The Autobiography of William Jerdan
Ch. 13: Finance
CHAPTER XIII.
ANOTHER DAY WITH THEODORE
HOOK—WORDSWORTH—ACKERMANN.
Sine Cerere et Baccho friget Venus.
|
But, since life at most a jest is,
As philosophers allow,
Still to laugh by far the best is,
Then laugh on as I do now.
Laugh at all things,
Great and small things,
Sick or well, on sea or shore;
While we’re quaffing,
Let’s have laughing—
Who the devil cares for more?
|
Finance is a dry subject, and one which, except on the single
instance described in the last chapter, I never liked. Indeed I had always a sort of dread
of figures after I lost my precocious aptitude for them (see vol. i.) and my blunders in
attempting numbers, reckonings, or accounts have been so ludicrous, that a schoolboy of ten
years old would have been whipt for making them, and they could hardly be believed to be
ought but affectations of carelessness, instead of inherent stupidity, or a predestiny to
be incorrect. Such matters are difficult to explain. I could perfectly understand and make
myself master of the most complicated problems, but I rarely succeeded in summing up a row
of cyphers, were it merely the
columns, half columns, &c., to
fill a sheet of the Gazette; and I have always
been equally at sea in finding my way about localities of town or country. Many a loss, and
many a perplexed travel has this want of a ready faculty cost me; and my endeavours to
explain it to myself by some idiosyncratic rules have been no less troublesome than
fruitless. Even phrenology could not find it out.
Well, but finance is a dry subject; and, in the present instance, I fly
from it, regardless of the order of time, to give as good an account as I can of one of
those symposia, which furnish a day to be marked with a white stone, and leave an
impression not to be forgotten. The subjoined letter from Frederic Mansell Reynolds, written in the L. G. office, may serve as prologue* to what turned out to be
a very merry play.
“I have gone through so many misfortunes, that I
scarcely know how to commence the recapitulation of them.—In the first place,
Lockhart does not come on Saturday;
in the next place, Theodore Hook, nor
Lockhart, nor Luttrell can come on Wednesday, but Theodore
Hook, Luttrell,
Lockhart, Lord
Normanby, Coleridge,
H. Harris the Covent Garden
proprietor, and Tom Hill can come on Monday week.—Now, my dear Jerdan, my fate is in your hands, I stand before you like a
criminal at the bar, and await your decision—I shall call for it at half-past four, when I understand you will be here.
* I may notice that I was indebted to Mansell Reynolds, the son of the dramatist, author of “Miserrimus,” &c., and editor-of the
“Keepsake Annual,” for my
introduction to a subsequent pleasant acquaintance with Wordsworth, respecting whom I will add a few words to this
miscellaneous chapter.
|
“Let mo tell you it is no easy task to get up a dinner at this
time of the year—mind you wait for me—I shall he here rather before the half
hour.”
Flattered by being invited to be the key-stone of such an arch, it may
readily be supposed that I did not stand in the way of its immediate completion. Reynolds had hired, for the autumn months, the upper
portion of a small gardener’s cottage at Highgate, a shell of a place, the first
floor of which supplied two little cabins, just big enough for coziness, fun, and revel.
The party was at last disappointed of Lord Normanby,
and instead of Henry Harris, his brother, Captain Harris, the member for Boston came, and we sat
down to dinner,
Eight precious souls, and all resolved To dash through thick and thin. |
I never saw Hook, often as I have seen him in
his hours of exuberant humour, in such glorious “fooling” as on this occasion.
From his entrance to his departure his countenance beamed with overflowing mirth, and his
wonderful talent seemed to be more than commonly excited by the company of Coleridge, whom, I think, he had never met—at any rate
never met with his legs under the same mahogany before.
Our host had replenished his sideboard with fine wines from his
father’s cellars and wine merchants in town; but having, unluckily, forgotten port, a
few bottles of black-strap had been obtained for the nonce from the adjacent inn at
Highgate; and sooth to say it was not of the first quality. To add to this grievance, the
glasses appertaining to the lodgings were of a diminutive capacity, and when they came to
be addressed to champagne and hock, were only tolerable and not to be endured. Thus, in the
midst of dinner, or rather
more towards its close, we were surprised
by Hook’s rising, and asking us to fill bumpers
to a toast. It was not difficult to fill these glasses, and we were pledged to follow the
example of our leader in draining them. In a brief but most entertaining address he
described the excellent qualities of Reynolds, and
above all his noble capacity for giving rural dinners, but,—there was always a but, not a
butt of wine, but a but, a something manqué.
