A sunny shaft did I behold, From sky to earth it slanted, And pois’d therein a Bird so bold— Sweet bird! thou wert enchanted! He sank, he rose, he twinkled, troll’d, Within that shaft of sunny mist: His Eyes of Fire, his Beak of Gold, All else of Amethyst! And thus he sang: Adieu! Adieu! Love’s dreams prove seldom true. Sweet month of May! we must away! Far, far away! To day! to day!

In the following month (May 8th, 1816) Mr. Coleridge offered Mr. Murray his ‘Remorse’ for publication, with a Preface. He also offered his poem of ‘Christabel,’ still unfinished. For the latter Mr. Murray agreed to give him seventy guineas, “until the other poems shall be completed, when the copyright shall revert to the author,” and also

* We give the lines because they are not included in Coleridge’s complete works; yet they were set to music many years ago.

304

MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY

£20 for permission to publish the poem entitled ‘Kubla Khan,’ but which the author should not be restricted from publishing in any other way that he pleased.

Next month (June 6th, 1816) Mr. Murray allowed Coleridge £50 for an edition of 1000 of his ‘Christmas Tale,’ and he also advanced him another £50 for a play then in course of composition; in default of this being completed, the ‘Christmas Tale’ to become Mr. Murray’s property. The drama proved to be ‘Zapolya,’ which was not completed till the following year. In the meantime Coleridge was full of “plans,” as will be seen from the following letter:—

I have often thought that there might be set on foot a review of old books, i.e., of all works important or remarkable, the authors of which are deceased, with a probability of a tolerable sale, if only the original plan were a good one, and if no articles were admitted but from men who understood and recognized the Principles and Rules of Criticism, which should form the first number. I would not take the works chronologically, but according to the likeness or contrast of the kind of genius—ex. gr. Jeremy Taylor, Milton (his prose works), and Burke—Dante and Milton (poetry)—Scaliger and Dr. Johnson. Secondly, if especial attention were paid to all men who had produced, or aided in producing, any great revolution in the Taste or opinion of an age, as Petrarch, Ulrich von Hutten, &c. (here I will dare risk the self-conceit of referring to my own parallel of Voltaire and Erasmus, of Luther and Rousseau in the seventh number of ‘The Friend’). Lastly, if proper care was taken that in every number of the Review there should be a fair proportion of amusing matter, such as a review of Paracelsus, Cardan, Old Fuller; a review of Jest Books, tracing the various metempsychosis of the same joke through all ages and countries; a History of Court Fools, for which a laborious German has furnished ample and

A REVIEW OF OLD BOOKS.

305

highly interesting materials; foreign writers, though alive, not to be excluded, if only their works are of established character in their own country, and scarcely heard of, much less translated, in English literature. Jean Paul Richter would supply two or three delightful articles.

Any works which should fall in your way respecting the Jews since the destruction of the Temple, I should of course be glad to look through. Above all, Mezeray’s (no! that is not the name, I think) ‘History of the Jews,’ that I must have.

I shall be impatient for the rest of Mr. Frere’s sheets. Most unfeignedly can I declare that I am unable to decide whether the admiration which the excellence inspires, or the wonder which the knowledge of the countless difficulties so happily overcome, never ceases to excite in my mind during the re-perusal and collation of them with the original Greek, be the greater. I have not a moment’s hesitation in fixing on Mr. Frere as the man of the correctest and most genial taste among all our contemporaries whom I have ever met with, personally or in their works. Should choice or chance lead you to sun and air yourself on Highgate Hill during any of your holiday excursions, my worthy friend and his amiable and accomplished wife will be happy to see you. We dine at four, and drink tea at six.

