LORD  BYRON  and  his  TIMES
Documents Biography Criticism

Memoir of John Murray
Chap. XXVI.

Vol. 1 Contents
Chapter I.
Chapter II.
Chapter III.
Chapter IV.
Chapter V.
Chapter VI.
Chapter VII.
Chapter VIII.
Chapter IX.
Chapter X.
Chapter XI.
Chapter XII.
Chapter XIII.
Chapter XIV.
Chapter XV.
Chapter XVI.
Chapter XVII.
Chapter XVIII.
Chapter XIX.
Vol. 2 Contents
Chap. XX.
Chap. XXI.
Chap. XXII.
Chap. XXIII.
Chap. XXIV.
Chap. XXV.
‣ Chap. XXVI.
Chap. XXVII.
Chap. XXIX.
Chap. XXX.
Chap. XXXI.
Chap. XXXII.
Chap. XXXIV.
Chap. XXXV.
Chap. XXXVI.
Creative Commons License

Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
Produced by CATH
(  180  )

We have now to enter upon one of the momentous episodes of Mr. Murray’s career. He had long contemplated the establishment of a periodical which should appear more frequently than once a quarter. During the interval of the three months, many works and events of importance, political or literary, attracted public attention, which in his opinion might be made matters of record or comment, but he possessed no means of dealing with them as promptly as was necessary. The Quarterly had rallied to its side a large number of political and literary men, who, he thought, might be relied on in supporting his proposed periodical.

After he had given up his connection with Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine —for reasons already stated—the idea of a new magazine again occurred to him. A Foreign Literary Review was suggested, but finally abandoned. At the beginning of 1818 we find Mr. Maurice, of the British Museum, writing to Mr. Murray:—

Mr. Bulmer informs me that you are about to publish some new periodical work, and I think my situation and resources here will enable me occasionally to be of use to you, if my services may prove agreeable.”

Nothing, however, was done about the proposed publication.


At the end of 1818 we find Mr. John Taylor offering Mr. Murray half the property of the Daily Sun at the price which he had given for it, and in the following year Mr. Jerdan asked him to join him as partner in the Literary Gazette, but these proposals were not accepted. In 1819 Mr. J. W. Croker wrote to Mr. Lockhart (then in Edinburgh) on the subject of starting a weekly newspaper to be entitled the Constitution, and published weekly. The Rev. Mr. Croly was to be editor and joint proprietor, and the son of Mr. Street, of the Courier, was to be the other proprietor. He requested Lockhart to communicate the design to Mr. Wilson and his other friends, and to request the assistance of their pens in promoting the new undertaking, which, however, was also very soon abandoned.

In 1820, however, Mr. Murray was induced by Mr. Croker to become a partner with him in the Guardian newspaper, printed and published by Charles Knight at Windsor. It was no doubt to oblige Mr. Croker that Mr. Murray became connected with this publication, which, as we have already seen, proved unsuccessful, and soon dropped out of sight. In February 1823 Mr. Robert Baldwin offered Mr. Murray the British Review (’My Grandmother’s Review, the British’), but Mr. Murray declined to have anything to do with it.

Passing on to 1824, we find Mr. Francis Cohen writing to Mr. Murray from Yarmouth:—

Mr. Cohen to John Murray.

“Our friend Hallam has communicated to me your ideas concerning the establishment of a new journal. The name of the Athenæum does not please me. Dr. Aikin’s Athenæum lingered through a year of sickly existence. And I doubt whether any advantage would be gained by the patronage of the Club in Waterloo Place. Mr. Hallam intimated that you were half inclined to pay us a visit.
Mr. Turner would be most happy to receive you, and we might then talk the matter over.”

This scheme also, like its predecessors, proved abortive, but in the following year (1825), through the influence of Mr. Benjamin Disraeli, Mr. Murray’s idea of a new publication was fully developed in the projection of a daily morning newspaper. The intimacy which existed between the Murrays and D’Israelis afforded Mr. Murray exceptional opportunities of forming an opinion of Benjamin’s character, and he saw with delight the rapidly developing capacities of his old friend’s son. Even in his eighteenth year Benjamin was consulted by Mr. Murray as to the merits of a MS., and two years later he wrote a novel entitled ‘Aylmer Papillon,’ which did not see the light. He also edited a ‘History of Paul Jones, Admiral in the Russian Navy,’ written by Theophilus Smart, an American, and originally published in the United States.

Young Disraeli was already gifted with a power of influencing others, unusual in a man of his age. He was eloquent, persuasive, and ingenious, and even then, as in future years, when he became a leading figure in the political world, he had the power of drawing others over to the views which he entertained, however different they might be from their own. Looking merely to his literary career as a successful novel writer, his correspondence with Mr. Murray about his proposed work of ‘Aylmer Papillon’ is not without interest.

Mr. Benjamin Disraeli to John Murray.
May, 1824.
My dear Sir,

Your very kind letter induces me to trouble you with this most trivial of trifles. My plan has been in these few
pages so to mix up any observations which I had to make on the present state of society with the bustle and hurry of a story, that my satire should never be protruded on my reader. If you will look at the last chapter but one, entitled “Lady Modeley’s,” you will see what I mean better than I can express it. The first pages of that chapter I have written in the same manner as I would a common novel, but I have endeavoured to put in action at the end, the present fashion of getting on in the world. I write no humbug about “candidly giving your opinion, etc, etc.” You must be aware that you cannot do me a greater favour than refusing to publish it, if you think it won’t do; and who should be a better judge than yourself?

Believe me ever to be, my dear Sir,
Your most faithful and obliged,
B. Disraeli.*

P.S.—The second and the last chapters are unfortunately mislaid, but they have no particular connection with the story. They are both very short, the first contains an adventure on the road, and the last Mr. Papillon’s banishment under the Alien Act from a ministerial misconception of a metaphysical sonnet.

Thursday morn.: Excuse want of seal, as we’re doing a bit of summer to-day, and there is not a fire in the house.

Frederick Place, May 25th, 1824.
1/2 past 1 o’clock a.m.
My dear Sir,

The travels, to which I alluded this morning, would not bind up with ‘Parry,’ since a moderate duodecimo would contain the adventures of a certain Mr. Aylmer Papillon in a terra incognita. I certainly should never have mentioned them had I been aware that you were so very much engaged, and I only allude to them once more that no

* It will be observed that while the father maintained the older spelling of the name the son invariably writes it thus.

confusion may arise from the half-explanations given this morning. You will oblige me by not mentioning this to anybody.

Believe me to be, my dear Sir,
Your very faithful and obliged Servant,
B. Disraeli.
Frederick Place, June 1824.
My dear Sir,

Until I received your note this morning I had flattered myself that my indiscretion had been forgotten. It is to me a matter of great regret that, as appears by your letter, any more trouble should be given respecting this unfortunate MS., which will, most probably, be considered too crude a production for the public, and which, if it is even imagined to possess any interest, is certainly too late for this season, and will be obsolete in the next. I think, therefore, that the sooner it be put behind the fire the better, and as you have some small experience in burning MSS.,* you will be perhaps so kind as to consign it to the flames. Once more apologising for all the trouble I have given you,

I remain ever, my dear Sir,
Yours very faithfully,
B. Disraeli.

