LORD  BYRON  and  his  TIMES
Documents Biography Criticism

The Autobiography of William Jerdan
Ch. 11: The R.S.L.

Vol. I. Front Matter
Ch. 1: Introductory
Ch. 2: Childhood
Ch. 3: Boyhood
Ch. 4: London
Ch. 5: Companions
Ch. 6: The Cypher
Ch. 7: Edinburgh
Ch. 8: Edinburgh
Ch. 9: Excursion
Ch. 10: Naval Services
Ch. 11: Periodical Press
Ch. 12: Periodical Press
Ch. 13: Past Times
Ch. 14: Past Times
Ch. 15: Literary
Ch. 16: War & Jubilees
Ch. 17: The Criminal
Ch. 18: Mr. Perceval
Ch. 19: Poets
Ch. 20: The Sun
Ch. 21: Sun Anecdotes
Ch. 22: Paris in 1814
Ch. 23: Paris in 1814
Ch. 24: Byron
Vol. I. Appendices
Scott Anecdote
Burns Anecdote
Life of Thomson
John Stuart Jerdan
Scottish Lawyers
Sleepless Woman
Canning Anecdote
Southey in The Sun
Hood’s Lamia
Murder of Perceval
Vol. II. Front Matter
Ch. 1: Literary
Ch. 2: Mr. Canning
Ch. 3: The Sun
Ch. 4: Amusements
Ch. 5: Misfortune
Ch. 6: Shreds & Patches
Ch. 7: A Character
Ch. 8: Varieties
Ch. 9: Ingratitude
Ch. 10: Robert Burns
Ch. 11: Canning
Ch. 12: Litigation
Ch. 13: The Sun
Ch. 14: Literary Gazette
Ch. 15: Literary Gazette
Ch. 16: John Trotter
Ch. 17: Contributors
Ch. 18: Poets
Ch 19: Peter Pindar
Ch 20: Lord Munster
Ch 21: My Writings
Vol. II. Appendices
The Satirist.
Authors and Artists.
The Treasury
Morning Chronicle
Chevalier Taylor
Foreign Journals
Vol. III. Front Matter
Ch. 1: Literary Pursuits
Ch. 2: Literary Labour
Ch. 3: Poetry
Ch. 4: Coleridge
Ch 5: Criticisms
Ch. 6: Wm Gifford
Ch. 7: W. H. Pyne
Ch. 8: Bernard Barton
Ch. 9: Insanity
Ch. 10: The R.S.L.
‣ Ch. 11: The R.S.L.
Ch. 12: L.E.L.
Ch. 13: L.E.L.
Ch. 14: The Past
Ch. 15: Literati
Ch. 16: A. Conway
Ch. 17: Wellesleys
Ch. 18: Literary Gazette
Ch. 19: James Perry
Ch. 20: Personal Affairs
Vol. III. Appendices
Literary Poverty
Ismael Fitzadam
Mr. Tompkisson
Mrs. Hemans
A New Review
Debrett’s Peerage
Procter’s Poems
Poems by Others
Poems by Jerdan
Vol. IV. Front Matter
Ch. 1: Critical Glances
Ch. 2: Personal Notes
Ch. 3: Fresh Start
Ch. 4: Thomas Hunt
Ch. 5: On Life
Ch. 6: Periodical Press
Ch. 7: Quarterly Review
Ch. 8: My Own Life
Ch. 9: Mr. Canning
Ch. 10: Anecdotes
Ch. 11: Bulwer-Lytton
Ch. 12: G. P. R. James
Ch. 13: Finance
Ch. 14: Private Life
Ch. 15: Learned Societies
Ch. 16: British Association
Ch. 17: Literary Characters
Ch. 18: Literary List
Ch. 19: Club Law
Ch. 20: Conclusion
Vol. IV. Appendix
Gerald Griffin
W. H. Ainsworth
James Weddell
The Last Bottle
N. T. Carrington
The Literary Fund
Letter from L.E.L.
Geographical Society
Baby, a Memoir
Creative Commons License

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

A little learning is a dangerous thing,
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring.—Pope.

