The Autobiography of William Jerdan
Ch. 17: Literary Characters
‣ Ch. 17: Literary Characters
CHAPTER XVII.
OF LITERARY CHARACTERS—CATALOGUE RAISONNÉ: ROBERT
MONTGOMERY, MARY ANN BROWNE, ELIZA
COOK, DR. BOWRING, LADY
BLESSINGTON, MRS. LOUDON, MRS. CARTER
HALL.
Come like shadows—so depart.
|
Faithful to my principle, ever as fresh candidates for literary
fame arose, it was to me a source of great pleasure to do all that lay in my power to
foster their aspirations, and, in many cases, to advise their course and guide their steps.
According to circumstances, I thus became a sort of literary tutor, and the “Gazette” the expositor of my mind with
respect to the talents and future prospects of the persons whose productions I exemplified,
and whose hopes I cherished. In glancing through a portion of these endeavours I find the
names of numbers who have since attained to eminence in the republic of letters; and it is
a matter on which I feel something like pride, that my judgment in these cases has very
rarely been falsified. As regards actors, artists, and authors, my predictions have been
verified by the results with extraordinary fidelity; inasmuch as, among all my
multitudinous adventures in the prophetic line, I can scarcely fix upon half-a-dozen which
have not realised my opinions, and fulfilled my anticipation.
When Mr. Robert Montgomery
commenced his career, he was roughly handled and greatly discouraged by the critical
authorities. Well might he have poured out Churchill’s denunciation:—
Look through the world, in every other trade The same employment’s cause of kindness made; At least appearance of good-will creates, And every fool puffs off the fool he hates; Cobblers with cobblers smoke away the night, And in the common cause e’en players unite: Authors alone, with more than savage rage, Unnatural war with brother authors wage. |
I believe I stood almost alone in vindicating for Montgomery that poetic character which has since been
ratified by the public voice, and even conceded by those who used to rail at his
productions, and improve their critical censures by attacks of personal ridicule. He has,
however, by strange good fortune, written down the former, and outlived the latter, by
twenty-five or more editions of the “Omnipresence of the Deity,” twelve editions
of “Satan, or Intellect without
God,” ten editions of the “Messiah,” eight editions of “Oxford, or Alma Mater,” as many of “Woman,” six editions of “Luther,” and repeated editions of
his minor publications! I persuade myself that this immense popularity proves more than I
ever affirmed of the poet’s merits, and augured of his success. My warmth in favour
of his youthful efforts was no doubt founded upon the sense I entertained of their
intrinsic deserts, but it was probably increased by the ungenerous, unhandsome, and unjust
manner in which they were assailed by a clique of writers of that superabundant class who
seem to fancy that authors are made to be tortured, as wicked schoolboys torment
cock-chaffers, transfix them with a painful instrument, and then laugh at their writhing
gyrations and wretched groans. The argument, from Fun to Death, is nevertheless a very
wanton and cruel one, and slight reflection
might teach even the would-be clever, and the certainly thoughtless, that the offence of
publishing a book ought not to provoke so severe an infliction as heart-breaking
mortification and crushed hopes, and, not seldom, deeply-injured fortunes in the grand
struggle of life: Heaven knows, the sin too often brings its own punishment, and heavy
enough, without the bitterness of accumulated griefs and added penalties.
The adverse press, however, prevailed so egregiously against the debut of
Robert Montgomery (who was falsely accused of a
wish to pass off his work as the performance of James, the beautiful and venerable bard of Sheffield), that, on his work
being what is called “subscribed” by Maunder, then starting as a bookseller, the whole Trade took only six
copies! But the “Literary Gazette”
reviews soon turned the scale, and when the third edition was called, the publisher, in
thanking me, stated that he had sold 2000 copies over the counter in ten days—a poetical
sale unequalled since the days of “Childe
Harold.” The “Times”
newspaper distinguished itself by opposing the run made against the young author, and a
laudatory criticism in that powerful organ most materially improved his poetic and prosaic
condition, and augmented the demand for his productions. Fame and Fortune are lovely twins,
and so rarely born in the marriage state of literature, that we may well congratulate the
party on whom such a blessing is shed. Professor
Wilson, in the potent “Blackwood” also put in a good word for “Satan” and his followers, in verse; and Wordsworth, Crabbe,
Bowles, Southey, and other eminent authorities, bore their friendly testimony to
the accession of a brother poet. His great consequent success has furnished a remarkable
comment on the cavil and, literally, hooting with which his early appearance was
encountered. I believe
that little short of eighty or ninety thousand
of his volumes have been circulated in various forms throughout his native country, besides
large sales in America and to a great extent on the continent. I think the last
publication, “The Christian
Life,” is running an equally successful course. Two elder pieces, a satire
called “The Age Reviewed,” and
another “The Puffiad,” I
have lost sight of, and therefore I suppose they have not been reprinted; and the former
met with strong and decided disapprobation
at my hands, notwithstanding their author had been introduced and welcomed to very intimate
terms and social attentions in my house, where he had opportunities of meeting persons to
whom it was not undesirable that a rising bard should be known. Referring to the
above-mentioned satirical publication, as it is not given to many to be able to write
“English Bards and Scotch
Reviewers,” its intemperate spirit and coarseness provoked my ire, and I
visited it with the sharpest reproof I could pen; for fiat
justitia was the motto, and I considered it an outrage upon public
taste and justice. It was indeed altogether discreditable even to the boyhood of the
author, and received that castigation from the “Literary
Gazette” which was never applied except in cases of notorious delinquency.
Next year, when the “Omnipresence
of the Deity” was published, I hailed it with the applause it deserved, as
belonging to the highest class of English sacred poetry; and the annexed letter will show
how both censure and praise were received.
“I trouble you with this line merely to say that
Montgomery has written to me from
Bath, desiring me to give you his most grateful thanks, and expressing himself
in terms which do honour to him, and which are well me-
rited by you. He says the libraries literally rung
with your praise. How your noble conduct has galled that cur, * * * [a literary
gent, presumed to be toady to
Richardson], he hardly knows how to be venomous enough. Poor devil!
he puts me in mind of a yelping cur, with a tin-kettle
(Richardson) tied to his tail. Lord! how the diamond
poet* pays for his whistle. I am told their
bonâ fide sale does not reach 250, but that they
give away 500, many of which are stamped.
“I beg you will accept my sincere acknowledgments for
all kindnesses, and believe me,
“My dear Sir, yours very sincerely,
“The book goes off well.”