On this occasion it was but too notorious in the size of these miserable pigmies, out of
which we were trying to drink his health, &c. &c. &c. The toast was drunk with
acclamation, and then followed the exemplary cannikin clink, hob-nobbing, and striking the
poor little glasses on the table till every one was broken save one, and that was reserved
for a poetical fate. Tumblers were substituted, and might possibly contribute their share
to the early hilarity and consecutive frolic of the night; for ere long Coleridge’s sonorous voice was heard declaiming on
the extraordinary ebullitions of Hook—“I have before in the
course of my time met with men of admirable promptitude of intellectual power and play
of wit, which as Stillingfleet tells The rays of wit gild wheresoe’er they strike; |
but I never could have conceived such amazing readiness of mind, and resources of
genius to be poured out on the mere subject and impulse of the moment.”
Having got the poet into this exalted mood, the last of the limited wine-glasses was
mounted upon the bottom of a reversed tumbler, and, to the infinite risk of the latter, he
was induced to shy at the former with a silver fork, till after two or three throws, he
succeeded in smashing it into fragments, to be tossed into the basket with its perished
brethren. It was truly hang-up philosophy, and, like all such scenes, may perhaps appear somewhat wantonly absurd in
description (for the spirit which enjoyed them cannot exist in the breasts of readers); but
this exhibition was remembered for years afterwards by all who partook of it; and I have a
letter of Lockhart’s* alluding to the date of
our witnessing the roseate face of Coleridge, lit up with animation,
his large grey eye beaming, his white hair floating, and his whole frame, as it were,
radiating with intense interest, as he poised the fork in his hand, and launched it at the
fragile object (the last glass of dinner), distant some three or four feet from him on the
table!— So full of shapes in fancy, That it alone is high fantastical. |
Grave folks wonder at those who are, as Shakspere hath
* This letter is so interesting in other literary respects, that
I venture to indulge myself and readers with it here:— “I have not as yet seen or heard anything of
the ‘New Grandpapa
Tales,’ but will send them over the moment I get them,
and no doubt my copy will be a very early one. “I have no news. Do you know that the
King has bought all Wilkie’s Spanish pictures, seven in number, and
two of the Italian. This munificence will re-establish
David, and ought to be celebrated in prose and
in rhyme. “Your ‘Literary Gazette’ comes to me every
Saturday morning, and proves an agreeable breakfast-table friend. Have
you seen the Edinburgh
one? I fear it is very poor stuff. “Mr.
Moore, as you will perceive, is very indignant with
F. M. Reynolds for putting
in extempore without his consent. The poet
asserts in a letter to Murray
that they offered him six hundred guineas for the benefit of his name
in the ‘Keepsake,’ and that he declined the offer. Whether was
Heath or Moore most mad? Our tumbler-shying was
nothing to this.’ “Sir Thomas
Lawrence has just finished a most admirable
painting, a full-length of Mr.
Southey, for Mr.