As an example of the way in which Royal Societies may be made, I proceed to add a few further particulars to the preceding chapter. Among the earliest members who entered zealously into the promotion of the design, as workers, were Mr. Taylor Combe, A. J. Valpy, Dr. Yeates, William Tooke, A. Impey, Mr. Jacobs, and Dr. Richards; and it was also strengthened by the junction and occasional services of Sir M. Tierney, Sir Thomas D. Acland, Sir Henry Halford, T. Bosworth, Sharon Turner, C. A. Smith, and others, so that by the end of 1821 it was in a fair way and satisfactory condition. I do not say too much, when I state that I was the President’s deputy manager, and really had my hands full of correcting proofs, and had more to do than Mr. Yeates, the provisional secretary. The premiums resolved to be announced for the year 1822 were a renewal of—

I. The King’s premium of one hundred guineas* for the best Dissertation on the Age of Homer;—his

* No essay presented for any of these premiums was at all commen-

Writings and Genius; and on the state of Religion, Society, Learning, and the Arts, during that period, collected from the Writings of

II. Also the Society’s premium of fifty guineas for the best Essay on the History of the Greek Language; comprehending the present Language of Greece, especially in the Ionian Islands; and the differences between Ancient and Modern Greek.

III. And the Society’s premium of fifty guineas for the best poem on the Fall of Constantinople in the fifteenth century.

This list being finally made ready for publication, after half a dozen times undergoing the revision of the bishop, Mr. Baber, and myself, was advertised in the newspapers; Mr. Baber left town, and the rest that might require to be done was remitted to a quorum of three; being about one, if not two, more than could be got together! at the season of the year. I was therefore left alone, like the one soldier from India, who represented Hamilton’s regiment at the review.

In February, 1822, the Council began to muster again, and the proceedings of the year, though several matters of importance were discussed, did not advance to any material transaction. A limited number of Mrs. Hemans’s prize poem was printed at the expense of the society, in a neat quarto of twenty-two pages, and distributed among the members; a fine memorial of the desolate Dartmoor, which is nevertheless one of the most antiquarian localities in our island, and yet wants the research of archæology to explore

surate to even limited expectation, and no award was made. There were, indeed, very few; and on the subjects which required great learning and labour, I think the offer was a mistake, and that nothing of sufficient character could be expected.

its wonderful remains, and the powers of history to explain them. There is, perhaps, more of Ancient Britain on Dartmoor, than on all the rest of England together. Thus sung the bard-like Hemans:—

Who shall tell
If on thy soil the sons of heroes fell,
In those far ages which have left no trace
No sunbeam on the pathway of their nice?
Though, haply, in the unrecorded days
Of kings and chiefs, who pass’d without their praise,
Thou might’st have rear’d the valiant and the free,
In history’s page there is no tale of thee.
Yet hast thou thy memorials. On the wild
Still rise the cairns of yore, all rudely piled,
But hallow’d by that instinct, which reveres
Things fraught with characters of elder years—
And such are these. Long centuries have flown,
Bow’d many a crest, and shattered many a throne.
* * * * * *
But still these nameless chronicles of death,
Midst the deep silence of the unpeopled heath,
Stand in primeval artlessness, and wear
The same sepulchral mien, and almost share
The eternity of nature.

A year after this society-printing and distribution, I received the following notes from the author relating to the poem on the Fall of Constantinople, which I also had the pleasure to arrange for her:—

“Bronwhylfa, St. Asaph, May 8th, 1823.
Dear Sir,

“As I am ignorant of the proper medium of communication with the Royal Society of Literature, and am aware that you are one of its members, may I request you would do me the favour of making known to that society, in whatever manner you consider most expedient, that it is my intention to publish, without delay, a poem of mine,
now in their hands, and originally written for the prize offered by them in 1821. The present season of the year being considered the most favourable for publication, I have been advised, on that account, no longer to wait the adjudgment of the prize. As I think it right that the society should be made acquainted with this without delay, it will be a satisfaction to me if you will have the kindness to inform me that it has been done. My poem, which is the one with a motto from
Horace—‘Barbarus, heu! insistet victor, &c.,’ and another from Montesquieu, ‘Sous les derniers Empereurs, l’Empire, reduit aux faubourgs de Constantinople,’ &c, will be in the hands of Mr. Murray by the time you receive this.