When Mary Ann Browne, in her
fifteenth year, produced her precocious poem of “Mont Blanc,” long before Albert Smith got enthusiastic about, and ascended that
giant mountain, I hastened, as usual, to welcome the bud of promise, which I pronounced to be fair and fragrant, and
asking but fostering care and judicious training to make it a graceful and a lasting shrub
beside our English Helicon. Such sounds were music to the young girl’s ear, and a
grateful letter from her father quickly acknowledged the kindness, and enclosed to me a
sweet composition for the “Gazette,” entitled “The
Native Land,” which received immediate insertion, and was the prelude to a
number of charming poems from the same finely-gifted being. Among these was an attractive
series called “Firsts and Lasts,” to which
* This was D. L.
Richardson, a poet of sonnets, &c, in a very small way, but so
egregiously vain and greedy of praise, that he published a diamond edition of his
volume, and appended to it a hundred quotations from provincial and other
newspapers, &c, in its praise; nearly every one of which had been sent from
head-quarters as puff paragraphs, together with the bribe of advertisements (see p.
90). This was a way to do critical business! |
the following letter alludes, and the two which follow it refer to a
momentary tiff between Mr. Editor and his petted contributor, and are graphic samples of
the irritable genus, even in fair young bosoms:—
“I send three more ‘Firsts
and Lasts.’ I intend, if I can possibly squeeze as many out of
my brain, to make this series consist of twelve. But if I cannot make so many,
you’re not to be affronted. I shan’t make any apologies about these
being longer than the first, because I’ve known you put pieces of
Miss Landon’s in three times
as long. By the by, I’ll get you to give her the enclosed note, if she is
returned. If not, give or send it to her the first opportunity. Thank you for
noticing * * * It’s very well you did, or you would have been minus any
more ‘Firsts and Lasts,’ as my patience
was beginning to get rather threadbare, and it must be a great deal, indeed,
that wears out my angelic temper!!!
“Love to all as usual, from
Martha and myself; Papa and Mamma send kind
compliments. Tell Agnes Martha
has found the knife she wrote to her about, so she need not make any further
search for it.
“I remain, dear Sir, yours very truly,
“I am very much astonished you do not either send my
‘Farewell’ or the history of its
fate. I had flattered myself it was not one of the very worst things I ever
wrote, and its not having been in the ‘Gazette’ is a matter of marvel to me, my puzzlement not being lessened by your saying it was in
print already. Where? that is what I have
asked you twice before, and I take it unfriendly and
unkind that you do not write a few lines, which would not occupy you five
minutes, to satisfy me as to what has become of it. Pray let me hear as soon as
possible.
Yours truly,
“Worton Lodge, Isleworth.”
“When I last wrote I had not received your letter,
mine must have passed it on the road. I write to say I am very sorry there
should have been any misunderstanding between us, which I now discover was all
through your substituting the word print for type. You sent me word the
‘Farewell’ was in print, which I
always understand to mean printed,* and which I think
most people would take in that sense. It now seems you meant in type, ready for printing.* I did not tell you to destroy
the ‘Farewell,’ I asked you to send it
back, or said I would transmit it to the ‘Morning Post’ on receiving the MS. from you.
The piece I said I had sent to that paper was the ‘Lines on New Year’s Day!!’ However, I should be very
sorry, on account of former friendship, that there should be any ill-feeling
between us, when it can be avoided. I thank you for your expressions of
kindness towards me, which I believe to be sincere. Therefore, if you have no
objection we will, though ten miles apart, mentally shake hands and give the
matter bon repos. In future,
therefore, let me subscribe myself,
“Your very sincere friend,
“By the by, you were in precious humour last time
you
* Two neat blunders: for 1st, publishing, and
2nd, being really printed.—W. J. |
wrote
Dear Miss Browne, and
every line as stiff as buckram—Good-bye.
(On back of letter.) “Pray
read it, for it’s the clearing-up shower.”
There was much piquancy and charm in the conversation as well as the
writings of poor Mary Ann Browne, whose early loss I
sincerely lamented. She was a most unaffected and affectionate creature. I often had the
pleasure of seeing her in Brompton, and her acquaintance with L. E. L. was all that was amiable and cordial.
For the sake of female union, I skip over a lapse of time (some ten years)
in order to say a few words about another of my great poetical favourites, and her entrance
upon the wild district of print (where types and troubles grow) which she has since so
laudably cultivated and embellished; for I also had the satisfaction to welcome into the
field the now justly popular Eliza Cook. Struck by
some of her productions, which she paid me the compliment to submit to me in manuscript, I
availed myself of the ice being broken to pay a visit to the unknown writer at her neat,
quiet, humble cottage residence in the Old Kent Road; and found, what I expected from the
specimens, a frank, feeling, and right-minded correspondent, not so juvenile as Mary Ann Browne, but yet so young and inexperienced as to
increase my admiration of the talent she possessed, and its touching direction to the great
end of ameliorating the condition of her fellow-creatures. As the needle points to the
pole, so did her inherent philanthropy seem ever to point to the improvement of the lowly,
and her sympathies to be awakened by the sufferings, only to be devoted to the promotion of
the happiness of the oppressed. Her mind and heart were even then in the mission she has so
zealously and beneficially pursued.
The interest I
took in bringing her forward was rewarded by the presentation of a number of her most
deservedly popular minor poems, and I may best explain the nature of the relative
interchange of friendly good offices which ensued, by affording my readers a peep into the
private correspondence of Eliza Cook.
The theme of her first letter was—
Few years ago I deem’d the tomb
A dreary place to think upon;
I shiver’d in the churchyard gloom,
And sicken’d at a bleaching bone.
|
Then all were round my warm young heart,
Each kindred tie, each cherish’d form;
I knew not what it was to part,
And give them to the grave and worm.
|
But soon I lost the gems of earth,
I saw the dearest cold in death;
And sorrow changed my laughing mirth
To searing drops and sobbing breath.
|
I stood by graves all dark and deep,
Pale, voiceless, wrapt in mute despair,
And left my sours adored to sleep
In stirless, dreamless, slumber there.
|
And now I steal at night to see
The soft, clear moonbeams playing o’er
Their hallow’d beds, and long to be
Where all most prized have gone before.
|
Now I can calmly gaze around
On tablet stones, with yearning eye,
And murmur o’er the grassy mound:
“’Tis a glorious privilege to die.”
|
The Grave hath lost its conquering might,
And Death its dreaded sting of pain,
Since they but ope the path of light
|
On these lines it seems I had offered some critical remarks, upon which I
received the following:—
“5, St. George’s Street, Albany Road, Old Kent Road.
