The Autobiography of William Jerdan
Ch. 3: Fresh Start
CHAPTER II.
A FRESH START—THE SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES—THE NOVIOMAGIANS—BENEVOLENT
INSTITUTIONS—THE LITERARY FUND—MISERIES OF AUTHORS—GEORGE CANNING AS THE PATRON OF
LITERATURE.
So, by the sleep of many a human heart
The crowd of men may bear their busy part,
Where wither’d, or forgotten, or subdued,
Its noisy passions have left solitude:—
|
Ah! little can they trace the hidden truth,’
What waves have moved it in the vale of youth!
And little can its broken chords avow
How once they sounded.—All is silent, now!
Anon. On an old
Water-wheel.
|
The weighty affairs of 1826 arranged, there was something like
new life, and a new start. After the storm, the world began to look up again among my old
friends and associates, and energy and enterprise were again awakened in the public
generally. I felt my full share in the impulse, and zealously took my part in the revived
order of things. I became a member of the Society of Antiquaries, being proposed (as I see
by a note from Sir H. Ellis) by Mr. Gwilt, Mr.
Woodfall, Mr. P. Vere, Dr.
Thomas Rees, &c.; and for some time I felt much interest in the society.
But I contributed only two communications: one on a golden
grasshopper, found in a very ancient Greek tomb; and the other, on the forms of money of
all ages and nations, such as shells, ring-money, perforated money, links of chains,
hook-shaped, weighed, round, &c. &c., as adapted to the habits and costumes of the
people; a subject which, in my opinion, would furnish curious matter for much research, and
an essay far longer than could be presented to any learned body. As years accrued, I found
that my eight guineas entrance, and four guineas per annum subscription, met with no
adequate return, or inducement to continue a member; for not having time to hunt him up, I
never could get papers or volumes of the “Archæology” from the then fat, contented, and rosy official, of the
name of Martin, and I therefore discontinued my attendance; and, as
the Quakers say, was “read out,” or ceased to belong, though still procuring
the reports of the meetings for insertion in the “Gazette,” and otherwise supporting the institution by
all means in my power.
Among the incidents connected with this event, was the formation of a
social club of F.S.A.’s, who found the transactions of the parent society as little
attractive as I did, and who adopted the illustrious Roman name of Noviomagians, in honour
of the lost city of Noviomagus, which they asserted they had identified near Bromley in
Kent, and close to the rural retreat so much enjoyed by the illustrious William Pitt. Thither, in commencing our career, we went to
dig and dine, and certainly turned up a few bits of broken pottery on the spot; but whether
actually taken from the bosom of the earth, or carried there by some humourist of the
party, I am as unable to determine as any original inhabitant of the city, if now called
on, would be. For, in fact, though united under a sonorous title, and pertaining to a very
grave association, this offshoot of the Antiquaries was any thing but
solid and serious. On the contrary, all the members assumed
heterogeneous offices, and with Lord High Presidents, Lord High Constables, Lord Keepers,
Lord Treasurers, Father Confessors, Poet-Laureates, Keepers of Records, &c, &c, the
monthly meetings were full of fun, and, sometimes, practical jokes, conducive to great
merriment. But in the midst of these high-jink enjoyments, it must not be thought that the
real business of Archaeological inquiry and science was quite neglected. Papers of rare
interest were communicated at almost every meeting; valuable antiquities, recently
discovered, were submitted for judgment; and inscriptions, seals, instruments, ancient
documents, coins, &c. &c., were carefully inspected and made out. To say that these
productions were infinitely superior to those, contemporaneously, of the National Society,
is saying very little in their favour. They were, independently of squibs and crackers of
every description, often exceedingly instructive, and always entertaining; and sometimes
not the less so from being of a character unfit for public reading or discussion. So good
were many of the Evenings, that I should not be surprised if, at some future day, a
history, and specimens of them, should appear in print for the gratification of the outer
world. I think the idea originated with Mr. R.
Balmanno, at the time so intimately concerned in the promotion of the Fine
Arts and Institutions for the benefit of Artists, and his early companions comprehended the
late Mr. R. Lemon, of the State Paper Office (gorged
with remarkable pieces of information), Mr. A. J.
Kempe, the Roman antiquary; Mr.
Newman, of London-bridge celebrity; Mr. G. P.
Corner, of Southwark, an able archaeologist; Mr.
T. C. Croker, who has made his name known by writing on local Irish remains;
Mr. Windus (with his fine museum); Mr. Rosser, Mr.