Peel’s great gallery at Whitehall. “Sir
Thomas’s contemporary
portraits are now getting into their proper places in the
long gallery at Windsor Castle. One caravan the other morning
conveyed Lord Eldon, Mr. Pitt, and Sir Walter Scott from Russell-square
to their regal destination.” |
it, “wise enough to play the fool,” and it is to be hoped
the party here met might plead some share of that foundation for their apology. Be that as
it may, Hook, after dinner, gave us two of his usual
extemporised songs, one of them characterising all the “present company,” no
one excepted, and few, if any, were spared the satirical lash; so cleverly applied, that
Captain Harris could not credit that the whole
was not preconcerted by Mr. Lockhart, Hook, and I (Hook and Eye!) Piqued by the suspicion,
Hook dared him to name a subject for an impromptu song, and of all
the impracticable subjects that could be imagined, he gave him “Cocoa-nut Oil!!” I must notice that it was suggested by the refusal of a
lamp, charged with that material (just then being publicly puffed, as the best of all
flame-feeders), to burn, and its having been sent from the table to liquify before the
kitchen fire whilst candles took its duty; and upon these untoward incidents the song
instantly proceeded. Having heard When I was a maiden of bashful fifteen |
improvised on a somewhat similar occasion, such as not unfrequently occurred at the
jocund board of Mr. Fred. Hodgson, it is high praise
to state that Hook never excelled this effort—effort? they never
seemed efforts to him. He commenced with a landscape of the Mauritius with the cocoa tree
as its principal feature; he painted the natives dancing by moonlight beneath its beautiful
foliage; he described the various uses of its fruits, wood, fibres, and sap, and out of the
latter extracted his oil. Then came the lampooned lamp, with all its
ludicrous pretensions and mishaps, the impudence of trading puffery, and the weakness of
the individual who had been taken in by it. And all this in versification, which might have
been taken in short-hand, and published
verbatim. “Think of that Master
Ford,” and your astonishment and admiration will be nearly as great as
were the astonishment and admiration of Captain Harris, largely shared
even by those who were best acquainted with the Improvisator’s most successful
displays of that marvellous faculty. Coleridge was
in the seventh heaven, and varied the pleasures of the evening by some exquisite
recitation, as well as humorous stories of Southey,
Wordsworth, and other brother bards.
In due season the feast of souls and the flow of tumblers told their tale;
and it must be confessed that some of us were a trifle uproarious. It so happened that the
name of the gardener was M’Pherson; and his busy wife, plying
her utmost care in getting the dinner up from the kitchen below (we had an experienced
waiter from Brompton for the dining-room), had been rather frightened by the catastrophe of
the glasses and the festive cheering and shouting of the hilarious party. Towards the
close, Mistress M’Pherson was the topic assigned to Hook for his last song, and he sung it! Now I have
mentioned that it was a shell of a cottage, and consequently Mrs. Mac
was an astonished auditress of this unique composition, which had such an effect upon her
nerves, that she bolted from her domicile to seek her sister to stay with her, and
(together with the foresaid waiter), take care of her till her husband came home. Of this,
however, I was not aware till later in the night, when it cost me a threat of watch-house;
for Lockhart, Hook, and I,
returned in the same carriage, and after leaving my companions in the Regent’s Park
and Cleveland-row, I resolved on walking home, attended by my neighbour the waiter, who had
availed himself of the coachbox; and as we wended our way up Piccadilly, amused me by
describing the scenes in the inferior regions whilst we
were at high
jinks above. His account of the terror which seized Mrs.
M’Pherson, so tickled my diaphragm, that I burst into laughter more
uncontrollable than any previous fit, and laid hold of the iron railing to support me in
having my cachinnation out, when lo and behold, I was pulled up by a Charley, with
“Hollo, sir, you must not laugh in that way there at this time of
night” (it was morning), and it showed great self-possession that I managed to
steer safely home at last, and live to record this day of memorable enjoyment.
Gaiety such as this, still enriched with intellectual fruits, and, though
apparently approaching in description the limit where excess would begin, far short of
Milton’s “riot and
ill-managed merriment,” sheds a bright halo, like an evening sun, over the
clouds of life, and teaches us the wisdom of the preacher, that there is a time to laugh
and (a better time it is too than) a time to cry.
A friend has reminded me of another lesser dining-bout, and, as his note
is very short, I add it.
The merry party assembled at Hook’s, in Cleveland Row. It consisted of the gifted Wilson Croker, the eccentric Dean of Patcham—Cannon, the versatile C.
Mathews, the laughter-loving F.