“Dear Sir,—
“My ‘fastidious master’ has a pupil, who
deems herself honoured by the trouble he bestows on her, and begs to tell him
his kind and just criticism is well appreciated; my muse is wild, and my
judgment very immature and crazy, but such bland correction as yours at once
quickens my perceptions and awakens my gratitude. I have endeavoured to alter
the first stanza, whether for the better you must decide—
Few years ago I shunn’d the tomb, And turned me from a tablet stone, I shivered, &c. |
and the sixth stanza thus:—
Now I can calmly gaze around On osiered heaps with yearning eye. |
“The lines were written in tears, very hastily, and rather from the
heart than head, but I am glad you think them passable. Many thanks for your
decision as to my right of selling the songs. I can now set all doubting
fearing mortals at rest.
“My reason for paying the postage was this—I thought
unpaid letters might be refused at the office, but I now address in your name;
if I do wrong, tell me so. You had better not pay postage to me, so this is
fair warning, there is much pleasure in spending some twopences. If you can
conveniently forward me a ‘Gazette,’ I shall be a happy recipient.
“Yours obliged and sincerely,
The next inquiry, I think, led to a satisfactory result.
“I venture to trouble you with a question, which I
trust your kindness will excuse, as I know of none so likely to solve it, nor
to whom I would so confidently apply. The affair is this. The songs of mine
which have appeared in the ‘Dispatch,’
have attracted the notice of musical composers, who give me a fair price for
them, lately I have sold many to N. J.
Sporle, but he has been told by some person that the words being
already published may be appropriated by any one, and turned to profit, that
they cease to be my property, and that I cannot sell them. Now this seems
hardly probable, and I am certain not just. I take no remuneration from the
‘Dispatch’ proprietors, consequently
the copyright is not theirs. No composer or publisher has yet thought proper to
risk publication without applying to me, and those who have been long in the
trade have told me the poetry is still my sole property, although printed in a
weekly journal; but the declaration that I cannot secure them has so alarmed my
friend Mr. Sporle, that if you would enable me to give him
a decided answer, you would much oblige me. Your knowledge on literary matters
induces me to address you, and I only hope you will not consider me too
presuming if I beg the favour of a line at your leisure.
To return to somewhat earlier dates, Dr.
Bowring, only a few nights ago at a Lord Mayor’s fête, did me the favour to remember that when he was, as yet, a
comparatively little known author, and I, a popular wight with an influential
weekly trumpet at my mouth, I had paid just tribute to his
productions, and helped to swell the note of his literary reputation. With a graceful
acknowledgment of this old service, he introduced me to his son, who has so fully inherited
the abilities of his father, and distinguished himself in the performance of official
public duties which required no small degree of intelligence and capacity. I mention
incidents of this kind, because they are very grateful to feelings unblunted by age, and
because I am sorry to say they are by no means common.’
Of Croly, Proctor, and others of yet earlier dates, I have already
spoken so much that I need not include them in this list—though I have materials of much
interest, tempting me to encroach even on my now prescribed limits—but I must run over a
few other names, out of a great number, which I now at least am obliged to pass in silence,
some of them endeared to me by strong ties of friendship, and others connected with
agreeable recollections of mutual kindnesses and regard.
Mais encore places aux dames! Of three ladies as
different from each other as the three Goddesses Venus,
Juno, and Minerva, who contended for the golden apple on Mount Ida, I have therefore
to speak; thankful that I am not the Paris, with the
discordant task of awarding the prize to one, but simply the critic who has to pronounce a
few sentences on the merits of all three. Lady
Blessington, Mrs. Loudon, and
Mrs. Carter Hall must therefore come into court.
Of the first, having already spoken, I shall here merely repeat that having advised her
with her first literary production “The Magic Lantern,” from that period I visited her constantly in St.
James’s-square, Mayfair, and Gore House; and the more I saw and knew of her, the more
I loved her kind and generous nature, her disposition
to be good to
all, and her faithful energy to serve her friends. Full of fine taste, intelligence, and
animation, she was indeed a loveable woman; and, by a wide circle, she was regarded as the
centre of a highly intellectual and brilliant society. As an author and editor of
“Heath’s Annuals,” for some years,
Lady Blessington received considerable sums. I have known her
enjoy from her pen, an amount somewhere midway between 2000l. and
3000l. per annum, and her title as well as talents had
considerable influence in “ruling high prices,” as they say in Mark Lane and
other markets. To this also, her well-arranged parties, with a publisher, now and then, to
meet folks of a style unusual to men in business, contributed their attractions; and the
same society was in reality of solid value towards the production of such publications as
the annuals, the contents of which were provided by the editor almost entirely from the
pens of private friends, instead of being dearly brought from the “balaam”
refuse of celebrated writers.
In the earlier trials of Miss Jane Webb, now
Mrs. Loudon, I took an earnest interest: in
fact, I saved her from sinking, when first exposed to the struggle which a female venturing
upon the rugged path of literature is sure to experience. “The Mummy” is a production of great talent and
imaginative power. After its publication, and ways and means were needed to “carry on
the war,” the amiable Miss Spence and
Miss Webb concerted a periodical between them, which was to be
called “The Tabby’s Magazine;” and a gracious
proposal was made that L. E. L. and myself should
join the projectors, in which case Mr. Ollier
thought it would do exceedingly well, and Miss Webb was convinced that
Colburn would publish it, and it would have a
prodigious run! The promise was that our true allies would trespass as little on my time as
possible, undertake
any share of the drudgery; and Miss
Webb could pledge herself to do a great deal if she had a master hand to
direct her—as for dear Miss Spence, she would be perfectly tractable,
as she almost worshipped me and thought my opinion infallible! What flattering creatures
the sex are; especially when they wish to carry any object. But alas, The best laid schemes of mice and men Gang oft ajee; |
and of women too; and the Tabby design fell to the ground, without the experiment of a
single scratch upon the public. Miss Spence, fortunately had a
law-suit decided in her favour, but Miss Webb, thrown upon her own
resources for several years after the death of her father and natural protector, fought a
stirring fight with literary exertion, as her “Hungarian Tales,” “Conversations on History and Chronology,” “Stories of a Bride,” and other clever works
amply testify; but she fell into severe sickness, and it was under the concomitant
circumstance that I had it in my power to perform the essential duties of a friend. Indeed
if I had failed, the consequences would have been dreadful; but I lived to see my esteemed
client united to my also much-esteemed friend and coadjutor Mr.
Loudon, with whom she led a comfortable and happy life to the end of his
days. Of herself, Miss Webb, in the time of her difficulty, truly
said, “I have naturally an independent spirit and wish to maintain myself; but I
am not fitted to struggle with the world. I cannot put myself forward, and I cannot
make bargains [i.e. with publishers]. I am soon depressed, and
when any one finds fault with any of my productions, instead of defending them, I throw
them in the fire. I try to overcome this feeling, but I cannot. The phrenologists say
that conscientiousness and | MRS. LOUDON: MRS. HALL. | 323 |
love of
approbation are my two strongest qualities, and that I have no self-esteem. I believe
they are right. Forgive this loquacity.”
