 |
to friends.’
Rogers’s was not the only offer. At the end of July
Rogers received a letter from Francis
Jeffrey, which has never been made public, but which is most honourable to
Moore’s old antagonist, and deserves to be
put on lasting record as an example of generous liberality.
‘Edinburgh: 30 July, 1819.
‘My dear Sir,—I have been very much shocked and
distressed by observing in the newspaper the great pecuniary calamity which has
fallen on our excellent friend Moore,
and not being able to get any distinct information either as to its extent, or
its probable consequences, from anybody here, I have thought it best to relieve
my anxiety by applying to you, whose kind concern in him must both have made
you acquainted with all the particulars, and willing, I hope, to satisfy the
enquiries of one who sincerely shares in that concern. I do not know, however,
that I should have troubled you merely to answer an useless enquiry; but in
wishing to know whether any steps have been taken to mitigate this disaster, I
am desirous of knowing also whether I can be of any use on the occasion. I
have, unfortunately, not a great deal of money to spare. But if it should be
found practicable to relieve him from this unmerited distress by any
contribution, I beg leave to say that I shall think it an honour to be allowed
to take share in it to the extent of 300l. or 500l., and that I could advance more
than double the sum named above upon any reasonable security of ultimate
repayment, however long postponed.
‘I am quite aware of the difficulty of carrying
through
292 | ROGERS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES | |
any such arrangement with a man of Moore’s high feelings and character, and
had he been unmarried and without children he might have been less reluctantly
left to the guidance and support of that character. But as it is, I think his
friends are bound to make an effort to prevent such lasting and extended misery
as, from what I have heard, seems now to be impending, and in hands at once so
kind and so delicate as yours I flatter myself that this may be found
practicable. I need not add, I am sure, that I am most anxious that, whether
ultimately acted upon or not, this communication should never be mentioned to
Moore himself. If you please, you may tell him that I
have been deeply distressed by his misfortunes, and should be most happy to do
him any service. But as I have no right to speak to him of money, I do not
think he should know that I have spoken of it to you. If my offer is accepted,
I shall consider you and not him as the acceptor, and he ought not to be
burdened with the knowledge of any other benefactor.
‘Is there no chance of seeing you in Scotland again?
We have had a sad loss in Playfair1—and one quite irreparable to our society here.
It is a comfort to think that we cannot possibly have such another. We had a
great fright about Scott too, but fortunately he is quite recovered.
‘I have a sort of project of running over to Paris
again
1 John
Playfair, F.R.S., the eminent mathematician and
physicist, died on the 19th of July 1819, in his seventy-second year.
He was an Edinburgh Reviewer, and Professor of Mathematics, and
afterwards of Natural Philosophy, in the University of Edinburgh. His
cousin, the Principal of St.
Andrews University, was grandfather of the Right Hon. Sir Lyon Playfair, K.C.B., F.R.S., &c.
|
| CRABBE ON 'HUMAN LIFE' | 293 |
this autumn. If I had a chance
of finding you in the Rue de Rivoli, I should not hesitate a moment. I am not
quite so insensible to the advantages of that encounter as I appeared to
be,—and yet I have a thousand times since reproached myself for having
made too little use of them. Believe me always,
‘Your obliged and very faithful servant, &c.,
Moore’s case did not admit of help of this
kind, and after a time of great anxiety, of which Rogers had his full share as a sympathising friend,
Moore went to Paris, where he arrived on the 8th of October,
taking the same rooms Rogers and he had occupied two years before.
Meanwhile, Rogers had made his usual round of country visits, and was
not able on this occasion to offer Crabbe
hospitality during his stay in London. Crabbe writes—
‘My dear Sir,—My purposed journey into Suffolk
has been deferred, and is now fixed for Monday the 23rd inst., when I must
immediately return and, if I do any business, it must be done without delay. My
people will want me at Trowbridge, and if not I shall want them.
‘I have thought of your lines, and will claim your
pardon when I suggest another alteration. The boy and the butterfly, though a
beautiful, is a common image; and harebells have not only the same objection,
but they are so seldom seen in cultivated ground that the name brings the idea
of a wood or a wild scene. I therefore
294 | ROGERS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES | |
prefer the
boy’s pursuit of insects and flowers in general, to these particular
instances. My memory would not permit me to retain a single line of yours, and
therefore I was obliged to make the trial in my own way, and I think these
general terms may be introduced without taking from the interest of the scene,
nor was I willing to give up the reference to Raphael and Correggio.