Mr. Murray did not accept Mr. Coleridge’s proposal to publish his works in a collected form or his articles for the Quarterly, as appears from the following letter:—

I cannot be offended by your opinion that my talents are not adequate to the requisites of matter and manner for the Quarterly Review, nor should I consider it as a disgrace to fall short of Robert Southey in any department of literature. I owe, however, an honest gratification to the conversation between you and Mr. Gillman, for I read

306

MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY

Southey’s article, on which Mr. Gillman and I have, it appears, formed very different opinions. It is, in my judgment, a very masterly article.* I would to heaven, my dear sir, that the opinions of Southey, Walter Scott, Lord Byron, Mr. Frere, and of men like these in learning and genius, concerning my comparative claims to be a man of letters, were to be received as the criterion, instead of the wretched, and in deed and in word mystical jargon of the Examiner and Edinburgh Review.

Mr. Randall will be so good as to repay you the £50, and I understand from Mr. Gillman that you are willing to receive this as a settlement respecting the ‘Zapolya.’ The corrections and additions to the two first books of the ‘Christabel’ may become of more value to you when the work is finished, as I trust it will be in the course of the spring, than they are at present. And let it not be forgotten, that while I had the utmost malignity of personal enmity to cry down the work, with the exception of Lord Byron, there was not one of the many who had so many years together spoken so warmly in its praise who gave it the least positive furtherance after its publication. It was openly asserted that the Quarterly Review did not wish to attack it, but was ashamed to say a word in its praise. Thank God! these things pass from me like drops from a duck’s back, except as far as they take the bread out of my mouth; and this I can avoid by consenting to publish only for the present times whatever I may write. You will be so kind as to acknowledge the receipt of the £50 in such manner as to make all matters as clear between us as possible; for, though you, I am sure, could not have intended to injure my character, yet the misconceptions, and perhaps misrepresentations, of your words have had that tendency. By a letter from R. Southey I find that he will be in town on the 17th. The article in Tuesday’s Courier was by me, and two other articles on Apostacy and Renegadeism, which will appear this week.

* This must have been Southey’s article on Parliamentary Reform, in No 31, which, though due in October 1816, was not published until February 1817.

LEIGH HUNT.

307

From not referring to the paper dictated by yourself, and signed by me in your presence, you have wronged yourself in the receipt you have been so good as to send me, and on which I have written as follows—“A mistake; I am still indebted to Mr. Murray £20 legally (which I shall pay the moment it is in my power), and £30 from whatever sum I may receive from the ‘Christabel’ when it is finished. Should Mr. Murray decline its publication, I conceive myself bound in honor to repay.” I strive in vain to discover any single act or expression of my own, or for which I could be directly or indirectly responsible as a moral being, that would account for the change in your mode of thinking respecting me. But, with every due acknowledgment of the kindness and courtesy that I received from you since my first coming to town,

Leigh Hunt was another of Murray’s correspondents. When the Quarterly was started, Hunt, in his Autobiography, says that “he had been invited, nay pressed by the publisher, to write in the new Review, which surprised me, considering its politics and the great difference of my own.” Hunt adds that he had no doubt that the invitation had been made at the instance of Gifford himself. Murray had a high opinion of Hunt as a critic, but not as a politician. Writing to Walter Scott in 1810 he said:—

“Have you got or seen Hunt’s critical essays, prefixed to a few novels that he edited. Lest you should not, I

308

MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY

send them. Hunt is most vilely wrongheaded in politics, and has thereby been turned away from the path of elegant criticism, which might have led him to eminence and respectability.”

Hunt was then, with his brother, joint editor of the Examiner, and preferred writing for the newspaper to contributing articles to the Quarterly.

On Leigh Hunt’s release from Horsemonger Lane Gaol, where he had been imprisoned for his libel on the Prince Regent, he proceeded, on the strength of his reputation, to compose the ‘Story of Rimini,’ the publication of which gave the author a place among the poets of the day. He sent a portion of the manuscript to Mr. Murray before the poem was finished, saying that it would amount to about 1400 lines. Hunt then proceeded (18th December, 1815) to mention the terms which he proposed to be paid for his work when finished. “Booksellers,” he said, “tell me that I ought not to ask less than £450 (which is a sum I happen to want just now); and my friends, not in the trade, say I ought not to ask less than £500, with such a trifling acknowledgment upon the various editions after the second and third, as shall enable me to say that I am still profiting by it.”