Brandreth, all assiduous and noted archaeologists; two
or three of whom, I believe, yet keep up the tone of the Noviomagians, in union with
younger blood filling the ranks of the dead, and of elder members, who grieved too much for
the departed friends of their jests and hilarity, to be able to enjoy the same spirit with
fresh levies in recruited combinations, where— A narrower circle seems to meet Around the board—each vacant seat A dark and sad remembrance brings. |
I have known few comrades whose loss I more deeply mourned than those of
Lemon, Kempe, Brandreth, and Rosser, each of whom was warm in personal attachment, and
valuable contributors to the “Literary Gazette.” Boon, kindly-natured, and full
of intelligence, the light of their wonted places became dark to me.
In other societies I took an earnest part. From 1821 I was a member of the
Horticultural; a steward at two of its festivals, whilst the “Gazette” was an efficient organ for making known and
accelerating its progress. To the Artists’ Fund, and the Artists’ Benevolent
Fund, I rendered similar homage during all my literary time, besides being a constant
subscriber to them. In truth, there was not a benevolent institution in London to which I
did not contribute with pen and purse; and, above all, the Literary Fund was an object of
my zealous and ceaseless exertion, and in the recollection of the few of its remaining best
friends, I will add that I devoted more time, and did more for it in bringing in new
supporters and liberal subscriptions than any individual that ever took an interest in its
administration. Only the founder Mr. Williams, the
Earl of Chichester, who obtained the charter,
Sir Benjamin Hobhouse, whose efforts never
failed, and, from his position,
were
productive of great benefits, could compete with me for utility and productiveness; though
there were then other warm and feeling allies, whose cordiality and humanity partook not of
the coldness, and statistical economics of the present day. The Rev. Dr. Yates, the soul of goodness and charity, was secretary; and after
the business of the monthly meetings was over, a majority of the leading vice-presidents
and members of the council and committee, were accustomed to dine together at the adjacent
Freemasons’ Tavern; Sir B. Hobhouse, even after gout seemed to
defy him, generally taking the chair, and promoting, together with the sociality of its
official friends, the utmost pecuniary resources and beneficent purposes of this, at any
rate, kindly apology for the debt due to literature, and almost repudiated by the British
nation. To these dinners, men of rank, fortune, and influence were invited by individuals,
and, by the end of the season, so pleasant had their system of recruiting been, there was
hardly a steward to seek for the ensuing anniversary, and already had a generous amount of
subscriptions been secured. By such means was the Literary Fund raised, and enabled to
exalt its head on high; endowed with a large realisation of capital, and made so far
independent of the aid to be derived from the anniversary celebrations. In this good work,
I call to mind, with affectionate regard, the earnest and valuable co-operation of such
individuals as the late Mr. Christie, by whom I was
introduced to the society, Mr. William Tooke,
Mr. Britton, and other warm-hearted friends of
suffering authors. With me it was a favourite custom, when any money was inadvertently or
ignorantly sent to the “Gazette” for illegitimate
purposes (any which could not be returned), to impound it for the Fund; and from this
source frequent and considerable subscriptions were derived. From the
Marquis of Normanby, on one literary occasion, I
acquired 501, and from Mr. G. P. R.
James, on another, 67l., by negotiating the sale of
manuscripts confided to me for publication, and handing over the proceeds; and one curious
accident procured a pleasing addition. In one of my walks near Grove House, I met a feeble
old man, poorly clothed, and appearing as if he had seen better days. Touched by the
circumstance, I spoke with him, and made an offer of a small sum of silver, half-a-crown,
which he gratefully declined. To my surprise, I discovered that he was the wealthy
father-in-law of the wife of a friend of mine, who happened to know me personally, and told
of our encounter with a good laugh at my intended charity. The result, however, was 20l. by J. A., through W.