Murray had a special regard for the remarkable young man, and by degrees had thoroughly taken him into his confidence; had related to him his experiences of men and affairs, and ere long began to consult him about a variety of schemes and projects. These long confidential communications led eventually to the suggestion of a much more ambitious and hazardous scheme, the establishment

* Byron’s Memoirs had been burnt at Albemarle Street during the preceding month.

of a daily paper in the Conservative interest. Daring as this must appear, Murray was encouraged in it by the recollection of the success which had attended the foundation of the
Quarterly, and believed, rashly, that his personal energy and resources, aided by the abilities displayed by his young counsellor, would lead to equal success. He evidently had too superficially weighed the enormous difficulties of this far greater undertaking, and the vast difference between the conduct of a Quarterly Review and a daily newspaper.

Intent upon gaining a position in the world, Benjamin Disraeli saw a prospect of advancing his own interests—by obtaining the influential position of director of a Conservative daily paper, which he fully imagined was destined to equal the Times, and he succeeded in imbuing Murray with the like fallacious hopes. The emancipation of the Colonies of Spain in South America in 1824-25 gave rise to much speculation in the money market in the expectation of developing the resources of that country, especially its mines. Shares, stocks, and loans were issued to an unlimited extent.

Mr. Benjamin Disraeli seems to have thrown himself into the vortex, for he became connected with at least one financing firm in the City, that of Messrs. Powles, and employed his abilities in writing several pamphlets on the subject. This led to his inducing Messrs. Powles to embark with him in the scheme of a daily paper. At length an arrangement was entered into, by which John Murray, J. D. Powles, and Benjamin Disraeli were to become the joint proprietors of the proposed new journal. The arrangement was as follows:—

London, August 3rd, 1825.

The undersigned panics agree to establish a Morning Paper, the property in which is to be in the following proportions, viz.:
Mr. Murray One-half.
Mr. Powles One-quarter.
Mr. Disraeli One-quarter.
Each party contributing to the expense, capital, and risk, in those proportions.

The paper to be published by, and be under the management of Mr. Murray.

J. D. Powles.
B. Disraeli.

Such was the memorandum of agreement entered into with a view to the publication of the new morning paper, eventually called the Representative. As the first number was to appear in January 1826, there was little time to be lost in making the necessary arrangements for its publication. In the first place, an able editor had to be found; and, perhaps of almost equal importance, an able sub-editor. Trustworthy reporters had to be engaged; foreign and home correspondents had also to be selected with care; a printing office had to be taken; all the necessary plant and apparatus had to be provided, and a staff of men brought together preliminary to the opening day.

The most important point in connection with the proposed journal was to find the editor. Mr. Murray had been so ably assisted by Sir Walter Scott in the projection of the Quarterly Review, that he resolved to consult him on the subject; and this mission was undertaken by Benjamin Disraeli, part proprietor of the intended daily journal, though he was then only twenty years old. It was hoped that Mr. Lockhart, Sir Walter Scott’s son-in-law, might be induced to undertake the editorship. The
following are Mr. Disraeli’s letters to Mr. Murray, giving an account of the progress of his negotiations. It will be observed that he surrounds the subject with a degree of mystery, through the names which he gives to the gentlemen whom he interviewed. Thus the Chevalier is Sir Walter Scott; M. is Mr. Lockhart; X. is
Mr. Canning; O. is the political Puck (could this be himself?); and Chronometer is Mr. Barrow.

On reaching Edinburgh, Mr. Disraeli wrote to Mr. Murray the following account of his first journey across the Border:—

Mr. B. Disraeli to John Murray.
Royal Hotel, Edinburgh.
September 21st, 1825.
My dear Sir,

I arrived in Edinburgh yesterday night at 11 o’clock. I slept at Stamford, York, and Newcastle, and by so doing felt quite fresh at the end of my journey. I never preconceived a place better than Edinburgh. It is exactly what I fancied it, and certainly is the most beautiful town in the world. You can scarcely call it a city; at least, it has little of the roar of millions, and at this time is of course very empty. I could not enter Scotland by the route you pointed out, and therefore was unable to ascertain the fact of the Chevalier being at his Castellum. I should in that case have gone by Carlisle. I called on the gentleman to whom Wright [a solicitor] gave me a letter this morning. He is at his country house; he will get a letter from me this morning. You see, therefore, that I have lost little time.

I called at Oliver & Boyd’s this morning, thinking that you might have written. You had not, however. When you write to me, enclose to them, as they will forward, wherever I may be, and my stay at an hotel is always uncertain. Mr. Boyd was most particularly civil. Their establishment is one of the completest I have ever seen. They are booksellers, bookbinders, and printers, all under the same roof; everything but making paper. I intend to examine the whole minutely before I leave, as it may be
useful. I never thought of binding. Suppose you were to sew, &c., your own publications?

I arrived at York in the midst of the Grand [Musical] Festival. It was late at night when I arrived, but the streets were crowded, and continued so for hours. I never witnessed a city in such an extreme bustle, and so delightfully gay. It was a perfect carnival. I postponed my journey from five in the morning to eleven, and by so doing got an hour for the Minster, where I witnessed a scene which must have far surpassed, by all accounts, the celebrated commemoration in Westminster Abbey. York Minster baffles all conception. Westminster Abbey is a toy to it. I think it is impossible to conceive of what Gothic architecture is susceptible until you see York. I speak with cathedrals of the Netherlands and the Rhine fresh in my memory. I witnessed in York another splendid sight—the pouring in of all the nobility and gentry of the neighbourhood and the neighbouring counties. The four-in-hands of the Yorkshire squires, the splendid rivalry in liveries and outriders, and the immense quantity of gorgeous equipages—numbers with four horses—formed a scene which you can only witness in the mighty and aristocratic county of York. It beat a Drawing Room hollow, as much as an oratorio in York Minster does a concert in the Opera House. This delightful stay at York quite refreshed me, and I am not the least fatigued by my journey.

As I have only been in Edinburgh a few hours, of course I have little to say. I shall write immediately that anything occurs. Kindest remembrances to Mrs. Murray and all.

Ever yours,
B. D.

I find Froissart a most entertaining companion, just the fellow for a traveller’s evening; and just the work too, for it needs neither books of reference nor accumulations of MS.

Royal Hotel, Edinburgh, Sunday.
September 22nd, 1825.
My dear Sir,

I sent a despatch by Saturday night’s post, directed to Mr. Barrow. You have doubtless received it safe. As I
consider you are anxious to hear minutely of the state of my operations, I again send you a few lines. I received this morning a very polite letter from
L[ockhart.] He had just received that morning (Saturday) Wright’s letter. I enclose you a copy of L.’s letter, as it will be interesting to you to see or judge what effect was produced on his mind by its perusal. I have written to-day to say that I will call at Chiefswood* on Tuesday. I intend to go to Melrose to-morrow, but as I will not take the chance of meeting him the least tired, I shall sleep at Melrose and call on the following morning. I shall, of course, accept his offer of staying there. I shall call again at B[oyd]s before my departure to-morrow, to see if there is any despatch from you. . . . I shall continue to give you advice of all my movements. You will agree with me that I have at least not lost any time, but that all things have gone very well as yet. There is of course no danger in our communications of anything unfairly transpiring; but from the very delicate nature of names interested, it will be expedient to adopt some cloak.

The Chevalier will speak for itself.

M., from Melrose, for Mr. L.