This is a lively sketch of author-feeling, and when one reflects on the
sensitive traits it exhibits, it ought still more forcibly to impress the humane
conviction, how base and cruel it is to lacerate and crush emotions so innocent and
aspirations so laudable. In Miss Webb’s
“Stories of a
Bride,” was exemplified the benefit to be derived from attention to
common-sense criticism. Whilst it was printing, a review appeared in the “Gazette,” in which I censured the foolish
fashion of interlarding English books with phrases and scraps of French on which
Miss Webb (now in good heart with prospects of farther success)
sportively writes to me, “I am sorry to say that my ‘Bride’ is rather Frenchified, and makes use of more foreign phrases
than I should have permitted her to do, if I had read your very able and very witty
quiz upon Frenchified English in last week’s
‘Gazette,’ As it is, I have translated all the phrases
that I dared, without running the risk of sending Mr.
Bentley and all his devils to Bedlam.” On the eve of her
marriage, the last time before changing the name I had at any rate done my best to elevate
on the roll of literary merit, my too grateful friend writes to announce the coming event,
and to assure me that “Mrs. Loudon will never forget the
kindness shown to the friendless and unprotected Jane
Webb.” And here it is fit to draw the curtain.
With Mrs. Hall I had not the
pleasure of a maiden acquaintance; but I enjoyed that gratification with regard to her
works, and, from the first to the last of them, have been their undeviating admirer and her
steadfast friend. It is after so long an interval, a sort of literary and
human triumph, to confess that more than the panegyric hestowed was
warranted, and more than the esteem deserved. The fancy of her mind and the purity of her
taste seemed to my judgment to animate and refine her “Irish Tales,” without the slightest injury to
their natural or comic effects, or the portraiture of the lowest characters among the
dramatis personæ. Her “Juvenile
Forget-me-not,” and all her writings intended for the moral instruction of
tender years, also always won my warmest approbation. There are very few writers in this
line of literature who do not grossly fail in their aim, and, instead of teaching the young
idea how to shoot straight forward, push the shooters into so false a position, that if
they shoot at all, they can only shoot round corners. Consistency in addressing unformed
intellect and paring down thoughts and style to childish comprehension, so as to produce
beneficial fruits, is a rare quality. The main lesson for good is often marred by bad
lessons unintentionally woven into the details. A parent will tell a lie to induce a child
to do something or other; and the child perhaps seeing through the transparency and
laughing it to scorn, will be terribly punished for its crime of disobedience. I could
point out many examples of the same kind of errors; but I never detected Mrs.
Hall in the slightest mistake of such a nature, and therefore I ever prized
her compositions for juvenile readers, even as much as the most popular of those she has
produced for mature age. I cannot say I like too much of the schoolmistress, whose tiresome
task often begets a spirit of prudish superiority and dogmatism (as male pedagogues are apt
to become pharisaical and tyrannical); and it is one of Mrs.
Hall’s great merits to steer so clear of this rather repulsive
habitude. On the contrary, there is a winning quietude and feminine persuasiveness in her
teaching which | MRS. HALL: BOOKS FOR THE YOUNG. | 325 |
has always pleased
me, and her purpose has always been of a beneficent order; just as in her “Barbara,” intended for female children of a larger growth,
she inculcated the useful truth that woman is never loved for her talents, but for her
domestic and gentle virtues.
I suppose there never was a literary brain that did not, at some time or
other, contemplate new projects, and indulge in episodiac escapades, which were either left
unfinished, or finished only to be laid upon the shelf. Perhaps Mrs. Hall herself has forgotten the schemes respecting which she did me the
honour to consult me, but I have met with her memoranda for writing a History of Music,
with biographical sketches of celebrated musicians, and an account of the rise and progress
of national music from the earliest syllables of recorded time. I think such a work would
be likely to be well received, and that her pen would have done, and might still, if she
has preserved the materials, do justice to it. Another note refers to a History of Birds,
suggested by her fondness for natural history from girlhood; and which I have no doubt she
would have written, as she thought she would, con
amore; but there are so many and such various publications on
ornithology, that it would not be easy for a fresh attempt to make itself heard among the
scientific noises, fierce screams, charming melodies, and endless chirpings of such a
number of clamorous candidates for notice. Then Mrs. Hall did actually
write a play, in three acts, the fate of which is hidden from my sight: and I can but vouch
for the fact.
Her contributions to the “Literary Gazette” were a grateful reward; but I may, I am sure, dip,
without offence, into less public litera scripta
to show how much the office of kindly, yet impartial, criticism is valued by the most
deserving. In one instance I had pointed out
blemishes in one of her
productions, and she, playfully in earnest, informs me of a domestic sick-room, which had
occupied her time and feelings to the exclusion of everything else.
“This,” she tells, “prevented my looking over the proof-sheets
as carefully as I ought. Must you indeed notice these blunders? I will never do so any
more, I never did so before, and as it is my first offence! There is truly no valid
excuse for presenting a faulty work to the public; but the theory of perfection and
perfectibility ought, I think, and must, I fear, yield a little to the accidents and
necessities of humanity.” In another letter from Mrs.
Hall, at Christmas time, in reply to one of mine, years after we had
suffered deeply deplored losses, the sentiment is so touchingly, though familiarly,
expressed, that I am tempted to transcribe it. “I quite think with you about this
‘merrie season,’ thank God there are blessings left to us! but the memory
of the friends long linked together—gone for ever from our circle—of those whose voice
was the music our hearts loved best, and whose place can never be filled up—comes to us
all, and makes the small anxieties—the small and evil nothings upon which we are too
apt to throw away both time and mind—seem mean and worthless. It makes us also regard
those left still to labour through this world, with feelings of kinder regard. I think
I discover new beauties in every face, and fancy the wrinkles of my dear old friends
far more beautiful than the dimples of the new ones.” . . . At the same
season, in the following year, I am greeted with yet warmer expressions of regard, which I
quote, not only on grounds of personal gratification, but as an example of the alliance
which, in well-regulated minds, is almost sure to arise out of the collision of liberal
criticism and meritorious literature. Integrity in the one, and superiority in the other, lead to such proofs as the annexed, dated on
Christmas Day:—
“The Rosery, Old Brompton.