“Should you be induced to visit this country in the course of the ensuing summer, I trust you will not pass St. Asaph without giving me an opportunity of assuring you that I am,

“Dear sir, very truly,
“Your obliged, &c,
“Bronwhylfa, St. Asaph, May 19.
Dear Sir,

“I feel particularly obliged by the kindness and consideration with which you have fulfilled the wishes I took the liberty of communicating to you, on the subject of my poem. It appears to me, however, that it would be taking an advantage hardly fair, of the permission to publish granted by the R. S. L., to leave the piece amongst those of the candidates for the offered prize, after laying it before the public. I had indeed imagined that the very request which the society have done me the favour to
grant, amounted to a withdrawal of my claim as a candidate. May I therefore still farther trouble you to procure for me the copy in the hands of the society (which, I conclude can be obtained on presenting the mottoes), and to do me the kindness of forwarding it to the address of
Lieutenant-Colonel Browne, at L. Hesse’s, Esq., No. 6, Somerset House.

“I have requested Mr. Murray to transmit you a copy of the little volume immediately on its publication. You will, I hope, receive, and favour me by accepting it, in the course of a few days. I have called it the ‘Last Constantine,’ having seen a poem advertised some time ago, by the title of the ‘Fall of Constantinople.’

“When you next see my old friend with a new name, Mr. Dare, be so kind as to offer him my congratulations on his recent acquisition of property. With much esteem, believe me, Dear Sir,

“Your obliged servant,
W. Jerdan, Esq.”

At last the Provisional Council finished its long and arduous task, and laid the results before his Majesty, as the Originator and Founder of “The Society for the Promotion of General Literature,” into which comprehensive formula all the various propositions, titles, alterations and amendments, were thus finally resolved. All the preceding motions, irregularly and desultorily brought forward (as I have described) and discussed at Council after Council on their insulated merits, without time and opportunity for weighing them with reference to the whole, were happily discarded, and the following official notification, under the sign manual, and addressed to the Bishop
of St. Davids, testified to his Majesty’s unwearied love of literature, and patriotic desire to effect a royal and national association in its favour.

“G. R.
“Carlton Palace, 2nd June, 1823.
My Lord,

“I am honoured with the commands of the King, to acquaint your Lordship, that his Majesty most entirely approves of the Constitution and Regulations of the Royal Society of Literature, as submitted by your Lordship.

“I have, &c.,
(Signed) W. KNIGHTON.”

This welcome intelligence having been laid before the Council, a general meeting of the Fellows was ordered to be summoned for the 17th, and this, the first public meeting, took place accordingly. The learned and excellent bishop, who, during all the period passed in maturing the plan agreeably to his Majesty’s direction, had acted as Provisional President, took the chair, and read an admirable address, in which he took a succinct but clear and complete view of the origin, present state, and future prospects of the society, upon which I need not dwell, having as well as I could, given an historical and anecdotical account of the royal intention, and the process by which it was brought to its existing establishment.

Under the patronage, and endowed by the munificence of the King, the institution was defined to be for the advancement of Literature, by 1, the publication of inedited remains of ancient literature, and of such works as may be of great intrinsic value, but not of that popular character which usually claims the attention of publishers; by 2, the promotion of discoveries in literature; by 3, endeavours to
fix the standard, as far as is practicable, and to preserve the purity of our language, by the critical improvement of our lexicography; by 4, the reading, at public meetings, of interesting papers on history, philosophy, poetry, philology, and the arts; and the publication of such of those papers as shall be approved of, in the Society’s Transactions; by 5, the assigning of honorary rewards to works of great literary merit, and to important discoveries in literature; and by 6, establishing a correspondence with learned men in foreign countries, for the purposes of literary inquiry and information.

Such was the original scope of the society, with a grant of eleven hundred guineas annually from the Crown, and its own fund of donations and subscriptions, to defray the charges. Before going farther, I shall briefly notice the results of this programme, as the society has been able to realise it, with, unquestionably, very liberal support from many members, but without that adhesion of numbers which alone could have done justice to the entire system.

1. As yet in embryo. The late Dr. Richards, however, bequeathed a legacy of 5000l. to the society for the execution of this object. Owing to private circumstances, the legacy, reduced to one-third, about 16501., was only recovered last year, and it is thought must accumulate with interest before any work worthy of the society can be undertaken. [In my humble opinion, it ought to be acted upon directly to the extent of its supply.] The publication of two sterling volumes, entitled “Biographia Britannica Literaria,” ably edited by Mr. Thomas Wright, does not come exactly within the terms of this bequest, and is the only separate work that has been issued by the society; though a second
volume of the “Hieroglyphics,” begun for the Egyptian Society by
Dr. Young, has also been produced.