Yates, the gentle Allan Cunningham, the
—— Jerdan, (I modestly suppress the epithet), and a
sprightly noble Lord, William Lennox, who has since,
as a novelist, hit off the characters of the host on that occasion, and Edward
Cannon as well, perhaps better than any other writer. The dinner in the
“Tuft Hunter,” in
which Hook figures as a principal character, and the scene at Newbury
with Hook and Cannon, in “Percy Hamilton,” prove that
his lordship was studying the peculiarities of those he has since so cleverly portrayed in
the above-mentioned novels. But to our dinner, or, as the French say, “revenons à nos moutons.” At first the
conversation was quiet, no
one liked to break the
ice; Hook squibbed off a few pleasantries, and
Cannon attempted a joke which flashed in the pan. But as the well
iced champagne went round, a thaw followed. Mathews told a story,
which told; Yates followed, and was tolerably successful; still no
“keen encounter of wit” had taken place, and we all began to fear there was too
great a concentration of talent for any one to take the lead. Cannon,
sitting next to Lord W. Lennox, whispered aloud, “Dead
slow.” “Slow—sloe-juice, you mean,” responded
Hook; “no reflections on my wine; Dean, a glass of
portums.” “Delighted.” Another pause. Cannon again
tried a joke. We must here premise that the Dean’s jests will not, in many cases,
bear printing; it was the knowing way in which they were uttered that made them tell. The
conversation turned on the Duke of Cumberland, and a
question asked who he had married. “Don’t you know?” said
Cannon. “The Princess de Psalms
(Salms), good enough for Hymn (him).” A small laugh.
It was rather odd that amongst the company present, the one not the most likely to say the
best thing should have carried off the éclat. We mean no reflection on the noble lord;
his powers of conversation were great, he was quick at repartee, but as a jester he was not
so high up. Hook had placed some crape round the print of Peel, for some vote he disapproved of; at dinner some one
appealed to him to take it off; he consented, and, amidst a dead silence, a voice which had
scarcely been heard during dinner, exclaimed, “Nothing like a tory for getting a
brother tory out of his crape (his
scrape).” “Who’s the chiel?” asked Allan
Cunningham. “Lord W. Lennox,” I
responded. “Happy idea,” said Croker; “a
glass of wine, Lord William.”
Wordsworth seldom visited London, and I had only
once an opportunity of seeing him at his home, when I went by
invitation from Tabley House to the Lakes and Ridal Mount. On this occasion, a lovely
summer afternoon, as I sauntered towards his residence, I discovered the poet picturesquely
disposed for the interview. He was seated at an oriel window opening upon the lawn, and
perusing, or seeming to peruse, a huge folio volume, which rested upon his knee. No
portrait-painter could have devised a finer subject for the pencil. It was
Wordsworth se ipse,
just on such a scene as the intense lover of nature would wish to select, and in delicious
harmony with all the feelings which his genius inspired. I passed a few hours of calm
delight at his tea-table and in his conversation, a contrast, I may say, to the few hours I
have been describing as passed in the society of his brother bard, Coleridge! The ideal was complete, and I might have
saluted him from Burbidge, in language which has always struck me as very typical of him
and his muse. Give me the man who can enjoyment find In brooks and streams, and every flower that grows; Who in a daisy can amusement see, And gather wisdom from a floating straw: His soul a spring of pleasure might possess Quite inexhaustible. |
But Wordsworth in town was very
different from Wordsworth in the country, or rather, perhaps, he was
not the same person in mixed company as when tête-à-tête, or with a couple of friends. In the
former case he was often very lively and entertaining. I recollect meeting him at breakfast
after his being at the Italian Opera the preceding night, and his remarks on the singing
and his limning of the limbs of the dancers, were as replete with shrewdness and pleasantry
as anything I ever heard from the most witty and graphic lips. I was so charmed both with
the matter and manner, that I wrote immediately to offer carte
blanche for his correspondence, from the continent, whither he was
then
on his way, for the “Literary Gazette,” which he declined for the reasons
assigned in the following letter:—
“Rydal Mount, near Ambleside, October 7th.
“Dear Sir,
“Your letter of the 23rd August I did not receive till
my arrival here, several weeks after it was written. My stay in London was only
of a few days, or I should have been pleased to renew my acquaintance with you.