“Dear Mr. Jerdan,
“Thank you a thousand times for your kind notice of my
book. It would he impossible for any review to touch me as that has done: it
brought back the last twelve years—it brought back the hour of intense anxiety,
when the ‘Gazette’ lay
for an hour upon my table, and yet I had not courage to cut the page—and when I
read, I well remember the tears of pure joy that burst from my eyes; those
feelings do not often return, but I hope they are never forgotten.
“To me, your name has ever borne the consciousness of
wise friendship. You encouraged and cheered me; and I do not think I ever
finished a chapter or a tale without wondering, ‘What the “Literary Gazette” would say of
that!’
“I think you must enjoy, even at this season, when we
all look back upon what we have lost, much real happiness from the knowledge
that you have always fostered young talent, given circulation to opinions
calculated to promote the influence of religion and morality, and never
inflicted a careless wound on any living thing.
“Yours, faithfully and sincerely,
As the Cockneys sing, “(H)all’s well”; but other images
crowd upon me, and the phantasmagoria is overwhelming. My endeavour to recal and revive
them all is hopeless. A cyclopaedia is wanted.
In short, the auto-biographic form will not admit of the weaving in so
miscellaneous a pattern, and at this period of
my work I am only the
more convinced of the fact that I had saddled myself with a most intractable machinery. By
means of diary and correspondence, I should have been more orderly and lucid, and the
draughts upon memory for the concoction together of connected parts, less imperative and
less frequently dishonoured.
Upon this said Memory I have a word to observe to my contemporaries, who,
like myself, are often complaining of its slips and deficiencies. Now, it appears to me
that we have not quite so much reason for this murmur as we imagine. It is not, in fact,
that our memory serves us so badly, as that, having so much more to do, so many more things
to remember, in Age than in Youth, it is not surprising that it should be oblivious to a
portion of the load! It gives more scope, too, for those curious phenomena of the mind,
which, by the windings of a chain or its links, over which the Will has neither power nor
control, works the strange work of Re-collecting, which, evolved by this process and in
this manner, is a faculty widely different from that of mere direct Re-membrance.
Hoping that I may live and have the opportunity to fashion some of my
multitudinous materials (embracing many busy years) into the more practicable shape I have
indicated; I must now run very briefly and hastily over a summary of personal and literary
relations, which sweetened and variegated the time to which my later chapters have been
devoted, and trust to a few letters casually rescued from my heaps, to afford a little
farther illustration of my imperfect roll-call.*
Again I give the first place to the sex, and mention with pleasurable
feelings the immediate cheering I offered to the earliest publications of Mrs. Bray, Mrs. Gore,
Miss
| FEMALE ORNAMENTS OF LITERATURE. | 329 |
Costello, Miss Agnes
Strickland, Miss Sheridan, Miss Emma Roberts, Miss
Jewsbury, Lady Charlotte Bury,
Miss Sinclair, Mrs.
Shelley, Mrs. Jameson, and other
female ornaments of our literature; not to mention my passing tributes to the works of the
Misses Porter, Miss
Benger, Hannah More, Lucy Aikin, Miss
Mitford, Mrs. Hofland, and other
established public favourites. With the majority of them I ever after maintained a cordial
intimacy, and with nearly all the rest a very friendly acquaintance. Of the friendship with
which Mrs. Bray and Miss Roberts, especially,
rewarded my impartial testimony to their great merits, the former as one of our most
eminent novelists, and the latter as a very successful cultivator of the belles lettres,
was a source of much gratification to me. Mrs. Bray still lives to
adorn her station, and listen to the applause of her country; the excellent Emma
Roberts has fallen a victim to the climate of India, in the midst of the
useful labours on which she was engaged for the beneficial development of our mighty, but
yet very partially understood, Asiatic Empire.
But when I come to glance at the list of male friends, with whom my
vocation and active enterprise in every matter that concerned the Arts and Literature
connected me, I find myself overwhelmed even within the limited circle of three or four
short years. I cannot enumerate them, far less describe the various kinds and degrees of
future intercourse to which they led. Shall I try an approximate but very partial
classification?
Pennie, the author of “The Royal Minstrel,” a heroic poem of much
poetic power, in twelve books, and afterwards of “Rogvald,” both written in his humble cot at
Lulworth, in the midst of mental distraction and (literally) physical starvation, was
speedily brought under my notice, and had no cause to regret the circumstance. Haydon and his
miseries came closer
home, and excited far stronger sympathies. Gerald
Griffin has already been alluded to; and Miller, the basket-maker, when he began his chequered career, in an
especial manner attracted my admiration, and won my esteem and services. A specimen of his
handicraft is much cherished in my study, and when I look upon its neat construction,
twistings, involutions, and pretty bordure (now somewhat the worse for wear), I cannot help
breathing the heartfelt wish that the author who sprung from its lowly manufacture may,
after all his twists and turns of fortune, be enjoying a like repose, and be viewed with as
much regard both for his useful and ornamental merits. But, beyond this, I also sincerely
hope that the various and remarkable talents he has displayed may have, at length, ensured
that consideration to which they are so eminently entitled, and that the old school-book
apologue of the travelled courtier and the basket-maker, who were cast upon the shore of a
barbarous people, has been reversed in his case, among a people proud or boastful of
civilisation. That such a man should have to struggle to the end, would be a shame to his
country; but if such do fall on evil days, what can their country, as represented by its
rulers, do for them? The resplendent government of England, which collects and dispenses
above fifty millions of golden sovereigns every twelvemonths, has, at its disposal, just
the amount of an upper clerk’s or minor commissioner’s salary, for the
encouragement of the nation’s genius and learning, and the succour of those who are
reduced to distress or perishing in the cause. The parsimonious dole, indeed, is a national
stigma: a beggar once solicited charity from an opulent passer-by, who seemed to regard him
with looks of pity and compassion, and lamented his want of small money to bestow upon him.
As it happened, there lay a halfpenny | LITERARY CONTEMPORARIES. | 331 |
before them on the road, which the miser hastened to pick up, and the poor man again put up
his voice for the boon. But charity which begins at home, seldom goes out; and the answer
he got to his prayer was, “No, no, find a halfpenny for yourself, poor fellow!”
My countrymen who came to push their literary fortunes in London, were
always welcome to my hospitalities and help in their pursuits; and those whom I only knew
through correspondence, failed not to find my pen prompt to espouse their interests.
Thomas Pringle, A.
Picken, Wilson the Scottish ballad
minstrel, recommended by Blackwood, Mackay the famous Baillie Nicol
Jarvie, recommended by Scott, and almost
all the classes who had public objects in view, either came or were consigned to me as to a
friend; and such honours to my native land as Professor
Wilson, Moir, Pollok, Motherwell,
Galt, Burnes (of eastern fame), J. B.