X. for a certain personage on whom we called one day, who lives a slight distance from town, and who was then unwell.

O. for the political Puck.

Mr. Chronometer will speak for itself, at least to all those who give African dinners.

I think this necessary, and try to remember it. I am quite delighted with Edinburgh. Its beauties become every moment more apparent. The view from the Calton Hill finds me a frequent votary. In the present state of affairs, I suppose it will not be expedient to leave the letter for Mrs. Bruce. It will seem odd; p.p.c. at the same moment I bring a letter of introduction. If I return to Edinburgh, I can avail myself of it. If the letter contains anything which would otherwise make Mrs. Murray wish it

* Chiefswood, where Lockhart then lived, is about two miles distant from Abbotsford. Sir Walter Scott describes it as “a nice little cottage, in a glen belonging to this property, with a rivulet in front, and a grove of trees on the east side to keep away the cold wind.”

to be left, let me know. I revel in the various beauties of a Scotch breakfast. Cold grouse and marmalade find me, however, constant.

Ever yours,
B. D.

The letter of Mr. Lockhart, to which Mr. Disraeli refers, ran as follows:—

Mr. J. G. Lockhart to Mr. B. Disraeli.

“The business to which the letter [of Mr. Wright]* refers entitles it to much consideration. As yet I have had no leisure nor means to form even an approximation towards any opinion as to the proposal Mr. W. mentions, far less to commit my friend. In a word, I am perfectly in the dark as to everything else, except that I am sure it will give Mrs. Lockhart and myself very great pleasure to see Mr. Disraeli under this roof. . . . If you had no other object in view, I flatter myself that this neighbourhood has, in Melrose and Abbotsford, some attractions not unworthy of your notice.”

Mr. Disraeli paid his promised visit to Chiefswood. It appeared that Mr. Lockhart expected to receive Mr. Isaac D’Israeli, the well-known author of ‘The Curiosities of Literature’; instead of which, the person who appeared before him was Mr. D’Israeli’s then unknown son Benjamin.

Mr. B. Disraeli to John Murray.
Chiefswood. September 25th, 1825.
My dear Sir,

I arrived at Chiefswood yesterday. M. [Lockhart] had conceived that it was my father who was coming. He was led to believe this through Wright’s letter. In addition, therefore, to his natural reserve, there was, of course, an evident disappointment at seeing me. Everything looked as black as possible. I shall not detain you now by informing

* A solicitor in London, and friend of both parties, who had been consulted in the negotiations.

you of fresh particulars. I leave them for when we meet. Suffice it to say that in a few hours we completely understood each other, and were upon the most intimate terms. M. enters into our views with a facility and readiness which were capital. He thinks that nothing can be more magnificent or excellent; but two points immediately occurred: First, the difficulty of his leaving Edinburgh without any ostensible purpose; and, secondly, the losing caste in society by so doing. He is fully aware that he may end by making his situation as important as any in the empire, but the primary difficulty is insurmountable.

As regards his interest, I mentioned that he should be guaranteed, for three years, £1000 per annum, and should take an eighth of every paper which was established, without risk, his income ceasing on his so doing. These are much better terms than we had imagined we could have made. The agreement is thought extremely handsome, both by him and the Chevalier; but the income is not imagined to be too large. However, I dropped that point, as it should be arranged with you when we all meet.

The Chevalier breakfasted here to-day, and afterwards we were all three closeted together. The Chevalier entered into it excellently. He thought, however, that we could not depend upon Malcolm, Barrow, &c., keeping to it; but this I do not fear. He, of course, has no idea of your influence or connections. With regard to the delicate point I mentioned, the Chevalier is willing to make any sacrifice in his personal comforts for Lockhart’s advancement; but he feels that his son-in-law will “lose caste” by going to town without anything ostensible. He agrees with me that M. cannot accept an official situation of any kind, as it would compromise his independence, but he thinks Parliament for M. indispensable, and also very much to our interest. I dine at Abbotsford to-day, and we shall most probably again discuss matters.

Now, these are the points which occur to me. When M. comes to town, it will be most important that it should be distinctly proved to him that he will be supported by the great interests I have mentioned to him. He must see that, through Powles, all America and the Commercial Interest is at our beck; that Wilmot H., &c., not as mere under-secretary, but as our private friend, is most staunch; that the Chevalier is firm; that the West India Interest
will pledge themselves that such men and in such situations as
Barrow, &c., &c., are distinctly in our power; and, finally, that he is coming to London, not to be an Editor of a Newspaper, but the Director-General of an immense organ, and at the head of a band of high-bred gentlemen and important interests.

The Chevalier and M. have unburthened themselves to me in a manner the most confidential that you can possibly conceive. Of M.’s capability, perfect complete capability, there is no manner of doubt. Of his sound principles, and of his real views in life, I could in a moment satisfy you. Rest assured, however, that you are dealing with a perfect gentleman. There has been no disguise to me of what has been done, and the Chevalier had a private conversation with me on the subject, of a nature the most satisfactory. With regard to other plans of ours, if we could get him up, we should find him invaluable. I have a most singular and secret history on this subject when we meet.

Now, on the grand point—Parliament. M. cannot be a representative of a Government borough. It is impossible. He must be free as air. I am sure that if this could be arranged, all would be settled; but it is “indispensable” without you can suggest anything else. M. was two days in company with X. this summer, as well as X.’s and our friend, but nothing transpired of our views. This is a most favourable time to make a parliamentary arrangement. What do you think of making a confidant of Wilmot H[orton]? He is the kind of man who would be right pleased by such conduct. There is no harm of Lockhart’s coming in for a Tory borough, because he is a Tory; but a Ministerial borough is impossible to be managed.

If this point could be arranged, I have no doubt that I shall be able to organise, in the interest with which I am now engaged, a most immense party, and a most serviceable one. Be so kind as not to leave the vicinity of London, in case M. and myself come up suddenly; but I pray you, if you have any real desire to establish a mighty engine, to exert yourself at this present moment, and assist me to your very utmost. Write as soon as possible, to give me some idea of your movements, and direct to me here, as I shall then be sure to obtain your communication. The Chevalier and all here have the highest idea of Wright’s
nous, and think it most important that he should be at the head of the legal department. I write this despatch in the most extreme haste.

Ever yours,
B. D.

On receiving the above letter and the previous communications, Mr. Murray sent them to Mr. Isaac D’Israeli for his perusal.

Mr. Isaac D’Israeli to Mr. Murray.
Hyde House, Amersham,
September 29th, 1825.
My Dear Friend,

How deeply I feel obliged and gratified by your confidential communication! I read repeatedly the third letter of our young plenipotentiary. I know nothing against him but his youth—a fault which a few seasons of experience will infallibly correct; but I have observed that the habits and experience he has acquired as a lawyer often greatly serve him in matters of business. His views are vast, but they are based on good sense, and he is most determinedly serious when he sets to work. The Chevalier and M. seem to have received him with all the open confidence of men struck by a stranger, yet a stranger not wholly strange, and known enough to them to deserve their confidence if he could inspire it. I flatter myself he has fully—he must, if he has really had confidential intercourse with the Chevalier, and so confidently impresses you with so high and favourable a character of M. On your side, my dear Murray, no ordinary exertions will avail. You, too, have faith and confidence to inspire in them. You observe how the wary Northern Genius attempted to probe whether certain friends of yours would stand together; no doubt they wish to ascertain that point. Pardon me if I add, that in satisfying their cautious and anxious inquiries as to your influence with these persons, it may be wise to throw a little shade of mystery, and not to tell everything too openly at first; because, when objects are clearly defined, they do not affect our imaginations as when they
are somewhat concealed. . . . Vast as the project seems, held up as it will be by personages of wealth, interests, politics, &c., whenever it is once set up, I should have no fears for the results, which are indeed the most important that one can well conceive. . . . Had the editor of ‘
Paul Jones’ consulted me a little, I could probably have furnished him with the account of the miserable end of his hero; and I am astonished it is not found, as you tell me, in your American biography.*

Meanwhile, young Disraeli still remained with Mr. Lockhart at Chiefswood.