Jerdan, to the Literary Fund, as published in the subscription lists for
years, till I was disconnected with the administration. And this I notice as a just cause
of complaint from a leading benefactor. The above and other contributions ought never to
have been obliterated from these records, were it only for the encouragement of others; but
they have been dropped out; and it is nowhere publicly intimated that such a person as
W. J. ever successfully exerted himself to advance the prosperity
of this excellent institution. A dislike to new principles in the grants, a cabal, and a
paltry insult, which I thought the official authorities ought to have taken up, caused me
to retire from it; yet with every warm wish for its increase and liberal and humane
management. There have been some vexatious quarrels and difficulties since, but I trust the
charity has not only not been permanently injured by them, and that, being got over, it is
steering its way according to the compass of its launch and early voyage, succouring the
helpless and sinking, without too much fine-drawing about their cases and claims, | LITERARY FUND, AND GUILD. | 37 |
and accumulating more and more means by
which this succour may be more and more extended. I should think it right to insist that,
as in the olden times, the humbler labourers in the literary field have as just a claim to
proportionate relief from the fund, as their more eminent brethren whom adversity has
thrown upon its bounty. It was never created for officers alone; but also, and equally, for
privates in the ranks—which distinction was lost sight of, but has I hope been revived.
The Guild of Literature now so generously supported, and, with the aid of
its popular dramatic adjuncts, making its prosperous way, is an enlarged and probably more
skilfully modelled adoption of a plan proposed by me to the Literary Fund, about which I
was very sanguine for several years. The promise of Crown-lands, free, in Essex, and some
powerful co-operation, including a list of donations, amounting to above 1000l., induced me to believe that augmented subscriptions and the
volunteer gift of MSS. for publication, would enable us to found quiet and pleasing
retreats for the reception of unsuccessful and worn out authors—upon whom house-rent is
generally the most grievous of their burdens—but a party in the committee of management
opposed the design, and to my great regret I was foiled in my earnest endeavour to carry
this favourite project into execution.
In truth I was intensely devoted to the interests of the Fund, and exerted
myself in every way to enrich it, as well as to see to the sympathising administration of
the succours it afforded; which is one of its most irresistible claims to universal
support. It was in the personal distribution of many of these grants that I witnessed so
much of the utter miseries of able and accomplished men of the literary class, as filled me
with the deepest sorrow at the time, and has
left that impression on
my mind, of the too frequent wretchedness and helplessness incident to the pursuit of
literature, which cannot he effaced, and has perhaps grown into almost a morbid feeling.
It may be, I trust, some apology for that feeling, and some recommendation
of the Literary Fund, to more of the public support than in spite of its deserving it has
ever under any circumstances received, to glance at two or three cases in which I was
requested by my considerate coadjutors to see to the most prompt and beneficial application
of the relief. In one instance, a poor “low” case, for which, with the
disposition to which I have alluded to afford no help except to writers somewhat
distinguished, there was some difficulty in obtaining a vote of 10l., I went to the address, not far from my residence in Brompton, and found, in a
single apartment, a broker’s man in possession on an execution for rent, a dead child
of two or three years of age on a rug in a corner, a living mother and a living baby on the
semblance of a bed, covered with a horse-cloth, on the floor, and the “Literary
Man,” who had really written some creditable productions, sitting stupified, like an
impersonation of Apathy, on a broken chair. Good God! let any one trust their imagination
to this heart-breaking scene. I was a “literary man” too, but in ostensible
wealth, and certainly with every enjoyment of life in Grove House, within three
minutes’ walk of my unhappy contemporary. Well, immediate necessities were supplied
by the agency of the assistant broker, who took my word for the settlement of his charge,
and partook, I believe, of the supper he brought in, before he departed; the corpse was
buried, and, as the landlord fell within the range of my numerous acquaintances, I had
influence enough to compromise all matters, and release my hapless client with a few pounds
in
his pocket. I will yield the truth for the
argument of my adversaries in the Fund, the relief was only temporary and ineffectual; but
it did change the chamber of ruin and mortality, as I have stated, and it entailed on
myself a claim for trifling assistance which I answered, for years, till I lost sight of
the poor author, who in one of his applications writes thus: “I almost despair of
your calling the circumstances to mind. [I never could forget them.] Since that period
my ills have multiplied tenfold. Penury, illness, almost madness have made me their
sport by turns, and I am even more like a spectre than a man.” He then tells
me of Tales for which he had received a Minerva press price, after twelve visits to the
city, viz., ten shillings! and adds some acknowledgment for my having cheered him in
sickness and sorrow.
I am not boasting of such things, for they have been a portion of my nature
and life. I could not help them. And yet I instance them with an approving conscience, to
point the way to consolatory reflections in later years, to those who, in connection with
the Fund and the press, are treading in my footsteps. Towards the end, in prosperity or
misfortune, they will assuredly he made sensible of the difference between having employed
their power (small or great) in assisting or depressing, in cherishing or crushing their
fellow strugglers. For be they as proud and self-confident as they may, I need not inform
them it is, or has been, a struggle with them all, from penny-a-liners, through all
gradations, to the crack favourites of the time.