Your child is not a rustic, but an educated boy, and there is no impropriety in
the introduction of such names; at least, I see none. And now, having confessed
so much, I will forgive you if you tell me I had been better employed about my
own business.
‘I am not certain when you return to St.
James’s Place, but I hope to hear, and shall not fail to make enquiry.
‘Yours most truly,
At this period of Rogers’s
life his divorce from politics seems to have been complete. Closely as he had been
associated with Dr. Price and Dr. Priestley in his earlier days, with Horne Tooke as well as with Fox and Sheridan in maturer life,
and constantly as he was to be seen in the Whig circle at Holland House, he is never found
taking any active part in political life. He voted for Sir
Samuel Romilly in the Westminster election in 1818 as he had for
Horne Tooke in 1796; but he was still the man of letters rather
than the politician. His one desire was to be spoken of and recognised as
‘Rogers the poet,’ and that desire was fully
satisfied. In this dissociation from public affairs he was not alone. How small a part the
political history of the time plays in the lives of
| LITERATURE SUPERSEDES POLITICS | 295 |
Wordsworth, of Campbell, of Crabbe, and of
Byron; and in Moore’s Diary there is no mention even of the death of George III. and the accession of George IV. They were all intent upon literature, and politics were of small
concern to them. The publication of a new poem was an event in their lives, the trial of a
Queen, a Manchester massacre, even a new settlement of Europe, were events in the lives of
other people. So much larger are things in which we have a share, or of which we are a
part, than those which we only look at from a distance. The times were troublesome enough
in the year when the Six Acts of an English coercion policy were passed, or when a Bill of
Pains and Penalties against the Queen was before the
House of Commons. The old King died in January, 1820; and in June, 1820, Grattan was taken away. The summer was a season of extreme
heat and drought. Horses dropped dead in the roads, says Miss
Martineau, and labourers in the fields; yet, along the line of the mails,
crowds stood waiting in the burning sunshine for news of the Queen’s trial, and
horsemen galloped over hedge and ditch to bear the tidings. ‘In London,’ she
continues, ‘the parks and the West-end streets were crowded every evening, and
through the bright nights of July neighbours were visiting one another’s houses
to lend newspapers or compare rumours.’ Rogers was, in
this matter, on the popular side. But the public quarrel did not disturb his private
friendships. Families were divided, coteries were broken up, but in
Rogers’s circle another interest set these disputes aside.
In the beautiful house overlooking the Green Park, small parties of men and women were
always gathering to meet great 296 | ROGERS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES | |
authors or artists, to talk of the last
new book, to criticise a poem of Byron’s, or
Wordsworth’s, or Southey’s, or Campbell’s, or
Crabbe’s, to roam at will over all literature, sucking the sweets, as bees from
flowers, and to enjoy the good stories of one, the epigrams of another, and the cynical wit
of a third. It is curious to reflect that in the same house, and under the same host, this
intercourse went on for nearly two generations, in spite of wars, and revolutions, and
reforms, and the changes made by death. Men came and went, but the stream of happy,
brilliant talk flowed on, and the troubles and triumphs of the outer world only cast their
shadows or their sunshine on its waves.
Joseph Addison (1672-1719)
English politician and man of letters, with his friend Richard Steele he edited
The Spectator (1711-12). He was the author of the tragedy
Cato (1713).
John Allen (1771-1843)
Scottish physician and intimate of Lord Holland; he contributed to the
Edinburgh Review and
Encyclopedia Britannica and published
Inquiry into the Rise and Growth of the Royal Prerogative in
England (1830). He was the avowed atheist of the Holland House set.
Ludovico Ariosto (1474-1533)
Italian poet, author of the epic romance
Orlando Furioso
(1532).
William Thomas Beckford (1760-1844)
English novelist and aesthete, son of the Jamaica planter and Lord Mayor William Beckford
(1709-1770), author of
Vathek: An Arabian Tale, surreptitiously
translated and published in 1786. He was MP for Wells (1784-90) and Hindon (1790-94,
1806-20).
George Berkeley, bishop of Cloyne (1685-1753)
Bishop of Cloyne and philosopher; author of
A New Theory of Vision
(1709, 1710, 1732),
A Treatise concerning the Principles of Human
Knowledge (1710, 1734), and
Three Dialogues between Hylas and
Philonous (1713, 1725, 1734).