Mr. B. Disraeli to John Murray.
September, 1825.
My dear Sir,

I am quite sure, that upon the business I am upon now every line will be acceptable, and I therefore make no apology for this hurried despatch. I have just received a parcel from Oliver & Boyd. I transmitted a letter from M. to Wright, and which was for your mutual consideration, to you, viâ Chronometer, last Friday. I afterwards received a note from you, dated Chichester, and fearing from that circumstance that some confusion would arise, I

* The last paragraph in Mr. D’Israeli’s letter refers to ‘The Life of Paul Jones,’ which has been already mentioned. As the novel, ‘Aylmer Papillon,’ written in 1824, was never published, the preface to ‘Paul Jones’ was Benjamin’s first appearance as an author. Mr. Murray sent a copy of the volume to Allan Cunningham—then Mr. Chantrey’s manager and secretary. Mr. Cunningham, when acknowledging its receipt, said: “It contains much curious and instructive matter, and stamps anew on my mind the character of the man. His love of literature, his thirst for fame, his inflexible temper, his heroic bravery, and his vanity, which was superior to all. With the particulars of his life I am intimately acquainted. He was born in my native place [Blackwood, Dumfriesshire], and his journals and letters, which are both interesting and numerous, are in the possession of his nieces. I have several of his letters myself.” Allan Cunningham afterwards wrote a work on the pirate hero, entitled ‘Paul Jones: a Romance,’ perhaps the best of his works of fiction.

wrote a few lines to you at
Mr. Holland’s.* I now find that you will be in town on Monday, on which day I rather imagine the said letter from M. to Wright will arrive. I therefore trust that the suspected confusion will not arise.

I am very much obliged to you for your letters; but I am very sorry that you have incurred any trouble, when it is most probable that I shall not use them. The Abbotsford and Chiefswood families have placed me on such a friendly and familiar footing, that it is utterly impossible for me to leave them while there exists any chance of M.’s going to England. M. has introduced me to most of the neighbouring gentry, and receives with a loud laugh any mention of my return to Edinburgh. I dined with Dr. Brewster the other day. He has a pretty place near Melrose. It is impossible for me to give to you any written idea of the beauty and unique character of Abbotsford. Adio!

B. D.

Mr. Murray continued to transmit the correspondence to Mr. Isaac D’Israeli, whose delight may be conceived from the following:—

Mr. D’Israeli to John Murray.
October 9th, 1825.
My Dear Friend,

Thanks! My warmest ones are poor returns for the ardent note you have so affectionately conveyed to me by him on whom we now both alike rest our hopes and our confidence. The more I think of this whole affair, from its obscure beginnings, the more I am quite overcome by what he has already achieved; never did the finest season of blossoms promise a richer gathering. But he has not the sole merit, for you share it with him, in the grand view you take of the capability of this new intellectual steam engine.

Mr. Murray knew something of Mr. Lockhart before the above correspondence took place. While at Balliol College

* The Rev. W. Holland, Mr. Murray’s brother-in-law, was a minor canon of Chichester.

Oxford, in 1817, he had written to Murray, offering to help him with translations from the German, but nothing came of this proposal. After a journey to the Continent, he became an advocate in Edinburgh, and, as we have already seen, was subsequently an active contributor to
Blackwood’s Magazine. In March 1819, Blackwood wrote to Murray:—

“A very particular friend of mine, Mr. J. G. Lockhart, advocate, sailed for London on Friday. I gave him a letter of introduction to you, as I think you will like to know him. He is a very uncommon young man, and made a distinguished figure at Oxford.”

From that time until Mr. B. Disraeli’s visit to Chiefswood he and Murray had but little personal communication, but, when the editorship of the Representative, a post from which he shrank, was formally offered to him, he wrote:—

Mr. Lockhart to John Murray.
October 7th, 1825.

“I am afraid, that in spite of my earnest desire to be clear and explicit, you have not after all fully understood the inexpressible feeling I entertain in regard to the impossibility of my ever entering into the career of London in the capacity of a newspaper editor. I confess that you, who have adorned and raised your own profession so highly, may feel inclined, and justly perhaps, to smile at some of my scruples; but it is enough to say that every hour that has elapsed since the idea was first started has only served to deepen and confirm the feeling with which I at the first moment regarded it; and, in short, that if such a game ought to be played, I am neither young nor poor enough to be the man that takes the hazard.”

Sir Walter Scott also expressed his views on the subject as follows:—

Sir W. Scott to John Murray.
Abbotsford, Sunday,
October 12th, 1825.
My dear Sir,

Lockhart seems to wish that I would express my opinion of the plan which you have had the kindness to submit to him, and I am myself glad of an opportunity to express my sincere thanks for the great confidence you are willing to repose in one so near to me, and whom I value so highly. There is nothing in life that can be more interesting to me than his prosperity, and should there eventually appear a serious prospect of his bettering his fortunes by quitting Scotland, I have too much regard for him to desire him to remain, notwithstanding all the happiness I must lose by his absence and that of my daughter. The present state, however, of the negotiation leaves me little or no reason to think that I will be subjected to this deprivation, for I cannot conceive it advisable that he should leave Scotland on the speculation of becoming editor of a newspaper. It is very true that this department of literature may and ought to be rendered more respectable than it is at present, but I think this is a reformation more to be wished than hoped for, and should think it rash for any young man, of whatever talent, to sacrifice, nominally at least, a considerable portion of his respectability in society in hopes of being submitted as an exception to a rule which is at present pretty general. This might open the door to love of money, but it would effectually shut it against ambition.

To leave Scotland, Lockhart must make very great sacrifices, for his views here, though moderate, are certain, his situation in public estimation and in private society is as high as that of any one at our Bar, and his road to the public open, if he chooses to assist his income by literary resources. But of the extent and value of these sacrifices he must himself be a judge, and a more unprejudiced one, probably, than I am.

I am very glad he meets your wishes by going up to town, as this, though it should bear no further consequences, cannot but serve to show a grateful sense of the confidence and kindness of the parties concerned, and yours in particular.


I beg kind compliments to Mr. D’Israeli, and am, dear sir, with best wishes for the success of your great national plan.

Yours very truly,
Walter Scott.