“I really cannot change my opinion as to the little
interest which would attach to such observations as my ability or opportunity
enabled me to make during my ramble upon the continent, or it would have given
me pleasure to meet your wishes. There is an obstacle in the way of my ever
producing anything of this kind, viz.—idleness, and yet another which is an
affair of taste.* Periodical writing, in order to strike, must be ambitious;
and this style is, I think, in the record of tours or travels, intolerable; or,
at any rate, the worst that can be chosen. My model would be Gray’s Letters and Journal, if I could
muster courage to set seriously about anything of the kind; but I suspect
Gray himself would be found flat in these days.
“I have named to Mr.
Southey your communication about Mr.
Percival’s death; he received them and wrote you a letter
of thanks, which by some mishap or other does not appear to have reached you.
“If you happen to meet with Mr. Reynolds, pray tell him that I received
his prospectuses, (an ugly word!) and did as he wished with them. “I remain, dear Sir,
* Mr. Orme wrote me to be
earnest, as he thought Mr. W. “only
wanted a little poetical pressing;” but I could not succeed.—W.
J.
|
Had he complied with my wish, and written letters in the tone and spirit
of the criticisms on the opera, I am sure the public would have had a variation in the
style of Wordsworth which would greatly have
surprised it, little anticipating that the tender poet could also be the grotesque
delineator of individual peculiarities, and humourous caricaturist of social anomalies. I
shall only relate one of his remarks as a sample, and I choose that most unlike his other
self (i.e. the bard of simplicity and the lakes,) as a contrast to a style both in writing
and conversing, which was always decorous and refined. We had gone together to the
exhibition in Somerset-house, in the year when Turner hung up a little picture of Jessica, decidedly the most worthless and extravagant whim with which he
ever amused himself (as I am convinced from his own mouth he frequently did, laughing in
his sleeve) by foisting on these walls. “Did you ever see anything like
that?” said my companion; “it looks to me as if the painter had indulged
in raw liver until he was very unwell,” and it was a perfectly applicable and
just critique. The picture was yellow ochre, with dabs of dirty clotted brownish-red upon
it; and Jessica (oh, how unlike a pretty young Jewess!)
was leaning out of a casement quite in keeping with the other colours.
Men who read much seldom think much. There is a medium in all things. In
our day the reading is of the most frivolous nature, or a few may read for particular
objects, but there is not one in a thousand who reads and thinks as our great teachers did
from a century and a half to two centuries and a half ago.
I offer this apology for the facetious character of this chapter, which
will not demand more thought than usual, being perfectly in keeping with the popular
writings of the age.
Among my amusing and friendly acquaintances, I kept up with no one in a
more kindly way than with the worthy German bibliopole, Rudolph
Ackermann. Ackermann was a character. A large, heavy
German, but sagacious and energetic, good-natured and liberal, simple and far-sighted. The
compound altogether was such as to conciliate esteem for an honest man, and regard for a
kindly one. I enjoyed and liked him very much. His ability and transparency, his sound
information, quaintness of manner, and fatherland ideas expressed in fatherland use of the
English tongue, were never-failing sources of gratification and amusement to me; and many a
pleasant diet did I pass with Ackermann, both at his residence in the
Strand and latterly at his villa on the Fulham Road, which he purchased from Andrews, the bookseller, of Bond-street, “as it
stood, furniture and all,” and immediately put into requisition for some very
agreeable blue parties; for the literary ladies usually outnumbered the literary gentlemen.
Ackermann’s patriotism and indefatigable
exertion in getting up the subscription for the distresses in Germany, reflected great
honour upon him, and justly procured him the grateful acknowledgments of his country, to
which he remitted a succour of upwards of £40,000. His literary and artistic
conversazioni were the first in London, and the example has since been advantageously
followed. He published the first Annual, the “Forget me not,” the prototype of a numerous and splendid progeny, which
seem to have had their day, or rather their year, and like all earthly things declined—it
may be to rise again, for the encouragement of the arts and literature, when the trade
which destroyed them can see its way more clearly. The first of this class of publications
in England was projected by Rodwell and Martin, in
Bond-street, and proposed to me to edit. We had
meetings, examined
the German models, talked of surpassing them in matter and engravings, entered into some
calculations which seemed to indicate that £1000 was the least possible sum at which a
volume could be produced, and the frightful prospect led to the abandonment of the design.