William Lisle Bowles (1762-1850)
English poet and critic; author of
Fourteen Sonnets, elegiac and
descriptive, written during a Tour (1789), editor of the
Works
of Alexander Pope, 10 vols (1806), and writer of pamphlets contributing to the
subsequent Pope controversy.
Sir Henry Edward Bunbury, seventh baronet (1778-1860)
The son of Henry William Burnbury; during his distinguished military career (1795-1809)
he married a niece of Charles James Fox in 1807; he was under-secretary for war (1809-16),
major-general (1815), and MP for Suffolk (1830).
Edmund Burke (1729-1797)
Irish politician and opposition leader in Parliament, author of
On the
Sublime and Beautiful (1757) and
Reflections on the Revolution
in France (1790).
Thomas Campbell (1777-1844)
Scottish poet and man of letters; author of
The Pleasures of Hope
(1799),
Gertrude of Wyoming (1808) and lyric odes. He edited the
New Monthly Magazine (1821-30).
Queen Caroline of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel (1768-1821)
Married the Prince of Wales in 1795 and separated in 1796; her husband instituted
unsuccessful divorce proceedings in 1820 when she refused to surrender her rights as
queen.
Eliezer Cogan (1762-1855)
Greek scholar, Presbyterian minister, and schoolmaster from 1801 at Essex Hall, Higham
Hill, Walthamstow; his pupils included Benjamin Disraeli and Samuel Rogers' nephew Samuel
Sharpe.
Mary Cogan [née Atchison] (1769 c.-1850)
The daughter of David Atchison of Weedon, Northamptonshire; in 1791 she married the
schoolmaster Eliezar Cogan.
Henry Colburn (1785-1855)
English publisher who began business about 1806; he co-founded the
New
Monthly Magazine in 1814 and was publisher of the
Literary
Gazette from 1817.
Samuel Taylor Coleridge (1772-1834)
English poet and philosopher who projected
Lyrical Ballads (1798)
with William Wordsworth; author of
Biographia Literaria (1817),
On the Constitution of the Church and State (1829) and other
works.
Abraham Cowley (1618-1667)
English royalist poet; his most enduring work was his posthumously-published
Essays (1668).
George Crabbe (1754-1832)
English poet renowned for his couplet verse and gloomy depictions of country persons and
places; author of the
The Village (1783),
The
Parish Register (1807),
The Borough (1810), and
Tales of the Hall (1819).
John Waldron Crabbe (1787-1840)
The younger son of the poet George Crabbe; he was educated at Gonville and Caius College,
Cambridge, and having served as his father's curate was Rector of Great and Little Glenham
(1832).
William Crowe (1745-1829)
English poet educated at Winchester and New College Oxford; he was rector of Alton
Barnes, Wiltshire; he is remember for his descriptive poem
Lewesdon
Hill (1788). He corresponded with Samuel Rogers.
John Dryden (1631-1700)
English poet laureate, dramatist, and critic; author of
Of Dramatick
Poesie (1667),
Absalom and Achitophel (1681),
Alexander's Feast; or the Power of Musique (1697),
The Works of Virgil translated into English Verse (1697), and
Fables (1700).
Maria Edgeworth (1768-1849)
Irish novelist; author of
Castle Rackrent (1800)
Belinda (1801),
The Absentee (1812) and
Ormond (1817).
Richard Lovell Edgeworth (1744-1817)
Irish magnate and writer on education; he published
Practical
Education, 2 vols (1788), and other works in collaboration with his daughter the
novelist.
Thomas Erskine, first baron Erskine (1750-1823)
Scottish barrister who was a Whig MP for Portsmouth (1783-84, 1790-1806); after defending
the political radicals Hardy, Tooke, and Thelwall in 1794 he was lord chancellor in the
short-lived Grenville-Fox administration (1806-07).
John Fitzpatrick, second earl of Upper Ossory (1745-1818)
Of Ampthill in Bedfordshire, the son of the first earl (d. 1758) and the uncle of Lord
Holland; he was educated at Westminster and Trinity College, Cambridge and was MP for
Bedfordshire (1767-94). In 1794 he was given an English peerage as Baron Upper
Ossory.
Hon. Caroline Fox (1767-1845)
The daughter of Stephen Fox, second Baron Holland of Foxley and niece of Charles James
Fox. Jeremy Bentham was among her admirers.
