LORD  BYRON  and  his  TIMES
Documents Biography Criticism

The Life and Correspondence of Robert Southey
Robert Southey to Magaret Holford Hodson, 10 September 1830

Vol. I Contents
Early Life: I
Early Life: II
Early Life: III
Early Life: IV
Early Life: V
Early Life: VI
Early Life: VII
Early Life: VIII
Early Life: IX
Early Life: X
Early Life: XI
Early Life: XII
Early Life: XIII
Early Life: XIV
Early Life: XV
Early Life: XVI
Early Life: XVII
Ch. I. 1791-93
Ch. II. 1794
Ch. III. 1794-95
Ch. IV. 1796
Ch. V. 1797
Vol. II Contents
Ch. VI. 1799-1800
Ch. VII. 1800-1801
Ch. VIII. 1801
Ch. IX. 1802-03
Ch. X. 1804
Ch. XI. 1804-1805
Vol. III Contents
Ch. XII. 1806
Ch. XIII. 1807
Ch. XIV. 1808
Ch. XV. 1809
Ch. XVI. 1810-1811
Ch. XVII. 1812
Vol. IV Contents
Ch. XVIII. 1813
Ch. XIX. 1814-1815
Ch. XX. 1815-1816
Ch. XXI. 1816
Ch. XXII. 1817
Ch. XXIII. 1818
Ch. XXIV. 1818-1819
Vol. IV Appendix
Vol. V Contents
Ch. XXV. 1820-1821
Ch. XXVI. 1821
Ch. XXVII. 1822-1823
Ch. XXVIII. 1824-1825
Ch. XXIX. 1825-1826
Ch. XXX. 1826-1827
Ch. XXXI. 1827-1828
Vol. V Appendix
Vol. VI Contents
Ch. XXXII. 1829
Ch. XXXIII. 1830
Ch. XXXIV. 1830-1831
Ch. XXXV. 1832-1834
Ch. XXXVI. 1834-1836
Ch. XXXVII. 1836-1837
Ch. XXXVIII. 1837-1843
Vol. VI Appendix
Creative Commons License

Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
Produced by CATH
“Keswick, Sept 10. 1830.
“My dear Mrs. Hodson,

“You might have had another reason for disbelieving the statement of my appearing as a witness in behalf of Mr. St John Long, to wit, that I am not likely to put myself into the hands of a quack. Probably he has had a patient of the same name, and the news’ reporters supposed it to be me. It was contradicted in the Times by my brother (I suppose), who perhaps thought it some derogation to his own doctorship as well as mine.

“I am troubled at the course of events, yet I can find some considerations, which, if they do not allay my disquietude, have in them a growing comfort. Had it been in my power to turn the balance between the contending principles of France,—which were Liberalism and Jesuitism,—I should have laid my hand with great misgiving on either scale; and, if I had decided on that which was, for the time, the cause of order, and brought with it the least immediate evil, it would have been with no clear conviction or good will. The complete triumph of the old Bourbon system would be the re-establishment of such a religion and such a court as those of Louis XIV. and Louis XV. Charles X. did not desire such a court, neither did the Dauphin his son, but they both deemed it their duty to do all that could be done by sovereign power for the holy Roman Catholic Church.


“The royal family fully understood that a scheme for expelling them and putting the son of Philippe Egalitè in their place had been carrying on ever since the battle of Waterloo, but they were strangely mistaken with regard to their strength, and did not calculate on the means of resistance which had been prepared. Otherwise, they had troops on whom they could have perfectly relied, who could have been brought up, for they were within two days’ march.

“It is better as it is, for they had put themselves glaringly in the wrong by the Ordinances, having been wholly in the right before. You might have been with them for mere political considerations (and those only temporary ones), if they had succeeded; but you could not have been with them in principle and in heart. But all three are now united in the Duke de Bordeaux’ cause. Oh, how blind of intellect and dead of heart must the Duke of Orleans be to have thrown away such an opportunity of securing himself a good and glorious name! Had he insisted upon that child’s right, and the plain policy of maintaining it—had he acted for him as a faithful regent,—he would have had, not the mere recognition of unwilling courts, nor the ‘hey, fellow!’ recognition of Cobbett and Co., but the sure support of all the European Powers, and the grateful attachment of all the old Royalists, and of all Frenchmen who desire tranquillity; and his name would have become as illustrious as that of Washington.

“Did you ever read the Abbé Terasson’s Sethos? There this Duke might have found a better model for himself than Fenelon exhibited for his pupil in
Ætat. 56. OF ROBERT SOUTHEY. 117
Telemachus. It is so fine a romance in part of its story, and in its conception of moral greatness, that I have always wondered how a Frenchman could have written it. But Louis Philippe is already tasting the bitter relish of that ambition which was sweet at the first draught Take away from his party the adventitious supporters (who make use, or hope to make use of him as an instrument, one faction against another), and his party is the weakest in France: the Napoleonists are stronger; so are the Republicans; so are the Loyalists. These last would be the most numerous if quiet voices were ever counted in clamorous times. The Republicans are the most active and the most daring, and therefore they are most likely to have their day of triumph. War then becomes inevitable, and the new King’s best policy, as against both Republicans and Napoleonists, may be to keep a mischievous nation quiet at home by engaging in hostilities with his neighbours, and taking up the old scheme of fraternization and conquests. This is what I expect, and then huzza for another Battle of Waterloo!

Believe me, always yours very truly,
Robert Southey.”