Ackermann, however, naturally enough, as the original belonged to
his native land, and with wiser foresight, took up the design, and brought out a popular
and profitable publication: so profitable, that too many rushed into the market with
imitations, but yet a very superior order of Annuals were produced, and where thousands of
pounds were embarked in single volumes, the returns were amply sufficient to requite
writers liberally, to pay artists handsomely, and to satisfy publishers for their risks in
adventuring such heavy freights in such lightly built and showily painted vessels.
But Ackermann did not force his
little flower “Forget me not,” into
the hothouse atmosphere of exotics, brought into wonderful flower by the names of
celebrated authors who sold at a high price their names and sweepings of their studies for
the advertising baits of A., B., or C, their contributions being public disappointments,
and nearly all the rest of the starved book being unpaid mediocrity—he went on quietly, and
I believe prosperously, as long as I had any acquaintance with this, his favourite yearly
undertaking.
But I must leave annuals for a few characteristics of my old friend (so I
may fairly call him), and endeavour to afford a “notion” of what used to
entertain me so much. I forget the occasion, but an unfavourable notice of some publication
of his having appeared in the Gazette, I
received a letter from “my sincere friend, always ready to acknowledge the boon when
in his power,” grievously reclaiming against the just act. He reproached me with
ingratitude, saying (which in fact I had never been told and would not have cared for
| THE FIRST ANNUALS. ACKERMANN. | 243 |
if I had) that he had left some
admirable Muzzle (Moselle) for my cellar at Grove House, as he was
conveying the aum to his Fulham Villa, and wondering how I could return such a civility
with such a “shlapp in the mouth.” We soon made the matter up; for when
publishers are kind, critics (whatever they may profess) are apt to be ditto. Except in the
gross shape of money I seldom rejected and never was offended by well meant, and, I may
honestly say, well deserved acknowledgments; and letters of thanks, personal courtesies,
and even such material proofs, as books, prints, nay, game or samples of curious wines,
&c., if offered with propriety, were received with pride and gratification. There was
no prostitution in accepting honest tributes of this kind, the value of which was great in
the sentiment, though of small, if any possible, consideration in a sordid sense.
I was wont to tell stories of Ackermann and imitate his dialect, which was replete with mispronunciations
of the most ludicrous description—such as cannot be “set down”—but I will try
if print can convey any idea of what was, vivâ
voce, so laughable.
I had dropt in at the Strand about two o’clock, about something or
other, when Mr. A. insisted on my staying to eat “suberb saur
krout” with a fine German boy, the son of a nobleman just imported. I consented, and
we chatted together till long past the dinner hour, for which Ackermann and his stomach were particularly punctual. His nephew (?) and
the young noble had gone out in the morning to see lions, and had not returned. We waited,
and waited, till near three o’clock (an hour over time), when my host, unable to
contain his anger and hunger any longer, ordered dinner, and we sat down to excellent
rotten cabbage, but washed down with sensible muzzle and schnaps. About the middle of the
repast the young gentlemen made their appearance, and
were told to
sit down and feed, with the politeness, and in the tone which might become an incensed
bear. However, as our host’s appetite got appeased, his temper improved, and by the
time the cloth was removed, the bumpers of muzzle had converted frowns into smiles, and at
length I heard his cavernous issue of the question, “Veil boisse (boys), vere ave
you been, and vat ave you see?” The youngsters, delighted by this
condescension, burst out in answer, the lead being taken by the nephew, who spoke as
follows: “Oh, mine oncle! after ve ave see two mans a henging at Old Belly—vat a
crowds!—ve go to de rivere to dox at Voolvitch to see de launch of de great sheep—vat a
crowds! and oh, mine oncle, vat a many billa box.” “Billa
box,” repeated Ackermann, “vat you mean by
billa box!” “Oh, sare,” broke in the stranger,
“so I ave been only a veeks in Engleland, I thinks I gan spake de langidge
better as he. He means Bocca bills!” “Billa box, Bocca
bills,” muttered Ackermann. “Vat de divels does
you mean? say it in Yarman!” which they immediately did; and thus informed,
he turned laughing loudly to me, and exclaimed, “O mine Kodds, vat you tink dey
means?” I had not heard, and could not tell; and their interpreter, still
convulsed with laughter, sputtered out, “Vy dey means big boggetts!” Not
to lengthen the story, for some time longer unintelligible to me, I at last discovered that
billa box, and bocca bills, and bigg boggetts, all and sundry, meant simply pickpockets!