Frazer and Baillie, Tytler and the two brothers Chambers—my compatriots, who have accomplished so much for the instruction
and elevation of the humbler orders wherever the English language is read—all, received the
earnest homage of the “Literary
Gazette,” and the use of its utmost exertions to promote the success of their
delightful productions and augment the influence of their philanthropic labours. I was well
kept up to the knowledge of what was doing in the Edinburgh school, which had raised itself
from provincial dependency into so noble and flourishing a head of literary enterprise, by
incessant missives from Constable,
Blackwood, James
Ballantine, Cadell, and others, writers
and publishers, whose industry and kindness in supplying me with information, crammed me
with the news, and were very valuable in filling up my weekly measures of intelligence.
Nor was I less fortunate in my relations with Ireland
and Irishmen. With Lover, from the first day he
saw London to that which now shines over us, in spite of a November fog, and I listen, with
new delight to the new lyrics he is adding to my ample “repertoire,” of those
which have charmed me for five-and-twenty years, I have been united in the bonds of
uninterrupted friendship. Song he never sang that was not previously submitted to my
judgment, and I think I may assert that my predictions with regard to their lesser or
greater popularity were invariably realised. When they elicited tears of emotion, as in the
“Baby was Sleeping,” the “Fairy Boy,” in which the climax of ultimate lines is so
exquisite, the “Letter,” the “Four-leaved Shamrock,” and others of pathos, or when they
provoked bursts of laughter, as “Molly Carew,”
“Widow Mac Cree,” “The
Shadow on the Wall,” &c. &c, there was no fear of their not
ringing through the length and breadth of the land; and when there was great approbation,
but not quite so much enthusiasm, the compositions were generally obliged to range in the
second rank. Poet, painter, musician, and Irish genre-novelist, and dramatic
author—accomplished in all, the earning of such association is a requital for any number of
literary good offices, done for any number of deserving candidates. In this way editors may
balance accounts to their own manifest advantage.
Mr. Crofton Croker was for many years a great ally
of mine in the “Gazette,” and his
very numerous contributions, derived not only from his own literary and antiquarian tastes,
but from his access to information as a clerk in the Admiralty, were generally very
acceptable. Our intimacy was consequently as close as our intercourse was frequent; and
many a humorous ebullition and piece of practical joke attended it. For devising and
executing these, his
| LITERARY CONTEMPORARIES. | 333 |
better-half displayed a masterly invention, and I
look back at their frolic and fun with a renewed sensation of mirth, which, as the sickly
Yorkshire wench said when her sweetheart proposed—“maks be laugh, tho’ I be
scarcely yable.” But the lady’s talents for pleasantry were often exhibited in
a most entertaining manner. She wrote in as original and clever a style as I ever met with,
and I may venture to illustrate the good fortune of my ancient confrère in having so congenial a partner, by relieving this categorical
list with three specimens of her amusing correspondence. The first relates to a part of
Fisher’s portrait gallery,
in which there was a portrait of Earl Howe,
“Pray accept my best thanks for the beautiful number
of the ‘Portrait
Gallery’ you were good enough to send me yesterday. The two
first engravings, I think perfect, but the third has (to
my eye) a kind of Howe-came-you-so? expression about it,
as if he had just taken what Captain Hall
calls a north-wester—videlicet, a half tumbler of rum filled up with rum and
water.
“I do not know whether your experience leads you far
enough to know that favours conferred on the female sex emboldens them to ask
for more. If, acquainted with this fact, you will not be surprised that I
should make direct application for the boon of a stray cookery-book, should
such a thing be lying useless on your floor after undergoing the ceremony of
reviewal. I have frequently asked Crofton to beg for me, but he is not yet quite epicure enough
to remember the commission—which I assure you, to a very
ignorant housekeeper, would be a most desirable possession.
“I was very sorry to hear your interior has been
disorderly, but hope Wardrop has set
you to rights, and have no doubt he would say to you, as he once said to me,
‘I’ll tell ye whot yell doo Mess
Nicholson—ye’ll just tak a little doss.’
“When I see you again, I have still more to say to
you, but this is ‘all at present’ from,
“Dear sir,
“Yours much obliged,
“Rosery, August 2.
“P.S. It might appear impertinent in me to hint at
the very talented manner in which the memoirs of the present number are
‘got up.’”
The drollery of the following I presume to be unique.
“The Rosery, Friday, 26th August, 1831.
“My dear Mr.
Jerdan,—
“I have the pleasure to inform you I was this evening
safely delivered as per margin, and that I am doing as well as can be expected.
“I am, my dear Mr. Jerdan,
“Yours very truly,
The last is not unworthy of its precursors.
“October 26.
“My dear Sir,—
“If you have heard how ill your godson has
| GRAFTS FROM IRISH HUMOUR. | 335 |
been the last fortnight,
you would excuse my not having sooner thanked you in his name for the
exquisite little fork you sent the
dandy. If you would not think the remark too sharp, I should say that
in sending him a fork, you have proved yourself to be no
spoon, and if you had not cut our acquaintance you might be diverted
to see how scientifically he wields it. He cannot yet master the letter F, but
he calls fork his god-ka-ka’s kork on the appearance of every meal.
“As he is now tolerably well acquainted with his
alphabet, I should be glad to know when you purpose commencing his instructions
in the Catechism. I have taught him some pretty little tricks myself, but I
leave the moral and religious part of his education in the hands of his worthy
sponsors.
“I am daily more and more convinced that the Rosery
must have been a sweet, attractive spot, so many of our friends used to come to
see it. ‘With which I am.’
“My dear Sir,
“Ever yours truly obliged,
“MARIANNE GREEN,
“(CROKER,
“I
mean.)”
The Irish humours of a facetious husband were surely well played up to by
a spirit like this, and it was the case in many instances when I begged “Mirth
admit me of thy crew,” and reaped lots of recreation from my prayer being
granted. I have only to add in explanation that the birth announced was that of a young
gentleman to whom I stood (with Mr. J. Wilson
Croker) as one of the godfathers, and who I believe, in spite of my neglect, has
grown up reverentially to follow in the footsteps of his sainted sire.
Lucy Aikin (1781-1864)
English biographer and historian, the daughter of Dr. John Aikin and niece of Anna
Letitia Barbauld, whose works she edited (1825). She published in the
Literary Gazette.
Joanna Baillie (1762-1851)
Scottish poet and dramatist whose
Plays on the Passions
(1798-1812) were much admired, especially the gothic
De Montfort,
produced at Drury Lane in 1800.
James Ballantyne (1772-1833)
Edinburgh printer in partnership with his younger brother John; the company failed in the
financial collapse of 1826.