Mr. Murray sent his reply to Hunt through their common friend, Lord Byron:—

“I wish your lordship to do me the favour to look at and to consider with your usual kindness the accompanying note to Mr. Leigh Hunt respecting his poem, for which he requests £450. This would presuppose a sale of, at least, 10,000 copies. Now, if I may trust to my own experience in these matters, I am by no means certain that the sale

LEIGH HUNTS WORKS.

309

would do more than repay the expenses of paper and print. But the poem is peculiar, and may be more successful than I imagine, in which event the proposition which I have made to the author will secure to him all the advantages of such a result. I trust that you will see in this an anxious desire to serve Mr. Hunt, although as a mere matter of business I cannot avail myself of his offer. I would have preferred calling upon you to-day were I not confined by a temporary indisposition; but I think you will not be displeased at a determination founded upon the best judgment I can form of my own business. I am really uneasy at your feelings in this affair, but I think I may venture to assume that you know me sufficiently well to allow me to trust my decision entirely to your usual kindness.”

I have now read the M S. poem, which you confided to me, with particular attention, and find that it differs so much from any that I have published that I am fearful of venturing upon the extensive speculation to which your estimate would carry it. I therefore wish that you would propose its publication and purchase to such houses as Cadell, Longman, Baldwin, Mawman, &c., who are capable of becoming and likely to become purchasers, and then, should you not have found any arrangement to your mind, I would undertake to print an edition of 500 or 750 copies as a trial at my own risk, and give you one half of the profits. After this edition the copyright shall be entirely your own property. By this arrangement, in case the work turn out a prize, as it may do, I mean that you should have every advantage of its success, for its popularity once ascertained, I am sure you will find no difficulty in procuring purchasers, even if you should be suspicious of my liberality from this specimen of fearfulness in the first instance. I shall be most happy to assist you with any advice which my experience in these matters may render serviceable to you.

310

MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY

Leigh Hunt replied at once:—

After the poem was printed and published, Mr. Hunt, being pressed for money, made an application to the publisher, to which the following reply was given:—

“The net balance of profit, supposing every copy to be sold, is £91 5s., of which your half will be £45 12s. 6d., for which, deducting £3 2s. 6d. for copies delivered to your order, there remains £42 10s. This I very willingly make £50, and enclose a note at three months for that sum in full for your share of this edition, and thus we will close the account. I have no doubt of the quick sale of the remainder of this edition, and look confidently to the publication of many others. I hope the bill I enclose will answer your present occasion, for the demands on me are so extensive that I am under the necessity of weighing out my means with circumspection. If you are satisfied with my statement, you will perhaps write a few lines saying that you have received a note from me at three months, £50 in full for your share and demand upon the first edition of ‘Rimini.’”

‘THE STORY OF RIMINI.’

311

Mr. Hunt delayed sending the receipt until the 9th of April following, when he enclosed it with the following letter:—

After a tedious recitation of his pecuniary troubles, Hunt concludes:

What I wanted to ask you then is simply this—whether, in the first instance, you think well enough of the ‘Story of Rimini’ to make you bargain with me for the copyright at once; or, in the second instance, whether, if you would rather wait a little, as I myself would do, I confess, if it were convenient, you have still enough hopes of the work, and enough reliance on myself personally, to advance me £450 on security, to be repaid in case you do not conclude

312

MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY

the bargain, or merged in the payment of the poem in case you do.

To this letter, Mr. Murray at once replied, desiring Mr. Hunt to stop for the present his proposed publication, as it might have the effect of drawing attention from the ‘Story of Rimini,’ which was rising in public estimation, and, left to itself, would make its way. “Any publication,” he said, “of the nature you propose, succeeding it so rapidly, would have the effect, at least, of dividing attention, and perhaps of drawing it off from an important object to fix it upon one of less moment.” Mr. Murray’s reply was not satisfactory, as will be observed from the following letter of Leigh Hunt:—

MADAME DE STAËL.