An almost similar case led me, entrusted with a larger aid, to meet the
exigencies of an author of much higher character—one indeed of the ornaments of our
national literature, and it so happened that I could not fulfil my mission till late on the
Saturday;—between evening and
night at Pentonville. The letter I had
received spoke, it is true of an “afflicted situation,” which as regarded the
writer he should have esteemed a trifle; but his “family commanded immediate assistance.” I was not prepared for a condition, if
possible more wretched than the preceding;—far more wretched, for there had been penurious
respectability, appearances to keep up, gentility to preserve, and sensibilities more
acutely affected by these accidental misfortunes. I do not think that distress is always
aggravated by the mere difference of position, for in the depths of woe there is great
equality between the lower and the upper orders; but there is something in the humiliation
of those who have stood high which affects the minds of the spectator with more of pity,
and must add some degree of poignancy to the sufferings of the unhappy. In the instance to
which I am alluding, I encountered a situation, if possible more deplorable from the
contrast and unexpected extent of the affliction, than the former. There too was death,
bare walls in consequence of the removal of furniture under a distress, and absolute want.
The Saturday night had come, not only without a provision for the Sabbath morrow, but
without a meal for pressing hunger. It was dreadful. I almost cursed myself for not having
hurried up on the Friday, which I might have done but for my indispensable editorial
duties; and I hastened to do myself, as well as I could, what the broker’s man had
shown me the way to do. I believe that I sent in as much meat from the butcher’s shop
as would have subsisted the inhabitants for a fortnight, and a tolerable supply from the
baker’s and the tavern, and (finding the warehouse open) something like a dozen of
blankets, and a counterpane or two. This occupied me several hours, and when I got back, my
friend, as he was for all his after life, had returned from a useless excursion into the money land; and so I supped with him
and his wife about eleven o’clock and approaching the small hours, was so elevated
that I was glad of a cab to carry me from Pentonville to Brompton. If my weight was as
light as my heart, the horse had little to draw; which, however, made no difference in the
driver’s drawing as usual upon my good nature and hatred of dispute.
Prisons and hospitals presented appeals no less appalling. It was fearful
to contemplate the degradation and torture to which men of intellectual endowments and
talentwere reduced by the enthusiasm of their natures and the incertitude of their efforts,
their fallacious devotedness and too common defeat. The authors of “Wine and Walnuts,” and “The Hermit in London,” which were so
popular in the “Literary Gazette,”
could not, with all their exertions, resist the appointed fate. Old age, penury, and
neglect withered and sank them in the grave. Imagine the pang of having an application for
a sovereign made from an individual of literary note with whom you have met for years on
terms of social intimacy, and to be thanked for averting starvation, with the apology,
“I would not otherwise have appealed to you, knowing that one of your
benevolent constitution, even at the best of times accustomed to think so little of
Self, at such a period as this would not fail when let into the secret of my troubles,
and my utter destitution of means. But I was taken unprepared, and my last shilling
engulfed in the vortex of that bottomless gulf which I fear will for ever remain open,
to the terror and misery of those circumstanced like myself.” He was by this
time lodged in gaol; one of the most ingenious men of the day, both with pen and pencil.
I might multiply these melancholy tales* through a
* Some of the inferior order, but still exhibiting abilities
which, in any |
whole volume, and the simple narratives would need no attempt at
pathos to point the sad varieties of human sufferings which they involved; but, deplorable
as my evidence would be, I will rather prefer the corroborative testimony of other
witnesses, whose sentiments on the subject of literary distress and the futile nature of
literary pursuits will not, perhaps, be so angrily impugned as, in certain quarters, mine
have been. Bernard Barton, probably influenced by
Charles Lamb’s half querulous, half
sportive complaints of the “slavery of the desk,” to which he was pinned in the
India House, talked of giving up his situation in the Bank, in order to devote himself
entirely to letters; and what wrote the amiable Elia in answer to this
intimation?
“Throw yourself on the world without any rational plan of support
beyond what the chance employ of booksellers would afford you!
“Throw yourself rather, my dear sir, from the Tarpeian Rock, slap
down headlong upon iron spikes. If you have but five consolatory minutes between the
desk and the bed, make much of them, and live a century in them, rather than turn slave
to the booksellers. They are Turks and Tartars when they have poor authors at their
beck. * * * Come not within their grasp. I have known many authors want for bread, some
repining, others enjoying the blessed security of a spunging-house, all agreeing they
had rather have been tailors, weavers, what not, rather than the things they were. I
have known some starved, some to go mad, one dear friend literally died in a workhouse.