Elizabeth Ogilvy Benger (1775-1827)
Literary hostess who published poems, novels, biographies and translated Klopstock's
letters. William Jerdan describes her as a companion.
Richard Bentley (1794-1871)
London bookseller who in 1819 partnered with his brother Samuel (1785-1868) and in 1829
formed an unhappy partnership with Henry Colburn that was dissolved in 1832.
William Blackwood (1776-1834)
Edinburgh bookseller; he began business 1804 and for a time was John Murray's Scottish
agent. He launched
Blackwood's Magazine in 1817.
William Lisle Bowles (1762-1850)
English poet and critic; author of
Fourteen Sonnets, elegiac and
descriptive, written during a Tour (1789), editor of the
Works
of Alexander Pope, 10 vols (1806), and writer of pamphlets contributing to the
subsequent Pope controversy.
Sir John Bowring (1792-1872)
Poet, linguist, MP, and editor of the
Westminster Review. He was
the secretary of the London Greek Committee (1823) through which he was wrongly accused of
having enriched himself.
Anna Eliza Bray [née Kempe] (1790-1883)
Devon novelist who corresponded with Robert Southey; her
Autobiography was published in 1884. Her first marriage was to the artist Alfred
Stothard (1786-1821), son of the illustrator.
Sir Alexander Burnes (1805-1841)
Scottish officer and assistant to the British resident in Cutch in India.
Lady Charlotte Susan Maria Bury [née Campbell] (1775-1861)
Scottish novelist, daughter of John Campbell, fifth duke of Argyll; in 1791 she married
John Campbell of Shawfield and Islay (1796) and in 1818 Edward John Bury; she was
lady-in-waiting to Queen Caroline (1809) and published
Diary illustrative
of the Times of George IV (1838). Thomas Creevey described her as “a very handsome
woman and somewhat loose.”
Thomas Cadell the younger (1773-1836)
London bookseller, son of his better-known father; the younger Cadell entered into
partnership with William Davies in 1793. In 1802 he married Sophia Smith, sister of James
and Horace Smith of the
Rejected Addresses.
Robert Chambers (1802-1871)
Scottish miscellaneous writer and journalist; his chief works are
Cyclopaedia of English Literature, 2 vols (1841-43) and
Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation (1844). He partnered with his brother
William (1800-1883).
Charles Churchill (1732-1764)
English satirist and libertine, a schoolmate of William Cowper; his brief but brilliant
career began with the publication of
The Rosciad (1761).
Henry Colburn (1785-1855)
English publisher who began business about 1806; he co-founded the
New
Monthly Magazine in 1814 and was publisher of the
Literary
Gazette from 1817.
Archibald Constable (1774-1827)
Edinburgh bookseller who published the
Edinburgh Review and works
of Sir Walter Scott; he went bankrupt in 1826.
Eliza Cook (1812-1889)
English poet, author of
Lays of a Wild Harp (1835) and other
volumes; her early work appeared in the
Literary Gazette,
New Monthly Magazine, and the
Metropolitan
Magazine.
Louisa Stuart Costello (1799-1870)
English novelist, translator, and travel writer, the elder sister of the journalist
Dudley Costello; she contributed to the
Bentley's Miscellany and
Household Words.
George Crabbe (1754-1832)
English poet renowned for his couplet verse and gloomy depictions of country persons and
places; author of the
The Village (1783),
The
Parish Register (1807),
The Borough (1810), and
Tales of the Hall (1819).
John 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).
Marianne Croker [née Nicholson] (1791 c.-1854)
Daughter of the water color painter Francis Nicholson (1753-1844); in 1830 she married
Thomas Crofton Croker and collaborated with him as a writer and illustrator.
Thomas Crofton Croker (1798-1854)
Irish antiquary who published
Researches in the South of Ireland
(1824) and
Fairy Legends and Traditions of the South of Ireland, 3
vols (1825-28). He wrote for the
Literary Gazette.
George Croly (1780-1860)
Anglo-Irish poet, novelist, and essayist for Blackwood's; his gothic novel
Salathiel (1828) was often reprinted.
James Baillie Fraser (1783-1856)
Traveller in India whose drawings were published as
Views in the Himala
Mountains and
Views of Calcutta and its Environs (1820);
later in life he published historical novels.
John Galt (1779-1839)
Scottish novelist who met Byron during the first journey to Greece and was afterwards his
biographer; author of
Annals of the Parish (1821).
Marguerite Gardiner, countess of Blessington [née Power] (1789-1849)
After a separation from a first husband in 1818 she married the Earl of Blessington; they
traveled on the Continent, meeting Byron in 1822; her best-known work,
Journal of Conversations with Lord Byron, originally appeared in the
New Monthly Magazine (1832-33).
Catherine Grace Frances Gore [née Moody] (1799-1861)
English novelist, the daughter of Charles Moody; she married Charles Arthur Gore in 1823
and wrote a series of best-selling ‘silver-fork’ fictions.
Mary Ann Gray [née Browne] (1812-1844)
English poet, author of
Mont Blanc and other Poems (1827) and
other volumes; in 1842 she married James Gray, apparently a son of the poet James Gray
(1770?-1830), friend and relation of James Hogg.
Gerald Griffin (1803-1840)
Irish novelist, playwright, and poet who emigrated to London in 1823 and worked as a
journalist, contributing to the
Literary Gazette; he published
The Collegians (1829).
Captain Basil Hall (1788-1844)
Scottish seaman and traveler; after education at Edinburgh high school he entered the
Navy in 1802; he published
Fragments of Voyages and Travels
(1831-33) and other works.
Benjamin Robert Haydon (1786-1846)
English historical painter and diarist who recorded anecdotes of romantic writers and the
physiognomy of several in his paintings.
Barbara Hofland [née Wreaks] (1770-1844)
English poet and novelist who in 1810 married the painter Thomas Christopher Hofland; she
wrote for the Literary Gazette and published
Says she to her Neighbour
what? (1812).
Richard Howe, earl Howe (1726-1799)
He was MP for Dartmouth (1757-82), sailed with Anson, fought in the Seven Years’ War,
created Earl Howe (1788), commander of the Channel Fleet (1790); vice-admiral of England
(1792-96).
Anna Brownell Jameson [née Murphy] (1794-1860)
Writer and art critic born in Dublin; she published
Shakespeare's
Heroines (1832). in 1825 she married the barrister Robert Sympson Jameson.
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).
Maria Jane Fletcher [née Jewsbury] (1800-1833)
Poet and essayist for the
Athenaeum who died in India shortly
after her marriage to William Kew Fletcher in 1832. She was a literary friend of Wordsworth
and Felicia Hemans.