Although Mr. Lockhart hung back from the proposed editorship, he nevertheless carried out his intention of visiting Mr. Murray in London a few weeks after the date of the above letter. Mr. J. T. Coleridge had expressed his desire to resign the editorship of the Quarterly, in consequence of his rapidly increasing practice on the western circuit, and Mr. Lockhart was sounded as to his willingness to become his successor, Mr. Murray entertaining the hope that he might be able to give a portion of his time to rendering some assistance in the management of the proposed newspaper. As Sir Walter Scott had been taken into their counsels, through the medium of Mr. Disraeli, Mr. Murray proceeded to correspond with him on the subject. From the draft of one of Mr. Murray’s letters we extract the following:—

John Murray to Sir Walter Scott.
October 13th, 1825.
My Dear Sir Walter,

I feel greatly obliged by the favour of your kind letter, and for the good opinion which you are disposed to entertain of certain plans, of which you will by degrees be enabled to form, I hope, a still more satisfactory estimate. At present, I will take the liberty of assuring you, that after your confidence in me, I will neither propose nor think of anything respecting Mr. Lockhart that has not clearly for its basis the honour of his family. With regard to our Great Plan—which really ought not to be designated a newspaper, as that department of literature has hitherto been conducted—Mr. Lockhart was never intended to have
anything to do as editor: for we have already secured two most efficient and respectable persons to fill that department. I merely wished to receive his general advice and assistance. And Mr. Lockhart would only be known or suspected to be the author of certain papers of grave national importance. The more we have thought and talked over our plans, the more certain are we of their inevitable success, and of their leading us to certain power, reputation, and fortune. For myself, the heyday of my youth is passed, though I may be allowed certain experience in my profession. I have acquired a moderate fortune, and have a certain character, and move now in the first circles of society; and I have a family: these, I hope, may be some fair pledge to you that I would not engage in this venture with any hazard, when all that is dearest to man would be my loss.

In order, however, to completely obviate any difficulties which have been urged, I have proposed to Mr. Lockhart to come to London as the editor of the Quarterly—an appointment which, I verily believe, is coveted by many of the highest literary characters in the country, and which, of itself, would entitle its possessor to enter into and mix with the first classes of society. For this, and without writing a line, but merely for performing the duties of an editor, I shall have the pleasure of allowing him a thousand pounds a year; and this, with contributions of his own, might easily become £1500, and take no serious portion of his time either. Then, for his connection with the paper, he will become permanently interested in a share we can guarantee to him for three years, and which, I am confident, will be worth, at the end of that period, at least £3000; and the profits from that share will not be less than £1500 per annum. I have lately heard, from good authority, that the annual profit of the Times is £40,000, and that a share in the Courier sold last week (wretchedly conducted, it seems) at the rate of £100,000 for the property.

But this is not all. You know well enough that the business of a publishing bookseller is not in his shop or even his connection, but in his brains; and we can put forward together a series of valuable literary works, and without, observe me, in any of these plans, the slightest risk to Mr. Lockhart. And I do most solemnly assure
you that if I may take any credit to myself for possessing anything like sound judgment in my profession, the things which we shall immediately begin upon, as Mr. Lockhart will explain to you, are as perfectly certain of commanding a great sale as anything I ever had the good fortune to engage in.

These were very sanguine prognostications, but not sufficiently strong to induce Lockhart to reconsider his decision with respect to the part he was asked to take in the new morning paper. He nevertheless accepted the editorship of the Quarterly, and Sir Walter Scott expressed his readiness to assist him with renewed contributions to the periodical. Mr. B. Disraeli continued his correspondence with Lockhart, and informed him as to the progress of the negotiations.

Mr. J. G. Lockhart to John Murray.
November 8th, 1825.

Disraeli has been good enough, among other kindnesses, to write occasionally as to the great business in its progress. I am anxious to hear what is doing about building; and also, when you or Disraeli may have leisure, to learn the general result of the negotiation with Dr. Maginn.”*

Mr. Disraeli even took the trouble, a week after the date of the above letter, to go down to Scotland a second time to visit Lockhart at his cottage at Chiefswood, but the negotiations bearing upon the appointment of Lockhart as editor of the Quarterly, must be left to the next chapter, that we may here continue the story of the Representative.

In London Disraeli was indefatigable. He visited City men, for the purpose of obtaining articles on commercial

* Dr. Maginn, as a long-tried newspaper writer, was considered to be well qualified for the post of editor.

subjects. He employed an architect,
Mr. G. Basevi, jun., his cousin, with a view to the planning of offices and printing premises. A large house was eventually taken in Great George Street, Westminster, and duly fitted up as a printing office.

Mr. B. Disraeli to John Murray.
October, 1825.

“When Basevi has arranged the terms, you should furnish Powles with the name of the vendor’s solicitor, and Hurst will then examine the title and do the needful. No time should be lost in arranging this, as the examination of the title should take place, while the old fishman is moving. Roworth* is to send all my proofs to you. I have taken the liberty of having them sent to W. P——,† as I thought they would then be sure to meet your eye. I send the Map. When we again meet, which I trust will be right speedily, I hope to have a vigorous account of your movements, particularly as regards the foreign correspondence. I mention Hurst, as I think, after what has passed, it will be better; and he is used to deeds of partnership and agreements for services, &c.”

Mr. Disraeli himself proceeded, in common with Mr. Murray, to make arrangements for the foreign correspondence. In the summer of 1824—before the new enterprise was thought of—he had travelled in the Rhine country, and made some pleasant acquaintances, of whom he now bethought himself when making arrangements for the new paper. One of them was Mr. Maas, of the Trierscher Hof, Coblentz, and Mr. Disraeli addressed him as follows:—

* Printer of the Quarterly in Bell Yard, Fleet Street.

† A house in Whitehall Place which Mr. Murray had taken as his private residence.

Mr. B. Disraeli to Mr. Maas.
October 25th, 1825.
Dear Sir,

Your hospitality, which I have twice enjoyed, convinces me that you will not consider this as an intrusion. My friend, Mr. Murray, of Albemarle Street, London, the most eminent publisher that we have, is about to establish a daily journal of the first importance. With his great influence and connections, there is no doubt that he will succeed in his endeavour to make it the focus of the information of the whole world. Among other places at which he wishes to have correspondents is the Rhine, and he has applied to me for my advice upon this point. It has struck me that Coblentz is a very good situation for intelligence. Its proximity to the Rhine and the Moselle, its contiguity to the beautiful baths of the Taunus, and the innumerable travellers who pass through it, and spread everywhere the fame of your admirable hotel, all conduce to make it a place from which much interesting intelligence might be procured. The most celebrated men in Europe have promised their assistance to Mr. Murray in his great project. I wish to know whether you can point out any one to him who will occasionally write him a letter from your city. Intelligence as to the company at Wiesbaden and Ems, and of the persons of eminence, particularly English, who pass through Coblentz, of the travellers down the Rhine, and such topics, are very interesting to us. You yourself would make a most admirable correspondent. The labour would be very light and very agreeable; and Mr. Murray would take care to acknowledge your kindness by various courtesies. If you object to say anything about politics you can omit mentioning the subject. I wish you would undertake it, as I am sure you would write most agreeable letters. Once a month would be sufficient, or rather write whenever you have anything that you think interesting. Will you be so kind as to write me in answer what you think of this proposal? The communication may be carried on in any language you please.

Last year when I was at Coblentz you were kind enough to show me a very pretty collection of ancient glass. Pray
is it yet to be purchased? I think I know an English gentleman who would be happy to possess it. I hope this will not be the last letter which passes between us.

I am, dear Sir,
Yours most truly,
B. Disraeli.

Mr. Maas agreed to Mr. Disraeli’s proposal, and his letter was handed to Mr. Murray, who gave him further instructions as to the foreign correspondence which he required. Mr. Murray himself wrote to correspondents at Hamburg, Maestricht, Genoa, Trieste, Gibraltar, and other places, with the same object. We give one of his letters as fairly representing the tenor of all.