* * * Oh, you know not, may you never know, the miseries of sub-
other employment, would have procured
bread, have not clothes to stir out of their den or even paper to write upon,
and solicit the smallest sums. I know that I may be told that such as these
have no right or title to be ranked with or aided as literary men; but they
were so, notwithstanding.—W. J.
|
sisting by authorship! ’Tis a pretty
appendage to a situation like yours or mine; but a slavery worse than all slavery to be
a bookseller’s dependent, to drudge your brains for pots of ale and breasts of
mutton. * * * The booksellers hate us. * * * Keep to your bank, and your bank will keep
you. Trust not to the public; you may hang, starve, drown yourself, for anything that
worthy personage cares,” &c. &c.—See vol. ii. “Life of Charles
Lamb,” by Sir T. Talfourd.
And from a very different source our worthy Quaker poet received a like
warning; for Byron, after speaking highly of his talents
and productions, tells him—
“You know what ills the author’s life assail;
Toil, envy, want, the patron and the jail.
|
“Do not renounce writing, but never trust
entirely to authorship.”
There are just enow of exceptions to prove the universality of the rule in
England. The calling of literature, like the old state lotteries, has a tempting prize for
every thousand blanks.
A letter from Mr. Canning, whom I
had prevailed upon to preside at one of the anniversary celebrations of the Literary Fund,
will, I am sure, be interesting to every reader.
“Gloucester Lodge, May 4, 1822.
“Dear Sir,
“I hope you will have considered the prompt
communication (through Mr. Backhouse) of
my willingness to accept the invitation of the Committee of the Literary Fund,
as a proof of my disposition to do anything agreeable to you. But, I am sorry
to say, my acceptance has involved me in great difficulties. It has not
‘rained, but poured’
similar invitations, not
to dinner indeed, but to morning meetings, for the last week or ten days. I
decline all; having long ago made up my mind not to figure on the
‘platform’ (as the blue and red tickets inclosed to me suggest) of
any of those institutions. But my one acceptance embarrasses my refusal, and
destroys the roundness of my assertion, that I do not frequent such meetings.
“Have you signified my acceptance—and, if not, can you
delay doing so?
“I am, dear Sir,
“Your obedient and faithful servant,
“I trust I need not tell you that I felt sensibly
for your misfortune in India.” [The reported death of a near
relative.]
When the dinner took place, agreeably to the annexed letter,* five years
later, it was one of the most memorable ever witnessed. Mr.
Canning was accompanied by the famed M. de
Chateaubriand, who, on his health being drunk, nobly acknowledged that he
had been succoured by the Fund when he fled in distress from the guillotine of the French
Revolution, and now requited the benefit by a donation of fifty pounds!†
As I shall have a chapter to devote to my illustrious and lamented friend,
I shall only notice in connection with my
* “Sir,—Mr.
Canning has at last found time to read the letter which
you addressed to me on the 21st inst. “Mr.
Canning consents to become a member of the Royal Society
of Literature, and consents to preside at the Literary Fund next May. “I am, sir,
yours respectfully, † See Appendix F. |
| PATRONAGE OF LITERATURE. | 45 |
present subject, that Mr. Stapleton’s letter indicates a matter of high
literary importance and unavailing literary regret. In frequent conversations with the
patriot Minister he spoke to me of his determination to exert his utmost power for the
elevation of the authors and literature of the Empire; and it was simply an initiative step
in this direction which authorised me, even without previous directions, to place him in
any position which could contribute to the progress of this glorious object. What he would
have done, had God spared him to an idolising people, is now but the vision of a shadowy
dream to me; but to this I can bear witness, that his purpose was earnest, comprehensive,
and exalting, and that the literary classes of England have deep cause to rue the day they
lost so sincere and warm a champion.
John Backhouse (1784-1845)
He was private secretary to George Canning and afterwards permanent under-secretary to
the Foreign Office.
Robert Balmanno (1779-1861)
Born in Aberdeen, he was editor of the
London Literary Gazette
before emigrating to New York before 1831, from whence he corresponded with the Cowden
Clarkes; Mary Cowden Clarke's letters to him were published in 1902 as
Letters to an Enthusiast.