Charles James Fox (1749-1806)
Whig statesman and the leader of the Whig opposition in Parliament after his falling-out
with Edmund Burke.
Elizabeth Fox, Lady Holland [née Vassall] (1771 c.-1845)
In 1797 married Henry Richard Fox, Lord Holland, following her divorce from Sir Godfrey
Webster; as mistress of Holland House she became a pillar of Whig society.
Henry Richard Fox, third baron Holland (1773-1840)
Whig politician and literary patron; Holland House was for many years the meeting place
for reform-minded politicians and writers. He also published translations from the Spanish
and Italian;
Memoirs of the Whig Party was published in 1852.
Sir Philip Francis (1740-1818)
Son of the translator of the same name, and the likely author of the Junius letters; he
was first clerk at the war office (1762-72), made a fortune in India, and served in
Parliament as a Whig MP.
John Hookham Frere (1769-1846)
English diplomat and poet; educated at Eton and Cambridge, he was envoy to Lisbon
(1800-02) and Madrid (1802-04, 1808-09); with Canning conducted the
The
Anti-Jacobin (1797-98); author of
Prospectus and Specimen of an
intended National Work, by William and Robert Whistlecraft (1817, 1818).
Henry Grattan (1746-1820)
Irish statesman and patriot; as MP for Dublin he supported Catholic emancipation and
opposed the Union.
Thomas Grenville (1755-1846)
The third son of George Grenville; he was a Whig MP and follower of Charles James Fox who
was first lord of the Admiralty (1806-07) and bequeathed a collection of 20,000 volumes to
the British Library.
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).
George Granville Vernon- Harcourt (1785-1861)
The son of Bishop Edward Venables-Vernon-Harcourt and Lady Anne Leveson-Gower; he was
educated at Westminster School and was MP for Lichfield (1806-31) and Oxfordshire
(1831-61). Sydney Smith described him as “a very clever young man.”
Warren Hastings (1732-1818)
Governor-general of Bengal (1774-84); he was charged high crimes by Edmund Burke,
initiating impeachment proceedings that continued from 1787 to 1795, when Hastings was
acquitted.
George Hibbert (1757-1837)
India merchant, alderman of London, and MP for Seaford (1806-12); he was a book collector
and member of the Roxburghe Club.
John Cam Hobhouse, baron Broughton (1786-1869)
Founder of the Cambridge Whig Club; traveled with Byron in the orient, radical MP for
Westminster (1820); Byron's executor; after a long career in politics published
Some Account of a Long Life (1865) later augmented as
Recollections of a Long Life, 6 vols (1909-1911).
Sir Henry Holland, first baronet (1788-1873)
English physician and frequenter of Holland House, the author of
Travels in the Ionian Isles, Albania, Thessaly, Macedonia etc. during 1812 and
1813 (1814) and
Recollections of Past Life (1872). His
second wife, Saba, was the daughter of Sydney Smith.
Homer (850 BC fl.)
Poet of the
Iliad and
Odyssey.
William Jackson of Exeter (1730-1803)
Composer, essayist, and organist of Exeter Cathedral; he was a leading figure among the
West-country literati.
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.
William Lister (1756-1830)
English physician born in Hertfordshire; after taking a medical degree in Edinburgh
(1781) he was physician to St. Thomas's Hospital in London (1795-1817).
John Locke (1632-1704)
English philosopher; author of
Essay concerning Human
Understanding (1690) and
Some Thoughts Concerning Education
(1695).
Thomas Norton Longman (1771-1842)
A leading London publisher whose authors included Southey, Wordsworth, Scott, and
Moore.
Sir Hudson Lowe (1769-1844)
Born in Galway, Ireland; he was lieutenant-general and governor of St. Helena where he
had custody of Napoleon.
Henry Luttrell (1768-1851)
English wit, dandy, and friend of Thomas Moore and Samuel Rogers; he was the author of
Advice to Julia, a Letter in Rhyme (1820).
Lysippus of Sicyon (350 BC fl.)
Sculptor in bronze known for his statues of Alexander the Great.
William Henry Lyttelton, third baron Lyttelton (1782-1837)
Whig politician and wit, son of William Henry, first baron Lyttelton of the second
creation; a noted Greek scholar at Christ Church, Oxford, he was MP for Worcestershire
(1807-20); in 1828 he succeeded his brother as baron.