John Murray to Mr. H. Bynner, Trieste.
London, Albemarle Street, October 1825.
Dear Sir,

I have to acknowledge the receipt of your valuable communications dated the 6th and 8th inst. I feel confident that in you I have found a correspondent whose diligence, talent and discretion will do justice to my wishes.

With respect to the point of remuneration, I fully comprehend your feeling, and I have only to remark that I trust my character is a guarantee to you, that when the time of distribution arrives your services will be appreciated in the most liberal manner.

The publication of my journal was to have been commenced on the 1 st of the ensuing November. Reasons of great weight have occasioned its delay until the beginning of the year, when it will infallibly take place. No prospectuses will be published, but, in confidence, I acquaint you with its leading features.

It will be conducted by many of our first political and literary characters, who will, through the medium of its columns, address the public upon every topic which can interest them. I wish to make this journal the focus of the information of the whole world. I wish you therefore
not to confine your observations and remarks to mere news, but to give us an account of everything of interest which passes under your observation. It is of course difficult in a letter to give you an idea of my wishes, but that you may form some slight one, I wish you to write to me as to your friend in London in a familiar and perfectly unconstrained manner, without troubling yourself in the least about style or set composition. Any curious anecdote, any discovery in science, any singular incident or adventure, in short, everything which forms the conversation of the best society of Trieste, interests, doubtless, all of us in England.

As to politics, my object is nothing more than to obtain the truth. Do me the favour, therefore, to divest yourself of all party prejudice, and endeavour to give me an impartial and accurate account of what passes.

You will be the best judge at what time to commence your operations. You must have much to say, however, which is not merely current intelligence, and which must be always interesting; such, for instance, as your account of the “Steam Boats” It might therefore be desirable for you regularly to continue your correspondence upon these topics. In that case I shall consider your services as commencing the first of this inst. You will, however, follow your own judgment on this head. If you think it more expedient to drop your communications for a few weeks, at any rate write me another immediate letter in answer to this.

If I can be of any service to you in England it will give me much pleasure.

I am, dear Sir, your most obedient servant,
John Murray.

What Mr. Murray himself thought of the scheme may be inferred from his letter to Mr. William Jerdan, who had wished him success in his enterprise.

John Murray to Mr. Wm. Jerdan.

“Few things of this kind have, I believe, been commenced with more enlarged views or more honourable
intentions, or, perhaps, with more extensive and powerful means of giving them effect; but I am not less sensible to the risk of so complicated an enterprise, however well imagined, from the difficulty of its execution. I have never attempted anything with more considerate circumspection, or with more satisfactory hopes of success, but no one can form an estimate of a publication of this kind until it is published, so accept my best thanks for your good wishes.”

The time for the publication of the newspaper was rapidly approaching, and Mr. B. Disraeli’s correspondence became fast and furious. He wrote to Mr. Murray as to the engagement of Mr. W. H. Watts as a parliamentary reporter and general adviser at a salary of £350 per annum:—

Mr. B. Disraeli to John Murray.
November 23rd, 1825.
My dear Sir,

Leave a note for Mr. Watts, and request him to come on to Bloomsbury Square, where you will meet him to execute. I want to see you immediately. A letter of Lockhart of the first importance, which will throw some light upon the machinations of the junta of official scamps who have too long enslaved you.

Yours affectionately,
B. D.
December, 1825.
My dear Sir,

The sensation about the paper is very great. A meeting of the proprietors of the New Times was held yesterday, in order to conciliate the reporters, whom they have universally offended. I have received two letters from Watts, and in consequence have engaged Mr. Hall* and a Mr. Windyer, sen., both of whom we shall find

* This was Mr. Sydney Carter Hall, afterwards editor of the Art Journal and author of many important works.

most excellent reporters and men of business. The latter has been on the
Times. Mr. Hall and Mr. Windyer will call on me to-morrow at 10 for their agreements, and I shall give them a note to you to have their agreements executed. I should not have troubled you with this, had it been in my power to have reached you to-day. Pray favour me with a note, informing me whether Hall and Windyer shall call in Whitehall Place or Albemarle Street, and what hour may suit your convenience. It is no use to write to Lockhart after to-day.

Yours ever,
B. D.

By the end of December Mr. Lockhart had arrived in London, for the purpose of commencing his editorship of the Quarterly Review. The name of the new morning paper had not then been yet fixed on; from the correspondence respecting it, we find that some spoke of it as the Daily Review, others as the Morning News, and so on; but that Mr. Benjamin Disraeli settled the matter appears from the following letter of Mr. Lockhart to Mr. Murray:—

Mr. Lockhart to John Murray.
December 21st, 1825.
My dear Sir,

I am delighted, and, what is more, satisfied with Disraeli’s title—the Representative. If Mr. Powles does not produce some thundering objection, let this be fixed, in God’s name.

Strange to say, from this time forward nothing more is heard of Mr. Benjamin Disraeli in connection with the Representative. After his two journeys to Scotland, his interviews with Sir Walter Scott and Mr. Lockhart, his activity in making arrangements previous to the starting of the daily paper, his communications with the architect
as to the purchase and fitting up of the premises in Great George Street, and with the solicitors as to the proposed deed of partnership, he suddenly drops out of sight; and nothing more is heard of him in connection with the business.

It would appear that when the time arrived for the proprietors of the new paper to provide the necessary capital under the terms of the memorandum of agreement dated the 3rd August, 1825, both Mr. Disraeli and Mr. Powles failed to contribute their several proportions. Mr. Murray had indeed already spent a considerable sum, and entered into agreements for the purchase of printing-offices, printing-machines, types, and all the paraphernalia of a newspaper establishment. He had engaged reporters, correspondents, printers, sub-editors, though he still wanted an efficient editor. He was greatly disappointed at not being able to obtain the services of Mr. Lockhart. Mr. Disraeli was too young—being then only twenty-one, and entirely inexperienced in the work of conducting a daily paper—to be entrusted with the editorship. Indeed, it is doubtful whether he ever contemplated occupying that position, though he had engaged himself most sedulously in the preliminary arrangements in one department, his endeavours to obtain the assistance of men of commerce in the City; however, he was by no means successful.

Nevertheless, Mr. Murray was so far committed that he felt bound to go on with the enterprise, and he advertised the publication of the new morning paper. Some of his friends congratulated him on the announcement, trusting that they might see on their breakfast-table a paper which their wives and daughters might read without a blush.

Professor W. T. Brande, F.R.S., then Assayist at the Mint, and Professor of Chemistry at the Royal Institute, wrote to Mr. Murray:—

Professor W. T. Brande to John Murray.
January 2nd, 1826.

Sir H. Davy has been making himself very busy about a review of Humboldt, and is extremely sore at Mr. Daniell’s paper which appeared in late numbers [of ‘Brande’s Journal of Science,’ published by Mr. Murray]. He told me he had spoken to you on the subject. Pray pay no kind of attention to this exceedingly impertinent interference of that self-constituted autocrat of science, who, if he continues to intermeddle, may receive a lesson through the ‘Journal’ that shall teach him better manners. It pleases me to think that we shall at last have a daily paper, of sound politics, and fit to place upon our breakfast table; for I am sure you will exclude from it the filthy details of crim. con. cases, the examination of drunkards and prostitutes at Bow Street, the condemned sermons at Newgate, and the last dying speeches and confessions, with the behaviour at the gallows, of culprits. I think I shall be able now and then to send you five or ten lines. I could have given you a very curious document or two respecting the late pressure of business at the Mint.

