Memoir of Francis Hodgson
William Gifford to Francis Hodgson, 3 June 1809
James Street, Buckingham Gate: June 3, 1809.
My dear Sir,—I have been so busy in forwarding our 2nd
No.3 that I have not been able to look to the right
hand or the left. It is now out, and I am running away for a short time to the
seaside to refresh my eyes and do nothing. I do not wonder that some
objectionable passages are found in the first No. I see too many myself, but
the allusion to the holy-water of the Mexican converts is an historical fact.
But, in truth, there is vast room for
![]()
![]()
![]()
improvement; and for this I am
very anxious. Such articles as appear in some of the smaller reviews might be
got by loads, but we aim at, or at least wish for, something better. That we
shall succeed is, indeed, problematical; but without it, it is quite certain
that we might as well sit with our hands before us, and do nothing. It is not
by common exertions that the ‘Edinburgh Review’ can be met, and the others are not objects
of contention. To write panegyrics and. satires is easy enough; but this is not
criticism: and I have already been obliged to omit more than I have inserted.
From you, my dear Sir, I look for valuable assistance: for this, it will be
necessary to put friendship out of the question, and to judge from established
principles of the art. What has sunk the British critic but a base dereliction of all independence? I know
little of the other Reviews, but I suspect they do not flourish
greatly—and from the same cause.
Lord Byron’s poem1 sales well I understand. I have an angry review of
it, which I shall not use; for though it is well written, it is manifestly
unjust. Unless works can be made to amuse or instruct the reader, it is loss of
time to dwell long on them or
![]()
![]()
| 116 | MEMOIR OF REV. F. HODGSON. | |
![]()
indeed to dwell on them at all. ‘Hesiod,’ which is gone to your
cousin,1 may
afford a neat article, but seems scarcely worth a long one. However, you will
judge. I think, indeed, that almost all our articles are too long.
If success be a proof of merit (which it certainly is not) we
might be vain; for our second number is nearly out of print in the first three
days. Yet we must look forward to something better.
Ever, my dear, Sir,
Your very faithful friend and servant,
P.S. I leave town this morning for Ryde, in the Isle of
Wight, where I shall remain for about six weeks, and where, as well as in
every other place, I shall be glad to hear from you.
William Gifford (1756-1826)
Poet, scholar, and editor who began as a shoemaker's apprentice; after Oxford he
published
The Baviad (1794),
The Maeviad
(1795), and
The Satires of Juvenal translated (1802) before becoming
the founding editor of the
Quarterly Review (1809-24).
Francis Hodgson (1781-1852)
Provost of Eton College, translator of Juvenal (1807) and close friend of Byron. He wrote
for the
Monthly and
Critical Reviews, and was
author of (among other volumes of poetry)
Childe Harold's Monitor; or
Lines occasioned by the last Canto of Childe Harold (1818).
John Hodgson (1786-1849)
Of Lincoln's Inn, a cousin of Francis Hodgson; he was called to the bar in 1812 and
practised as a conveyancer. He reviewed poetry for the
Monthly
Review and
Quarterly Review.
John Ireland (1761-1842)
Dean of Westminster and a close friend of William Gifford; he published
Nuptiae sacrae, or, An Enquiry into the Scriptural Doctrine of Marriage and
Divorce (1801).
The British Critic. (1793-1825). A quarterly publication of conservative opinion continued as
The
British Critic, and Quarterly Theological Review (1838-1843). The original editors
were Robert Nares and William Beloe.
The Quarterly Review. (1809-1967). Published by John Murray, the
Quarterly was instigated by Walter
Scott as a Tory rival to the
Edinburgh Review. It was edited by
William Gifford to 1824, and by John Gibson Lockhart from 1826 to 1853.