Sir James Macdonald, second baronet (1784-1832)
The son of Sir Archibald Macdonald (d. 1826) and Lady Louisa Leveson-Gower; educated at
Westminster School, he was MP for Tain burghs (1805-06), Newcastle-under Lyme (1806-12),
Sutherland (1812-16), Calne (1816-31), and Hampshire (1831-32); he was clerk of the Privy
Seal.
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).
Sir James Mackintosh (1765-1832)
Scottish philosopher and man of letters who defended the French Revolution in
Vindiciae Gallicae (1791); he was Recorder of Bombay (1803-1812) and
MP for Knaresborough (1819-32).
Gaius Maecenas (70 BC-8 BC)
Counsellor to the Emperor Augustus and patron of Virgil and Horace.
James Maitland, eighth earl of Lauderdale (1759-1839)
Scottish peer allied with Charles James Fox; he was author of
An
Inquiry into the Nature and Origin of Public Wealth, and into the Means and causes of
its Increase (1804) and other works on political economy.
William Maltby (1764-1854)
A schoolmate and life-long friend of Samuel Rogers; he was a London solicitor and a
member of the King of Clubs. In 1809 he succeeded Richard Porson as principal librarian of
the London Institution.
Harriet Martineau (1802-1876)
English writer and reformer; she published
Illustrations of Political
Economy, 9 vols (1832-34) and
Society in America
(1837).
John Milton (1608-1674)
English poet and controversialist; author of
Comus (1634),
Lycidas (1638),
Areopagitica (1644),
Paradise Lost (1667), and other works.
Thomas Moore (1779-1852)
Irish poet and biographer, author of the
Irish Melodies (1807-34),
The Fudge Family in Paris (1818), and
Lalla
Rookh (1817); he was Byron's close friend and designated biographer.
Sir Thomas More (1478-1535)
English statesman and humanist, Catholic martyr; he was the author of
Utopia (1516).
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).
Sir Isaac Newton (1642-1727)
English scientist and president of the Royal Society; author of
Philosophae naturalis principia mathematica (1687).
Ovid (43 BC-17 AD c.)
Roman poet famous for his erotic
Art of Love and his mythological
poem,
The Metamorphoses.
Samuel Pett (1755-1823)
English physician who was a classmate of Eliezer Cogan at Daventry, Thomas Belsham's
dissenting academy; after taking a medical degree at Edinburgh he practiced at Hackney from
1804.
Pindar (522 BC c.-443 BC)
Greek lyric poet who celebrated athletic victories in elaborate odes that became models
for intricate and often elliptical odes in English.
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 Hugh Lyon Playfair (1786-1861)
The son of Dr James Playfair, principal of St Andrews (1738-1819); he served as an
officer in India (1804-34) and was provost of St. Andrews University (1842-61).
John Playfair (1748-1819)
Professor of Mathematics at Edinburgh University and Whig man of letters who contributed
to the
Edinburgh Review.
John William Ponsonby, fourth earl of Bessborough (1781-1847)
The son of Frederick Ponsonby, third earl of Bessborough (d. 1844) and elder brother of
Lady Caroline Lamb; he was a Whig MP (1805-34), home secretary (1834-35), and
lord-lieutenant of Ireland (1846-47).
Alexander Pope (1688-1744)
English poet and satirist; author of
The Rape of the Lock (1714)
and
The Dunciad (1728).
Richard Power (1827 fl.)
A Dublin friend of Thomas Moore who founded and managed the Kilkenny Theatre.
Richard Price (1723-1791)
Dissenting divine, philosopher, and political radical who was the target of Burke's
remarks in
Reflections on the Revolution in France; he published
Review of the Principal Questions and Difficulties in Morals
(1758).
Joseph Priestley (1733-1804)
Dissenting theologian, schoolmaster, and scientist; he was author of
The History and Present State of Electricity, with Original Experiments
(1767).
Raphael (1483-1520)
Of Urbino; Italian painter patronized by Leo X.
Owen Rees (1770-1837)
London bookseller; he was the partner of Thomas Norton Longman and friend of the poet
Thomas Moore.
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).
Peter Mark Roget (1779-1869)
English physician and professor of physiology at the Royal Institution; he was a nephew
of Samuel Romilly well-connected in Whig circles, best remembered for inventing the
thesaurus that bears his name.