Others, of considerable newspaper experience, warned him of the heavy risk and expense he must be put to before he could reap a farthing of profit from his adventure. Matters, however, had gone too far; he could not now retreat. These warnings were put to one side, and he determined to go on; in fact, he could not avoid it. The first number of the Representative accordingly appeared on the 25th of January, 1826, price 7d.; the Stamp Tax being then 4d. In politics it was a supporter of Lord Liverpool’s Government; but public distress, the currency, trade and commerce were subjects of independent comment.

Notwithstanding the pains which had been taken, and the money which had been spent, the Representative was a failure from the beginning. It was badly organized, badly edited, and its contents—leading articles, home and foreign
news—were ill-balanced. Failing Lockhart, an editor, named Tyndale, had been appointed on short notice, though he was an obscure and uninfluential person. He soon disappeared in favour of others, who were no better.
Dr. Maginn had been engaged—the Morgan O’Doherty of Blackwood’s Magazine—wit, scholar, and Bohemian. He was sent to Paris, where he evidently enjoyed himself; but the results, as regarded the Representative, were by no means satisfactory. He was better at borrowing money than at writing articles.

Mr. S. C. Hall, one of the parliamentary reporters of the paper, says, in his ‘Retrospect of a Long Life,’ that:—

“The day preceding the issue of the first number, Mr. Murray might have obtained a very large sum for a share of the copyright, of which he was the sole proprietor; the day after that issue, the copyright was worth comparatively nothing. . . . Editor there was literally none, from the beginning to the end. The first number supplied conclusive evidence of the utter ignorance of editorial tact on the part of the person entrusted with the duty. . . . In short, the work was badly done; if not a snare, it was a delusion; and the reputation of the new journal fell below zero in twenty-four hours.”*

An inspection of the file of the Representative justifies Mr. Hall’s remarks. The first number contained an article by Lockhart, four columns in length, on the affairs of Europe. It was correct and scholar-like, but tame and colourless. Incorrectness in a leading article may be tolerated, but dulness amounts almost to literary crime. The foreign correspondence consisted of a letter from Valetta, and a communication from Paris, more than a column in length, relating to French opera. In the matter

* ‘Retrospect of a Long Life, from 1815 to 1883.’ By S. C. Hall, F.S.A., i. p. 126.

of news, for which the dailies are principally purchased, the first number was exceedingly defective. It is hard to judge of the merits of a new journal from the first number, which must necessarily labour under many disadvantages, but the Representative did not from the first exhibit any element of success.

The leading articles in the first numbers were too few, too long, and wanted variety. Then they were shortened into paragraphs; and sometimes, during the appearance of the parliamentary reports, they disappeared altogether. Proceedings in the courts of law were well reported, though these are not very interesting to general readers. The foreign correspondence improved in length and quality, but the home news was neglected—the fault, no doubt, of the sub-editor. Sometimes the leading articles and other contributions were good; but, on the whole, the four pages of the Representative were not attractive. When the advertisements shrunk away, as they soon did, there was more room for news, as well as for the advertisements of Mr. Murray’s own books. Had there been no other morning paper, the Representative might have succeeded, but it could not stand against the powerful competition which even then existed.

Mr. Murray knew that the chief defect of the paper was the want of an able organizer and editor. Mr. S. C. Hall has informed us that on one occasion Mr. Murray encountered a friend in the Strand, who, after a little conversation with him, accompanied him to a cab, and gave the driver orders to go to 14, Whitehall Place. Mr. Murray, however, before the cab drove off, beckoned his friend back. “What is it, Mr. Murray? what do you want?” “I want an editor! I want an editor!” This was his constant cry; but a cry which was never satisfied.
He engaged as his literary adviser a retired clergyman,
Edwards by name, who, however, proved of no use, and went out of his way to criticise Mr. Lockhart as editor of the Quarterly, and to condemn the contributions of Barrow, Ellis, and Southey—men who had in a great measure assisted in the establishment of the Review.

It is not surprising that in these circumstances, deprived of any efficient helpers, Mr. Murray found his new enterprise an increasing source of annoyance and worry. His health broke down under the strain, and when he was confined to his bed by illness, things went worse from day to day. The usual publishing business was neglected; letters remained unanswered, manuscripts remained unread, and some correspondents became excessively angry at their communications being neglected. Mr. Murray had many private sympathisers. Among these were Mr. Mitchell, Mr. John Taylor, formerly proprietor of the Sun, Mrs. Graham, and many others. Mr. Mitchell wrote to Mr. Lockhart as follows:—

Mr. T. Mitchell to Mr. Lockhart.
February 3rd, 1826.

“I have been made seriously uneasy by a communication which has recently been made to me of the state of our friend Murray’s health, and by a continued silence on his part, which leads me to fear that the communication is too well founded. . . . Other rumours have been afloat in the daily papers, to which it would perhaps be impertinent in me to allude more closely; but there are public men of such high character, that no misfortune can happen to them without individuals feeling as if it were their own private calamity.”

And Mr. Lockhart himself wrote to Murray:—

Mr. Lockhart to John Murray.
February 7th, 1826.
My Dear Murray,

That I should have been in any measure accessory to bringing you into the present situation weighs, I assure you, more heavily on my spirits than even the mass of domestic melancholy with which I am at present surrounded. What I can do in any way is always at your service, but even the depression is proof enough that I have not the iron nerves of the man fitted for daily collision with the world. I hope you have never for a moment supposed it possible that I should add to your embarrassments by being willing to touch unearned gold. The Quarterly Review, I think, promises well. Let us hope for better days. If something very effectual be not done for the mechanical arrangements in the course of a few days, I shall undoubtedly return to the opinion which we carried with us one day to Mr. Powles.

Very sincerely yours,
J. G. L.

The rumours alluded to by Mr. Mitchell related to the commercial crisis then prevailing, and to the downfall of many large publishing houses; and it was feared that Mr. Murray might be implicated in the failures. At the end of January, the great firm of Alexander Constable & Co., of Edinburgh, publishers of Sir Walter Scott’s novels, was declared bankrupt; shortly after, the failure was announced of James Ballantyne & Co., in which Sir Walter Scott was a partner; and with these houses, that of Hurst, Robinson & Co., of London, was hopelessly involved. The market was flooded with the dishonoured papers of all these concerns, and mercantile confidence in the great publishing houses was almost at an end. We find Washington Irving communicating the following
intelligence to
A. H. Everett, United States Minister at Madrid (January 31st, 1826):—

“You will perceive by the papers the failure of Constable & Co., at Edinburgh, and Hurst, Robinson & Co., at London. These are severe shocks in the trading world of literature. Pray Heaven, Murray may stand unmoved, and not go into the Gazette, instead of publishing one!”