313

This negotiation was ultimately brought to a conclusion by Mr. Hunt, at Mr. Murray’s suggestion, disposing of the copyright of ‘Rimini’ to another publisher.

Mr. Murray had a good deal of correspondence with Madame de Staël. He had in 1813 published her ‘L’Allemagne,’ which was translated by F. Hodgson, edited by William Lamb, and excited a considerable sensation at the time. Napoleon was furious at its original publication at Paris, and ordered Savary, the Minister of Police, to seize the whole stock of ‘L’Allemagne’ at the Paris publishers, virtually hunted Madame de Staël from France, and had a strict watch kept upon her at Coppet, in Switzerland, whither she had retired for refuge. At length she contrived to escape, and went by way of Russia to England, where she superintended the translation and publication of her work.

Neither Byron nor Gifford had a very high opinion of Madame de Staël, though readers of Byron’s letters are aware that in later years, when he came to know Italy, he saw reason to modify some of his criticisms, as, for instance, when he wrote in a note to Corinne, “I little thought that one day I should think with her thoughts, in the country where she has laid the scene of her most attractive production. She is sometimes right, and often wrong, about Italy and England; but almost always true in delineating the heart, which is of but one nation, and of no country; or, rather, of all.”

314

MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY

Gifford wrote of her to Murray, when the question of publishing the translation of her ‘L’Allemagne’ was under consideration.

“As to Madame de Staël, I can say nothing, and perhaps your bargain is off. At any rate, I can venture to assure you that the hope of keeping her from the press is quite vain. The family of Œdipus were not more haunted and goaded by the Furies than the Neckers, father, mother, and daughter, have always been by the demon of publication. Madame de Staël will therefore write and print without intermission. The volumes you were in treaty for promised to have something of novelty, and are besides well timed. Her suicidal work* I have not yet looked at; but in a note I have had to-day from Mr. Wilmot, he proposes a short review of it.”

The work was afterwards accepted and published by Mr. Murray, and succeeded tolerably well. During the time of her residence in London, Madame de Staël used frequently to dine with Mr. Murray, and was in the habit of writing short notes to him, of which the following are given as specimens. The first contains her proposed introduction to the forthcoming work:—

Cet ouvrage sur les mœurs, la société, la littérature, la philosophie et la réligion des Allemands, a été imprimé à dix milles exemplaires à Paris en 1810, et au moment où il allait paraître il a été supprimé par la police et tous les exemplaires mis en pièces. Un seul a échappé par hasard,

* “Mdme. de Staël hath published an essay against Suicide, which I presume will make somebody shoot himself; as a sermon by Blenkinsop in proof of Christianity sent a hitherto most orthodox acquaintance of mine out of a chapel of ease a perfect atheist.”—Byron to Moore, July 8th, 1803.

MADAME DE STAEL.

315

et c’est sur celui-là que Mr. John Murray a ré-imprimé l’ouvrage.

Voilà la préface, my dear Sir, avec les corrections de Sir James que je vous prie de faire accepter. Je serai de retour à Londres vendredi 5 Novembre; ainsi je vous prie de ne pas envoyer l’exemplaire du Prince Regent avant que je vous aye vu; ce qui sera j’espére samedi matin, Argyle Street, No. 31.—Nous avons ici la plus intéressante réunion du monde, tout-à-fait digne du maître et de la maîtresse de la maison: on s’y parle beaucoup de vos procédés envers les hommes de lettres: j’entends Sir James [Mackintosh] et moi. Je vous demanderai un exemplaire à Dument, un à Rogers, et un à Lucien, à qui j’ecrirai. Je souhait presqu’autant pour vous que pour moi le succés de mon ouvrage.

Je serai chez vous vendredi à cinq heures, my dear Sir. J’ai été charmée de Mr. Southey; son âme et son esprit m’ont paru de la même force et dans le même sens. Il y a bien longtemps que je n’ai été chez vous, c’est à dire in the head-quarters of Mr. Canning.