Sir Samuel Romilly (1757-1818)
Reformer of the penal code and the author of
Thoughts on Executive
Justice (1786); he was a Whig MP and Solicitor-General who died a suicide.
Sir John St. Aubyn, fifth baronet (1758-1839)
Son of the fourth baronet (d. 1772); he was MP for Truro (1784), Penryn (1784-90), and
Helston (1807-12) and a noted mineral collector. He fathered fifteen illegitimate children,
but no heir.
Richard Sharp [Conversation Sharp] (1759-1835)
English merchant, Whig MP, and member of the Holland House set; he published
Letters and Essays in Poetry and Prose (1834).
Catherine Sharpe (1782-1853)
The daughter of Sutton Sharpe by his first wife Catharine Purchase (d. 1791).
Elizabeth Ann Sheridan [née Linley] (1754-1792)
Much-admired English singer, daughter of the musician Thomas Linley; she was compelled to
give up her career upon marrying Richard Brinsley Sheridan in 1773.
Richard Brinsley Sheridan (1751-1816)
Anglo-Irish playwright, author of
The School for Scandal (1777),
Whig MP and ally of Charles James Fox (1780-1812).
Catharine Amelia Smith [née Pybus] (1768-1852)
The daughter of John Pybus, English ambassador to Ceylon; in 1800 she married Sydney
Smith, wit and writer for the
Edinburgh Review.
Sydney Smith (1771-1845)
Clergyman, wit, and one of the original projectors of the
Edinburgh
Review; afterwards lecturer in London and one of the Holland House
denizens.
John Somers, baron Somers (1651-1716)
Whig politician, member of the Kit-Kat Club, friend of Addison, Steele, and Swift; he was
lord chancellor (1697).
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).
George John Spencer, second earl Spencer (1758-1834)
Educated at Harrow and Trinity College, Cambridge, he was a Whig MP aligned with Edmund
Burke, first lord of the Admiralty (1794-1801) and home secretary (1806-07). He was a book
collector and patron of the poets John Clare and Herbert Knowles.
Sir William Temple, baronet (1628-1699)
English statesman, diplomat, and patron of Jonathan Swift; his much-admired essays were
published as
Miscellanea, 3 vols (1680, 1692, 1701).
Mary Tickell [née Linley] (1758-1787)
English singer, daughter of Thomas Linley and sister of Elizabeth Sheridan; in 1780 she
married the poet Richard Tickell.
Richard Tickell (1751-1793)
Poet and wit, grandson of the poet Thomas Tickell and friend of Richard Brinsley
Sheridan; he died a suicide.
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.”
Thomas Timbrell (1760-1820)
Trowbridge attorney and banker; his daughter Carolina Matilda married the younger George
Crabbe in 1817.
John Horne Tooke (1736-1812)
Philologist and political radical; member of the Society for Constitutional Information
(1780); tried for high treason and acquitted (1794).
John Towgood (d. 1837)
Of Upper Bedford-place; he was a banker in the Rogers firm who married Martha, sister of
Samuel Rogers.
Lord John Townshend (1757-1833)
The son of George Townshend, first Marquess Townshend; he was educated at Eton and St
John's College, Cambridge and was a Whig MP for Cambridge, Westminster, and Knaresborough.
He was a denizen of Holland House and Sheridan's literary executor.
John Whishaw (1764 c.-1840)
Barrister, educated at Trinity College, Cambridge; he was Secretary to the African
Association and biographer of Mungo Park. His correspondence was published as
The “Pope” of Holland House in 1906.
Roger Wilbraham (1743-1829)
Educated at Trinity College, Cambridge; he was a Whig MP St. Michael (1784), Helston
(1786-90) and Bodmin (1790-96).
William Wordsworth (1770-1850)
With Coleridge, author of
Lyrical Ballads (1798), Wordsworth
survived his early unpopularity to succeed Robert Southey as poet laureate in 1843.
Morning Chronicle. (1769-1862). James Perry was proprietor of this London daily newspaper from 1789-1821; among its many
notable poetical contributors were Coleridge, Southey, Lamb, Rogers, and Campbell.
George Gordon Byron, sixth Baron Byron (1788-1824)
Don Juan. (London: 1819-1824). A burlesque poem in ottava rima published in installments: Cantos I and II published in
1819, III, IV and V in 1821, VI, VII, and VIII in 1823, IX, X, and XI in 1823, XII, XIII,
and XIV in 1823, and XV and XVI in 1824.