Mr. Murray held his ground. He was not only able to pay his way, but to assist some of the best-known London publishers through the pressure of their difficulties. One of these was Mr. Robert Baldwin, of Paternoster Row, who expressed his repeated obligations to Mr. Murray for his help in time of need. The events of this crisis clearly demonstrated the wisdom and foresight of Murray in breaking loose from the Ballantyne and Constable connection, in spite of the promising advantages which it had offered him. He was now rewarded for the resolution with which he had refused to discount and renew their constantly increasing bills. Had Sir Walter Scott adopted the same course, he might have been a rich man instead of a poor one; though we might not have had the grand lesson of his fighting against time, to meet the dishonoured bills of the Edinburgh publishers, and to pay their debts as well as his own. In the fervency of his manly anxiety to fulfil his pecuniary engagements, he considered every hour mis-spent which did not directly contribute to the accomplishment of that noble end.

Murray still went on with the Representative, though the result was increasing annoyance and vexation. Mr. Milman wrote to him, “Do get a new editor for the lighter part of your paper, and look well to the Quarterly.” The advice was
taken, and
Dr. Maginn was brought over from Paris to take charge of the lighter part of the paper at a salary of £700 a year, with a house. The result was, that a number of clever jeux d’esprit were inserted by him, but these were intermingled with some biting articles, which gave considerable offence. In one of these Sir James Mackintosh was introduced, on which Mrs. Graham, a contributor to the paper, wrote to Mr. Murray:—

Mrs. Graham to John Murray.

“I cannot refrain from telling you that some of Sir James Mackintosh’s friends are more vexed than I think so very stupid a paragraph deserves. What could possess your sub-editor to defile your paper with a thing so foolish and so bad-hearted? I hope I never saw the wretch—whoever he is. I feel almost disgraced by having a word of mine on the same page. However, for your sake, I will do my best on the subjects you wish.”

It was no slight aggravation of Mr. Murray’s troubles that he was held personally responsible for the writings of others; for the editor, whoever he might be, was unknown, while Mr. Murray was accessible to everybody. At length the strain became more than he could bear, and he sought the first opportunity for stopping the further publication of the paper. On the 6th of June, Thomas Mitchell, in one of his letters, asked Mr. Murray, “Have you yet got rid of the Representative ?” A general election, however, was in progress, and, moreover, the management of the paper was showing considerable improvement, and flagging hopes revived. But it was too late. The early issues of the Representative had seriously injured it, and the damage could not now be redressed. Accordingly, after the general election was over, the Representative ceased to exist on the 29th of July 1826, after a career of only six months, during
which brief period it had involved Mr. Murray in a loss of not less than £26,000*

Mr. Murray bore his loss with much equanimity, and found it an inexpressible relief to be rid of the Representative even at such a sacrifice. To Washington Irving he wrote:—

John Murray to Mr. Irving.

“One cause of my not writing to you during one whole year was my ‘entanglement,’ as Lady G—— says, with a newspaper, which absorbed my money, and distracted and depressed my mind; but I have cut the knot of evil, which I could not untie, and am now, by the blessing of God, again returned to reason and the shop.”

One of the unfortunate results of the initiation and publication of the Representative was that it disturbed the friendship which had so long existed between Mr. Murray and Mr. Isaac D’Israeli. The real cause of Benjamin’s sudden dissociation from an enterprise, of which in its earlier stages he had been the moving spirit, can only be matter of conjecture. The only mention of his name in the later correspondence regarding the newspaper occurs in the following letter:—

Mr. Lockhart to John Murray.
Thursday, February 14th, 1826.

I think Mr. B. Disraeli ought to tell you what it is that he wishes to say to Mr. Croker on a business of yours ere he asks of you a letter to the Secretary. If there really be something worth saying, I certainly know nobody that would say it better, but I confess I think, all things con-

* The Representative was afterwards incorporated with the New Times, another unfortunate paper.

sidered, you have no need of anybody to come between you and Mr. Croker. What can it be?

J. G. L.

But after the Representative had ceased to be published, the elder D’Israeli thought he had a cause of quarrel with Mr. Murray, and proposed to publish a pamphlet on the subject. The matter was brought under the notice of Mr. Sharon Turner, the historian and solicitor, and the friend of both. Mr. Turner strongly advised Mr. Isaac D’Israeli to abstain from issuing any such publication.

Mr. Sharon Turner to Mr. D’Israeli.
October 6th, 1826.

“Fame is pleasant, if it arise from what will give credit or do good. But to make oneself notorious only to be the football of all the dinner-tables, tea-tables, and gossiping visits of the country, will be so great a weakness, that until I see you actually committing yourself to it, I shall not believe that you, at an age like my own, can wilfully and deliberately do anything that will bring the evil on you. Therefore I earnestly advise that whatever has passed be left as it is. . . . If you give it any further publicity, you will, I think, cast a shade over a name that at present stands quite fair before the public eye. And nothing can dim it to you that will not injure all who belong to you. Therefore, as I have said to Murray, I say to you; Let Oblivion absorb the whole question as soon as possible, and do not stir a step to rescue it from her salutary power. . . If I did not see your words before me, I could not have supposed that after your experience of these things and of the world, you could deliberately intend to write—that is, to publish in print—anything on the differences between you, Murray, and the Representative, and your son. . . . If you do, Murray will be driven to answer. To him the worst that can befall will be the public smile that he could have embarked in a speculation that has cost him many thousand pounds, and a criticism
on what led to it. . . . The public know it, and talk as they please about it, but in a short time will say no more upon it. It is now dying away. Very few at present know that you were in any way concerned about it. To you, therefore, all that results will be new matter for the public discussion and censure. And, after reading
Benjamin’s agreement of the 3rd August, 1825, and your letters to Murray on him and the business, of the 27th September, the 29th September, and the 9th October, my sincere opinion is that you cannot, with a due regard to your own reputation, write or publish anything about it. I send you hastily my immediate thoughts, that he whom I have always respected may not, by publishing what will be immediately contradicted, diminish or destroy in others that respect which at present he possesses, and which I hope he will continue to enjoy.”

Mr. D’Israeli did not write his proposed pamphlet, and thereby give room for literary gossip. What Mr. Murray thought of his intention may be inferred from the following extract from his letter to Mr. Sharon Turner:—

John Murray to Mr. Sharon Turner.
October 16th, 1826.

Mr. D’Israeli is totally wrong in supposing that my indignation against his son arises in the smallest degree from the sum which I have lost by yielding to that son’s unrelenting excitement and importunity; this loss, whilst it was in weekly operation, may be supposed, and naturally enough, to have been sufficiently painful, but now that it has ceased, I solemnly declare that I neither care nor think about it, more than one does of the long-suffered agonies of an aching tooth the day after we have summoned resolution enough to have it extracted. On the contrary, I am disposed to consider this apparent misfortune as one of that chastening class which, if suffered wisely, may be productive of greater good, and I feel confidently that, as it has re-kindled my ancient ardour in business, a very few months will enable me to replace this temporary loss, and make me infinitely the gainer, if I profit by the prudential
lesson which this whole affair is calculated to teach. . . . From me his son had received nothing but the most unbounded confidence and parental attachment; my fault was in having loved, not wisely, but too well.”

Fortunately, the misunderstanding between these two old friends did not last long, for towards the end of the year we find Mr. Isaac D’Israeli communicating with Mr. Murray respecting Wool’sLife of Joseph Warton,’ and certain selected letters by Warton which he thought worthy of re-publication; and with respect to his son, Mr. Benjamin Disraeli, although he published his first work, ‘Vivian Grey,’ through Colburn, he returned to Albemarle Street a few years later, and published his ‘Contarini Fleming’ through Mr. Murray.