Mille graces du ‘Corsaire;’ il y a de l’esprit beaucoup et de l’interêt. Je vous attendrai un de ces matins avec Mr. Hamilton. Mille remerciements pour le roman de Mlle. Burney! Et répondez-moi un de ces jours sur mes diverses

316

MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY

propositions à l’égard de M. Constant, lettres sur Rousseau, Delphine, &c. Parlez à Colburn, mais quand vous voudriez; je ne suis pas pressée.

In 1814, after Napoleon’s abdication, Madame de Staël returned to Paris, where she supported Louis XVIII.; she remained there until after the final defeat of Napoleon at Waterloo, when she returned to Coppet, in Switzerland, and proceeded to prepare her final work for the press, ‘Considérations sur la Révolution Française.’

On the 28th of June, 1816, the Baron de Staël wrote to Mr. Murray on the subject of his mother’s work, ‘Des Causes et des Effets de la Révolution Française.’ He said that the plan had been extended, that it would be in three volumes, and that the work was calculated to produce a general sensation in Europe.

Murray having conferred with the Messrs. Longman on the subject, proposing that they should share it, replied as follows:—

I have just returned to town after a sudden call to the country, after the receipt of your obliging letter, which I now answer in haste. You are not aware, I suppose, of the great changes which have taken place in the sale of everything in this country, which is operating to the

MADAME DE STAEL’S ‘FRENCH REVOLUTION.’

317

destruction of speculations of any kind. I am truly sorry to say that neither I, nor Mr. Longman conjointly with me, can venture upon the new work of Mad. de Staël at the sum which you mention; but we are desirous that the author should reap every fair advantage in case the work should succeed beyond our calculations: and we therefore propose to offer the sum of one thousand pounds for one edition of the work in French and one in English—we paying for the translation—each to consist of fifteen hundred copies; the sum to be paid at two months from the day on which we shall publish each edition; and for every future edition, of either the original or the Translation, to consist of one thousand copies, we engage to pay the sum of three hundred and fifty pounds after the sale of the one thousand copies. You have no conception of the total alteration since we have had the opportunity of emigrating to foreign countries, and I could not have made you this slender offer unless Messrs. Longman had agreed to take half the risk. I beg the favour of you to offer my compliments to Madame de Staël. I will have the pleasure of writing more at large in a few days when I shall send the account. In the meantime,

Madame de Staël was not satisfied with this letter. Mr. Murray had explained that her work ‘L’Allemagne’ had not been so satisfactory as she supposed; nevertheless, she urged that the proposed work was likely to be much more attractive to the public—especially the third volume, which would

“Contain a picture of all your public characters. I don’t question,” she said, through the pen of her son, the Baron de Staël (28th December, 1816), “the exactitude of the statement which you give me of the returns of ‘L’Allemagne’: but whatever it be, I don’t hesitate to say that I should think it a good speculation to pay for the grandest work

318

MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY

the double of what you paid to the former; considering, besides, that you have the privilege for the translation as well as of the original. In short, the only reduction which I think my mother would agree to is the sum of £2500 for her volumes, that Sir J. Mackintosh had been commissioned by you to propose to her two years ago.

Madame de Staël died in the following year (14th July, 1817), and the work in question was not published until 1818. A few days after her death Mr. J. W. Ward (afterwards Lord Dudley) wrote to Mr. Murray:—

“I saw poor Madame de Staël four days before she died. She was looking wretchedly ill, and showed indications of great languor and weakness. But her understanding was quite unimpaired. She evidently thought very ill of her own situation, though at the same time she had no notion how near she was to her end. There is a story here (Paris), that just at last she was reconciled to the Church of Rome, chiefly, it is said, by the persuasion of Viscount Montgomery. Perhaps, too, Mr. Schlegel contributed his influence to this event. He had already set the example. I do not know the fact for certain, but I think it is not improbable. I also understand that it now appears she had been for some time married to Mr. Rocca, I do not know in what state of forwardness her book was; but I should hope that a part of it at least was fit for publication.”