2. Almost an entire blank.

3. An expensive design, and beyond the means of the society. Yet, as Todd, the editor of “Johnson’s Dictionary,” presented to it all his valuable and lexicographical collection,* it may still be hoped, that, possessed of such materials and a large body of useful accessories, this grand branch of the pristine plan may, at some future period, be brought into operation.

4. Regularly carried on, and the source of many very learned and admirable papers. On Egyptian, and, latterly, Assyrian antiquities, the communications have been remarkably interesting; and a list of the contributors would at once prove that they could not be otherwise. Hallam, W. Hamilton, Col. Leake, Sir G. Wilkinson, Mr. Birch, of the British Museum, Mr. Bonomi, Dr. P. Colquhoun, Mr. John Hogg, the late Isaac Cullimore, Dr. Hincks, the late Granville Penn, Sharon Turner, Sir W. Ouseley, Archdeacon Nares, Mr. Millingen, Sir W. Gell, Henry Holland, W. Osburn, Sir C. Fellowes, Mr. Layard, Colonel Rawlinson, Colonel Mure, W. S. W. Vaux, J. P. Collier, J. Landseer, G. Burges, and a host of other distinguished authors and literary antiquaries (not to swell the catalogue with foreign scholars), have thrown much light upon many curious and long-vexed inquiries.

5. During the life of the founder, George IV., ten royal associates were endowed with a permanent honorarium of one hundred guineas each, and every year two splendid gold medals were voted by the Council to men most eminent in the pursuits of literature. On the death of his

* Prince Hoare also was a great benefactor to the library, which now contains many standard and some rare works.

Majesty, this munificent source of distinction ceased.
King William IV. intimated that he was too poor, and had too many nearer claims upon the Privy Purse to admit of this deduction, and the royal endowment came to an unexpected and painful close. Several of the royal associates, the recipients of the pension (if I may so call the tribute to their deserts, accompanied by a pecuniary revenue), had been taught to rely upon it as a certainty; and I was aware that to some inconveniency, amounting to distress, was the consequence of this sudden stoppage of income. I have mentioned my slight acquaintance with Lord Melbourne, and the cuff he bestowed upon me; and I record it, as an honour to his memory, that he renewed our intercourse to ascertain through me how parties were affected by this change; and when I represented the particular hardships to him, provided the same amount from other sources of national disbursement.

6. Has not perhaps been carried out to the extent which a very wealthy and flourishing institution, especially when fresh and young, might desire; but, in this respect, it is gratifying to have to state that, with the accession of new and active members, there is a manifest improvement going on, and a much wider intercommunication with foreign literati likely to be concerted.

The management of the society’s affairs was, at this meeting, vested in the Bishop of St. Davids, as President; as Vice-presidents, the Bishop of Chester, the Lord Chief Justice, the Right Hon. J. C. Villiers, the Hon. G. Agar Ellis, Sir Gore Ouseley, Sir James Macintosh, Archdeacon Nares, and Colonel Leake; Council, Marquis of Lansdowne, Lord Grenville, Lord Morpeth, Sir T. Acland, F. Chantrey, Taylor Combe, Rev. G. Croly, James Cumming, W. Empson, Rev. Dr. Gray, Prince Hoare, W. Jerdan, Archdeacon Prosser, Rev. Dr. Richards, and Rev. C. Sumner (now
Bishop of Winchester); treasurer,
A. E. Impey; librarian, Rev. H. H. Baber; secretary, Rev. R. Cattermole.

In the ensuing season, early in November, the council re-assembled; the business of the society advanced, and its strength and prosperity increased.

I have a little way back put the word “Fellows” into italics, in order that I may mention one of our formative dilemmas. We wanted a name by which to designate our members, as other societies had their capital letters, F.R.S., F.S.A., M.R.A., &c., &c.; and it was almost, if not altogether, ludicrous, but gave us much trouble at the time, that the Royal Society and the Royal Society of Antiquaries formally protested against our additions exhibiting the distinguishing letters which they employed to designate a Fellow, and the Royal Academy objected to our having an M., which pertained to them to designate Members. We had a deal of correspondence on the subject, and how we were to be permitted to range our P’s and Q’s, or rather our F’s, M’s, R’s, and S’s, became a matter of grave consideration. I forget how the difficulty was overcome; but I think it was by adding an L. to the literal measure, and swelling ourselves into the four letters, M. R. S. L.