Papworth, a most worthy man and able architect, poor
Pyne, Shoberl, and other clever men, were much associated with Ackermann, who, in his day, was led by his own impulse,
and by their advice, to do a great deal for the encouragement of the fine arts. Neither his
heart nor purse were contracted, as is too much the case amongst his
“order;” and I, appreciating his superior qualities, and
remembering the social merriment I often derived or extracted from such oddities as I have
faintly portrayed, look back upon the past with a melancholy regret, that such things can
never be again.
Rudolph Ackermann (1764-1834)
London bookseller born in Germany who specialized in illustrated books; he was the
pioneer of the literary annual.
John Andrews (1857 fl.)
London bookseller trading in New Bond Street, 1831-57. Charles Macfarlane recalled him as
a fat man who “gave a dinner to authors and wits, and gave it in good
style.”
Edward Cannon [Dean of Patcham] (1772-1834)
English wit; a founding member of the Garrick Club and chaplain to the Prince of Wales,
he was lecturer at St. George's, Hanover-square.
Samuel Taylor Coleridge (1772-1834)
English poet and philosopher who projected
Lyrical Ballads (1798)
with William Wordsworth; author of
Biographia Literaria (1817),
On the Constitution of the Church and State (1829) and other
works.
John Wilson Croker (1780-1857)
Secretary of the Admiralty (1810) and writer for the
Quarterly
Review; he edited an elaborate edition of Boswell's
Life of
Johnson (1831).
Allan Cunningham [Hidallan] (1784-1842)
Scottish poet and man of letters who contributed to both
Blackwood's and the
London Magazine; he was author of
Lives of the most Eminent British Painters, Sculptors, and
Architects (1829-33).
King Ernest Augustus, of Hanover (1771-1851)
The fifth and last surviving son of George III; he was king of Hanover 1837-1851. Though
acquitted, he was thought to have murdered his valet, Joseph Sellis.
Thomas Gray (1716-1771)
English poet, author of “Ode on a Distant Prospect of Eton College,” “Elegy written in a
Country Churchyard,” and “The Bard”; he was professor of history at Cambridge
(1768).
George Harris (1786 c.-1836)
The son of Thomas Harris, manager of Covent Garden; he served as a naval officer during
the Napoleonic wars and was MP for Great Grimsby (1830-31).
Henry Harris (1783 c.-1839)
The son of Thomas Harris, whom he succeeded as manager of Covent Garden Theater, 1809-22;
he was an acquaintance of Thomas Moore.
Charles Theodosius Heath (1785-1848)
English illustrator and engraver whose work was published in
The
Keepsake and other literary annuals.
Thomas Hill (1760-1840)
English book-collector who entertained members of Leigh Hunt's circle at his cottage at
Sydenham in Kent. He was a proprietor of the
Monthly Mirror and
later a writer for the
Morning Chronicle. Charles Lamb described him
as “the wettest of dry salters.”
Frederick Hodgson (1795 c.-1854)
London brewer and Conservative MP for Barnstable (1824-30, 1831-23, 1836-47).
Theodore Edward Hook (1788-1841)
English novelist, wit, and friend of the Prince of Wales; he edited the
John Bull (1820) and appears as the Lucian Gay of Disraeli's
Conigsby and as Mr. Wagg in
Vanity Fair.
William Jerdan (1782-1869)
Scottish journalist who for decades edited the
Literary Gazette;
he was author of
Autobiography (1853) and
Men I
have Known (1866).
Sir Thomas Lawrence (1769-1830)
English portrait painter who succeeded Joshua Reynolds as painter in ordinary to the king
(1792); he was president of the Royal Academy (1820).
Lord William Pitt Lennox (1799-1881)
The fourth son of Charles Lennox, fourth duke of Richmond; after education at Westminster
School he pursued a military career, married an actress, and wrote for the popular press.
He published
The Story of my Life, 3 vols (1857).