Letitia Elizabeth Landon [L. E. L.] (1802-1838)
English poet who came to attention through the
Literary Gazette;
she published three volumes in 1825. She was the object of unflattering gossip prior to her
marriage to George Maclean in 1838.
Jane Loudon [née Webb] (1807-1858)
English writer and editor; she published
The Mummy! A Tale of the
Twenty-Second Century (1827) and horticultural works. She married the landscape
gardener John Claudius Loudon (1783-1843).
John Claudius Loudon (1783-1843)
Landscape gardener, journalist, and prolific author; he wrote for the
Literary Gazette and edited the
Gardener's Magazine
(1826).
Samuel Lover (1797-1868)
Irish artist, writer, and composer, a founder of the
Dublin University
Magazine (1833); he wrote and illustrate
Legends and Stories of
Ireland (1831).
Charles Mackay (1787-1857)
Scottish actor who performed characters from Walter Scott's novels, notably Bailie Nichol
Jarvie.
Samuel Maunder (1785-1849)
Compiler of dictionaries and reference works in partnership with William Pinnock; he was
at one time a publisher of the
Literary Gazette.
Thomas Miller (1807-1874)
Basket-maker, poet, and novelist; he published in
Friendship's
Offering (1838, 1839),
The Athenaeum, and the
Literary Gazette.
Mary Russell Mitford (1787-1855)
English poet, playwright, and essayist; author of
Our Village: Sketches
of Rural Character and Scenery (1824, etc.).
James Montgomery (1771-1854)
English poet and editor of the
Sheffield Iris (1795-1825); author
of
The Wanderer of Switzerland (1806) and
The
World before the Flood (1813).
Robert Montgomery (1807-1855)
Originally Gomery; English religious poet whose
The Omnipresence of the
Deity (1828) was widely read and reprinted; he was attacked by Macaulay in the
Edinburgh Review.
Hannah More (1745-1833)
English bluestocking writer and advocate for Christian morality; a founder of the
Religious Tract Society (1799) and author of
Coelebs in Search of a
Wife (1808).
William Motherwell (1797-1835)
Scottish poet and ballad-editor; after an irregular education he was appointed
sheriff-clerk-depute of Renfrewshire (1819); he was editor of
Glasgow
Courier (1830).
Charles Ollier (1788-1859)
London bookseller and novelist who in partnership with his brother James published Keats,
Shelley, Lamb, and Hazlitt; after the firm went bankrupt in 1823 he worked for the
publisher Henry Colburn. He was a sub-editor at the
New Monthly
Magazine.
John Fitzgerald Pennie (1782-1848)
English actor, schoolmaster, and poet; he wrote for the
Literary
Gazette and published an autobiography,
The Tale of a Modern
Genius (1827).
Andrew Belfrage Picken (1802-1849)
Son of the Scottish poet Ebenezer Picken; he was secretary to the adventurer Sir Gregor
MacGregor, published
The Bedouins and other Poems (1828),
contributed to the Literary Gazette, and emigrated to Canada in 1830.
Robert Pollok (1798-1827)
Scottish poet and clergyman, author of the oft-reprinted
The Course of
Time (1827) issued shortly before his early death.
Jane Porter (1776-1850)
English novelist, sister of the poet and novelist Anna Maria Porter (1778-1832); she
wrote
The Scottish Chiefs (1810).
Thomas Pringle (1789-1834)
Scottish poet, journalist, and abolitionist, who after a brief stint as one of the
founding editors of
Blackwood's Magazine emigrated to southern
Africa.
Bryan Waller Procter [Barry Cornwall] (1787-1874)
English poet; a contemporary of Byron at Harrow, and friend of Leigh Hunt and Charles
Lamb. He was the author of several volumes of poem and
Mirandola, a
tragedy (1821).
David Lester Richardson (1801-1865)
English poet and journalist; after service in India he published volumes of poetry and
edited the
London Weekly Review, (1824); on Macaulay's
recommendation he was appointed professor of English literature of the Hindu College at
Calcutta (1836).
Emma Roberts (1791-1840)
The daughter Captain William Roberts and friend of L.E.L., she published
Memoirs of the Rival Houses of York and Lancaster (1827) and wrote
for the
Asiatic Journal.
Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley [née Godwin] (1797-1851)
English novelist, daughter of William Godwin and Mary Wollstonecaft, and the second wife
of Percy Bysshe Shelley. She is the author of
Frankenstein (1818)
and
The Last Man (1835) and the editor of Shelley's works
(1839-40).
Catherine Sinclair (1800-1864)
Scottish novelist, daughter of Sir John Sinclair, for whom she acted as secretary; her
first novel was
Charlie Seymour, or, the Good Aunt and the Bad Aunt
(1832).
Albert Richard Smith (1816-1860)
Educated at Merchant Taylor's School, he was a novelist, writer for
Punch, and mountaineer.
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).
Elizabeth Isabella Spence (1768-1832)
Scottish novelist and travel writer, the daughter of Dr James Spence (d. 1786) of
Dunkeld; she published
Sketches of the Present Manners, Custom, and
Scenery of Scotland (1809).
Agnes Strickland (1796-1874)
English historian and author of books for children; with her sister Elizabeth she
published
Lives of the Queens of England (1840-48) and
Letters of Mary Queen of Scots (1843).
Patrick Fraser Tytler (1791-1849)
Sottish barrister, son of Alexander Fraser Tytler; he published
The
Life of the Admirable Crichton (1819),
History of Scotland
(1828-43), and other works.
John Wilson [Christopher North] (1785-1854)
Scottish poet and Tory essayist, the chief writer for the “Noctes Ambrosianae” in
Blackwood's Magazine and professor of moral philosophy at Edinburgh
University (1820).
John Mackay Wilson (1804-1835)
The son of a millwright, he published poems, dramas, and The
Tales of
the Borders (1834) in threepenny numbers. He contributed an essay on James Hogg to
the
Literary Gazette.
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.
Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine. (1817-1980). Begun as the
Edinburgh Monthly Magazine,
Blackwood's assumed the name of its proprietor, William Blackwood after the sixth
number. Blackwood was the nominal editor until 1834.
Morning Post. (1772-1937). A large-circulation London daily that published verse by many of the prominent poets of
the romantic era. John Taylor (1750–1826), Daniel Stuart (1766-1846), and Nicholas Byrne
(d. 1833) were among its editors.
The Times. (1785-). Founded by John Walter, The Times was edited by Thomas Barnes from 1817 to 1841. In the
romantic era it published much less literary material than its rival dailies, the
Morning Chronicle and the
Morning
Post.