“There is, unluckily, a very sufficient reason for not disclaiming Wat Tyler,—which is, that I wrote it three-and-twenty years ago.
“It was the work, or rather the sport, of a week in the summer of 1794: poor Lovel took it to London, and put it into Ridgeway’s hands, who was then in Newgate. Some weeks afterwards I went to London and saw Ridgeway about it; Symonds was with him, and they agreed to publish it: (I believe, or rather I am sure, the publication was to have been anonymous), and what remuneration I was to have was left to themselves, as dependent upon the sale. This was the substance of our conversation; for nothing but words passed between us. From that time till the present, I never heard of the work: they of course, upon better judgment, thought it better left alone; and I, with the carelessness of a man who has never thought of consequences, made no inquiry for the manuscript. How it has got to the press, or by whose means, I know not.
“The motive for publication is sufficiently plain. But
the editor, whoever he may be, has very much mistaken his man. In those times
and at that age, and in the circumstances wherein I was placed, it was just as
natural that I should be a Republican, and as proper, as that now, with the
same feelings, the same principles and the same integrity, when
| 242 | LIFE AND CORRESPONDENCE | Ætat. 43. |
“The booksellers must be disreputable men, or they would not have published a work under such circumstances. I just feel sufficient anger to wish that they may be prosecuted for sedition.
“I would write to Turner, if my table were not at this time covered with letters; perhaps if you see him you will ask his opinion upon the matter,—whether it be better to interfere, or let it take its course.