The “Literary Gazette,” I need hardly say, had been from the first a hearty supporter of the plan, and became its demi-official organ; and in this course it published a report of a meeting of primary importance, in its No. 374, March 20, 1824. In this, however, a mistake occurred, in describing the appointment of the Royal Associates as proceeding from a carte blanche given to the Council by the Sovereign; upon which I received the annexed letter from the President, which shows his great anxiety to have nothing misunderstood regarding the society:—

“Durham, March 23.
Dear Sir,

“The more I consider the account of the carte blanche expressly signified to the Council by the King, and his expressed will, that no party or political feelings should be permitted to have the slightest influence in the proceedings of the society, the more I am concerned at the incorrectness (to say the least of it) of such a representation. The only carte blanche which the King gave was to me, and it certainly expressed no such direction. If the King should see this account, he must think I have abused his confidence. In the two letters under the sign manual, which are the only public expressions of his will, there are not the slightest intimations respecting party or politics. I am really anxious on my own account, as well as the Society’s, that this misconstruction of the King’s authority should be set right, which I hope the letter of ‘Chartophylax’ will do

“I am, dear Sir, yours very truly,

This correction was inserted in the “Literary Gazette,” No. 375, and the Royal Associates elected under the proper authority appeared as follows:—S. T. Coleridge, Rev. E. Davies (Celtic Researches, Mythology, &c.); Dr. John Jamieson, Edinburgh; T. R. Malthus; T. J. Matthias; J. Millingen; Sir W. Ouseley; W. Roscoe; Todd, editor of “Johnson’s Dictionary;” and Sharon Turner;—a list I believe unanimously approved of by the public and literary world.

The honorary members elected at the same period gave equal satisfaction, as evincing the absence of all little or
party feelings in the selection.
Alison, the historian, Bishop Gleig, Von Hammer, Archhishop Magee, Angelo Mai, Sir John Malcolm, W. Mitford, J. Rennell, H. Salt, W. A. Von Schlegel, Sir G. Staunton, Dr. Thomas Young, and Dr. C. Wilkins, are names that could hardly be surpassed in the sphere of contemporary literature; and I may add, as an amusing fact, that at a later date the good orthodox Bishop of St. Davids moved, and I seconded, the nomination of a certain scholarly M. Wiseman, little foreseeing that he would become a Cardinal, and the greatest Roman Catholic authority in England. It is almost enough to stir my venerated old friend in his tomb. As for myself, I read the name, still on the honorary list, with becoming equanimity.

Meetings at which a number of the celebrated persons I have named in these pages were usually present, possessed great interest; and there were also, at various times, connected with the society, as honorary associates, as well as honorary members, Dr. Rees, Professor Lee, Mr. Duppa, Mr. Fosbrooke, Lisle Bowles, B. Barton, Dr. Lingard, Dr. G. Miller, James Rennell, Dugald Stewart, G. Crabbe, Archdeacon Coxe, A. Roscoe, Washington Irving, T. Mitchell, James Montgomery, P. F. Tytler, the Chevalier Bunsen, Dr. Lepsius, G. P. R. James, Dawson Turner, and many more who have enriched our literature in every class. That the society was steered clear of party or sectarian prejudices need not be asserted after the contemplation of such a list of men of every description of political and religious opinion; but, if farther proof were wanted, it would be supplied by the names of the fourteen individuals who were honoured with the gold medals during the seven years, from 1824 to 1830, in which the bounty of George IV. was expended upon these distinctions, viz., W. Mitford and Angelo Mai, James Rennell and C. Wilkins, Professor Schweighreuser
and Dugald Stewart,
Sir W. Scott and R. Southey, George Crabbe and Archdeacon Coxe, W. Roscoe and Baron Silvestre de Lacy, Washington Irving and Henry Hallam.