After his mother’s death, Baron de Staël continued his negotiations with Mr. Murray, but no satisfactory arrangement could be arrived at, and the work was in the end published by Messrs. Baldwin and Cradock.

Another lady who was to be enrolled on the list of Mr. Murray’s most successful authoresses was the daughter of

MRS. GRAHAM.

319

Rear-Admiral Dundas, then the wife of Captain Graham, R.N., nephew of James Graham, author of ‘The Sabbath.’ Mr. Murray had sent her a copy of the Quarterly, and received the following reply:—

I conclude that the Quarterly Review and Miss Williams’ account of France, which I have lately received from the Foreign Office, are from you. I assure you that both are most acceptable in this retired place; between which and the nearest court of Modern Literature lie the two formidable waters which keep this corner of Angus at least a century behind other places in the known civilized world. It is true that the ruins of Cardinal Beatoun’s tower, and the Cathedral and College of St. Andrews, are visible from our windows; but they carry one back only to times of violence and civil war, and make one expect to hear more particulars of Huntley’s conspiracy, or of Mary’s weakness, and Knox’s hard justice, while you are listening to tales from Paris of oppressed people and king, and spoiled galleries and humbled conquerors, and imprisoned Emperors, and things just, and but just, remembered here, where a weekly paper at most connects us with the news of the southern world. But we have books and a garden, and, like all poor people, plenty of occupation for our hands, and even heads, that we may live and not lose caste, which in this poor, proud country, where Montrose and Dundee are still in the mouths of the people, is even more difficult than in most parts of the southern portion of the Island. Our establishment here consists of our two selves, a sister of Graham’s, two women, two dogs, and some poultry; and our cottage is large enough to entertain a friend; so that in spite of peace and half pay we are far better off than most of our brother officers. The dogs and gun furnish an excuse for a great deal of walking to the Captain, and the garden for a good deal of exercise to me; but as to a party, either for a dinner, or an evening, or a morning visit, they are things quite unknown and un-

320

MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY

thought of. It is a better life than a London one, perhaps, and if it has fewer pleasures, it has fewer cares and disappointments; for we know to a certainty who we shall sit by at dinner, and which portion of our book of last night will either divert or weary us to-night, unless indeed the morning’s post brings such a variety as this morning produced, from any kind person who happens to remember our existence here. Our best thanks, and believe me to be always,

Some years afterwards Mrs. Graham visited London, and called upon Mr. Murray. She was exceedingly anxious that her husband should leave his half pay, and be again put in command of a ship. Murray promised to help her so far as he could, and to this end he invited Croker, then Secretary to the Admiralty, to dine at Albemarle Street, and arranged to place Mrs. Graham by his side, in order that she might have an opportunity of stating her views as to the reappointment of her husband. Murray had not fully taken into account that Mrs. Graham was not only a Whig, but a high-spirited woman, who did not hold back her opinions—nor did Croker hold back his—and the consequence was that they got into collision about politics. At the close of the dinner, Croker said to Murray’s son, John, “Run down for a copy of the Navy List, and bring it here.” After it had been brought, Croker looked through the list, and found the name of Graham. Murray thought he had intended to put a black mark after his name, in consequence of what had occurred; but on the contrary, Croker, who liked a woman of spirit, took occasion to speak in Captain Graham’s favour; and he was shortly after appointed to the command of the Doris, and made a voyage, with Mrs. Graham on board,

MRS. GRAHAM AND MR. CROKER.

321

in the Mediterranean. Captain Graham was afterwards ordered to the coast of Brazil, whence Mrs. Graham addressed many interesting letters to her friends in Albemarle Street Some time after the death of Captain Graham, R.N., she married Mr., afterwards Sir Augustus, Callcott, R.A. Although she had before published some interesting books—such as ‘An Account of her Travels in India,’ her ‘Three Months in the Environs of Rome,’ her ‘History of Spain,’ and several works on Art,—her most popular and best read work was ‘Little Arthur’s History of England.’ many hundred thousand copies of which have by this time been printed and published.