John Gibson Lockhart (1794-1854)
Editor of the
Quarterly Review (1825-1853); son-in-law of Walter
Scott and author of the
Life of Scott 5 vols (1838).
Henry Luttrell (1768-1851)
English wit, dandy, and friend of Thomas Moore and Samuel Rogers; he was the author of
Advice to Julia, a Letter in Rhyme (1820).
Charles Mathews (1776-1835)
Comic actor at the Haymarket and Covent Garden theaters; from 1818 he gave a series of
performances under the title of
Mr. Mathews at Home.
John Milton (1608-1674)
English poet and controversialist; author of
Comus (1634),
Lycidas (1638),
Areopagitica (1644),
Paradise Lost (1667), and other works.
Thomas Moore (1779-1852)
Irish poet and biographer, author of the
Irish Melodies (1807-34),
The Fudge Family in Paris (1818), and
Lalla
Rookh (1817); he was Byron's close friend and designated biographer.
John Murray II (1778-1843)
The second John Murray began the
Quarterly Review in 1809 and
published works by Scott, Byron, Austen, Crabbe, and other literary notables.
Cosmo Orme (1780 c.-1859)
London bookseller of Scottish origin; he was a partner of Thomas Longman before his
retirement in 1841.
John Buonarotti Papworth (1775-1847)
Architect, writer, and designer who collaborated with Rudolph Ackermann on the
Repository of Arts (1809-28).
Spencer Perceval (1762-1812)
English statesman; chancellor of the exchequer (1807), succeeded the Duke of Portland as
prime minister (1809); he was assassinated in the House of Commons.
Constantine Henry Phipps, first marquess of Normanby (1797-1863)
The son of Henry Phipps, first earl of Mulgrave; educated at Harrow and Trinity College,
Cambridge, he was a Whig MP, governor of Jamaica (1832-34), lord privy seal (1834),
lord-lieutenant of Ireland (1835), and ambassador at Paris (1846-52).
William Pitt the younger (1759-1806)
The second son of William Pitt, earl of Chatham (1708-1778); he was Tory prime minister
1783-1801.
Frederic Mansel Reynolds (1801-1850)
Son of the dramatist Frederick Reynolds; he edited
The Keepsake
and published a novel,
Miserrimus: a Tale (1833).
John Rodwell (1854 fl.)
London bookseller who traded in Bond Street as Rodwell and Martin, 1816-26.
John Scott, first earl of Eldon (1751-1838)
Lord chancellor (1801-27); he was legal counsel to the Prince of Wales and an active
opponent of the Reform Bill.
Frederic Shoberl (1775-1853)
He was part-proprietor and sometimes-editor of the
New Monthly
Magazine, and was editor for Rudolf Ackermann's
Forget-me-not (1822-34).
Robert Southey (1774-1843)
Poet laureate and man of letters whose contemporary reputation depended upon his prose
works, among them the
Life of Nelson, 2 vols (1813),
History of the Peninsular War, 3 vols (1823-32) and
The Doctor, 7 vols (1834-47).
Benjamin Stillingfleet (1702-1771)
Botanist, librettist, and grandson of the bishop of Worcester; he was educated at Trinity
College, Cambridge; he published
Miscellaneous Tracts relating to Natural
History (1759).
Joseph Mallord William Turner (1775-1851)
English landscape and history painter who left his collection to the National Gallery and
Tate Gallery.
Sir David Wilkie (1785-1841)
Scottish-born artist whose genre-paintings were much admired; he was elected to the Royal
Academy in 1811.
William Wordsworth (1770-1850)
With Coleridge, author of
Lyrical Ballads (1798), Wordsworth
survived his early unpopularity to succeed Robert Southey as poet laureate in 1843.
Frederick Henry Yates (1797-1842)
English actor and theater manager educated at Charterhouse; he performed with Charles
Kemble and was a partner of Charles Mathews in the Adelphi Theatre (1825-35).
The Keepsake. 30 vols (London: Hurst, Chance and Co., 1828-1857). An illustrated annual edited by William Harrison Ainsworth (1828), Frederic Mansel
Reynolds (1829-35), and Caroline Norton (1836).