From the period of the second anniversary, when the President delivered another eloquent address, any small portion of research may trace the future history of the Society; and therefore I may consistently finish my sketch of its origin and earliest proceedings here. That I claim some credit and feel considerable pride in the share I took in its formation, of which I can truly say quorum pars magna fui, and deem a prominent event in my literary life, I have no wish to conceal; for it is not amiss to affirm the insufficiently appreciated fact, that when a man engaged in literary pursuits devotes his precious time to the public cause, he is contributing much more, both in substance and assistance, than the noble or wealthy who subscribe even munificently for its benefit. For thirty-two years I have not slackened in any zeal for the promotion of the design, whose birth I witnessed and whose prosperity I aided, out of the council-room and the committees on papers for publication, by personal exertions to augment its numbers and procure the co-operation of powerful allies. That I was very successful in both ways the list of living members still bears testimony (though, alas, the list of the departed would be more demonstrative); and when I add that two of the future presidents were introduced through me, namely, Lord Dover, and the Earl of Ripon, I need scarcely refer to the Duke of Rutland, Earl of Munster, Lord Willoughby de Eresby, Lord Farnborough, Lord Chief Baron Pollock, and others, whom it was my good fortune to enrol among the friends of the institution. I append the note of Lord Ripon (then Lord Goderich) on his election, as he afterwards did so much to advance the welfare of the society, and as the allusion at
its close may demand some observations, as connected with another hardly less important but far less known affair, in which the press was intimately concerned.

“Pembroke House, March 9.
Dear Sir,

“Will you do me the favour to let me know to whom I am to address myself upon the subject of my election to be a member of the Royal Society of Literature. I have received a communication respecting it, but I have mislaid the letter, and know not to whom or where the answer ought to be sent.

“I think your idea about ‘Truth’ a very good one, and will talk to Mr. Ellis about it.

“I remain, dear sir,
“Very faithfully yours,

In all the Bishop of St. Davids’ (afterwards Salisbury) proceedings and addresses I was gratified by being usefully and confidentially employed; and the more so because in all my experience of mankind I never knew a character superior to his. In London and at Abergwilly I had opportunities for studying him closely, and for scholarship, humanity, and Christianity, I never met his equal. He was indeed the good Samaritan, the man without guile, the Protestant prelate of purest apostolic principles. His charity was only limited by his means to bestow, and hardly by that, and his very strong orthodoxy was often dissolved in a tide of liberality in which the great ingredient was nearly lost. A more simple-minded, sincere, virtuous, and pious being never adorned creation. I trust I may be forgiven the addition of a few brief notes, to show the terms on which I
had the happiness to live for many years with this exemplary man. I preface them with one from
Prince Hoare:—

“Thursday, Norfolk-street.
Dear Sir,

“The Bishop of St. Davids is very desirous of reading to the Council on Thursday, your first announcement of the R. S. L. in the ‘Literary Gazette.’ Can you conveniently favour him with it on Thursday?

“Yours, with regard,
Dear Sir,

“I have here sent you the title, &c., of the tract which has been advertised in the ‘Literary Gazette.’ In the last page of the enclosed you will find a reference to the Address to the Royal Society of Literature, which I shall not advertise publicly till it has been printed.

“Yours very truly,
Dear Sir,

“You will of course prefix to the enclosed some reason for printing the entire Anniversary Discourse, instead of the epitome, and state that it has been done with my consent. It was my intention to publish the Discourse as a tract; but, for the present, I shall be content with the wider circulation which the ‘Literary Gazette’ will give to its contents, than could have been done in the form of a tract. Yours very truly,

Dear Sir,

“I was truly concerned to hear of your severe accident, and I hope that you will be soon a convalescent. I sent a copy of our Address to Colonel Fitzclarence,
and received yesterday evening an answer from him, which I shall lay hefore a meeting of the Council on Monday. With best wishes for your perfect recovery,

“I am, dear sir, yours very truly,
Dear Sir,

“I leave London next week, and should be glad to have my Anniversary Discourse on Monday, that I may commit it to the press, so as to get a proof or two before I leave London.

Yours very truly,

The last I shall quote is amusing, as referring to Mr. Davies:—

Dear Sir,

“Your compositor has succeeded much better than I expected. There is one droll erratum—Cellar Researches, instead of Celtic Researches—the author having been one of the most abstemious men in the world.

“Yours very truly,

I have only to add, that the commodious house now occupied by the Royal Society of Literature, in St. Martin’s Place, was indebted for its building to liberal voluntary subscriptions from leading members; and that the Society is now flourishing under the presidency of the Earl of Carlisle, with the able assistance of Lord Colborne, Lord Clarendon, the Lord Chief Baron, Sir John Boileau, Mr. Hallam, Col. Leake, Dr. Spry, Mr. Wm. Tooke, Mr. B. Botfield, Sir John Doratt, Mr. B. Austen, Mr. Teed, &c., amongst its Vice-presidents and Council. Esto perpetua!