Bernard Barton (1784-1849)
Prolific Quaker poet whose verse appeared in many of the literary annuals; he was an
acquaintance of Charles Lamb.
Henry Brandreth (1797-1840)
English poet and antiquary, educated at St. John's College, Oxford and the Middle Temple;
he was a contributor to the
Literary Gazette.
John Britton (1771-1857)
English autodidact, antiquary, and topographer; he published
Beauties
of Wiltshire (1801) and
Autobiography, 2 vols (1850,
1857).
George Canning (1770-1827)
Tory statesman; he was foreign minister (1807-1809) and prime minister (1827); a
supporter of Greek independence and Catholic emancipation.
François-René, viscomte de Chateaubriand (1768-1848)
French romantic poet and diplomat, author of
The Genius of
Christianity (1802). He was a supporter of the Bourbon restoration. He was
ambassador to Great Britain in 1822.
James Christie the younger (1773-1831)
Art critic, the son of the auctioneer whose business he continued; he was a member of the
Society of Dilettanti (1824) and a specialist on Greek vases. He was active in the Literary
Fund Society.
George Richard Corner (1801-1863)
Southward attorney and antiquary; he contributed to
Archaeologia
and the
Gentleman's Magazine.
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.
Sir Henry Ellis (1788-1855)
English diplomat, the illegitimate son of Robert Hobart, fourth earl of Buckinghamshire;
he published
A Journal of the Proceedings of the Late Embassy to
China (1817).
Joseph Gwilt (1784-1863)
English architect and antiquary, educated at St Paul's School; he published
An Encyclopaedia of Architecture, Historical, Theoretical and
Practical (1842).
Sir Benjamin Hobhouse, first baronet (1757-1831)
The father of John Cam Hobhouse. He was educated at Brasenose College, Oxford and the
Middle Temple, he was MP for Bletchingly (1797-1802), Grampound (1802-06), and Hindon
(1806-18).
George Payne Rainsford James (1801-1860)
English novelist and historiographer royal to William IV; he published
Richelieu (1829) and
Philip Augustus (1831).
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).
Alfred John Kempe (1785 c.-1846)
English antiquary; he was gentleman porter at the Royal Mint and a staff writer at the
Gentleman's Magazine; he contributed to the
Literary Gazette.
Charles Lamb [Elia] (1775-1834)
English essayist and boyhood friend of Coleridge at Christ's Hospital; author of
Essays of Elia published in the
London
Magazine (collected 1823, 1833) and other works.
Robert Lemon (1779-1835)
Educated at Norwich grammar school, he was deputy keeper of the state paper office, where
he discovered the manuscript of Milton's treatise
De doctrina
Christiana.
John Newman (1786-1859)
English architect and antiquary who exhibited at the Royal Academy between 1807 and
1838.
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.
Thomas Rees (1777-1864)
Unitarian minister who published in the
Monthly Repository and the
Christian Reformer; he was the younger brother of the London
bookseller Owen Rees.
William Henry Rosser (1792 c.-1848)
London solicitor and antiquary; he contributed to the
Literary
Gazette and was secretary to the Noviomagian Society.
Augustus Granville Stapleton (1800 c.-1880)
Educated at St John's College, Cambridge, he was private secretary to George Canning and
author of
Political Life of George Canning, 1822-1827 (1831).
Sir Thomas Noon Talfourd (1795-1854)
English judge, dramatist, and friend of Charles Lamb who contributed articles to the
London Magazine and
New Monthly
Magazine.
William Tooke (1777-1863)
Son of the Russian historian of the same name; a London solicitor, he was a founder of
University College, London, active in the Royal Society for Literature, and MP for Truro
(1832-37). He contributed to the
New Monthly Magazine and
Gentleman's Magazine. Charles Knight described him as
“kind-hearted man of moderate abilities—somewhat fussy.”
David Williams (1738-1816)
Dissenting minister and schoolmaster in London and founder of the Literary Fund in
1788.
Benjamin Godfrey Windus (1790-1867)
London merchant and collector of English art; he opened his house one day a week to
ticketholders.
George Woodfall (1767-1844)
Printer, of Paternoster Row, printer, son of the newspaperman Henry Sampson Woodfall
(1739-1805); he was a member of the Society of Antiquaries and the Royal Society of
Literature.
Richard Yates (1769-1834)
English clergyman and antiquary educated at Bury St Edmunds; he was chaplain at Chelsea
Hospital and secretary to the Literary Fund.