| ( 350 ) |
On January 2nd, 1815, Lord Byron was married to Miss Milbanke, and during the honeymoon, while he was residing at Seaham, the residence of his father-in-law Sir Ralph Milbanke, he wrote to Murray desiring him to make occasional enquiry at his chambers in the Albany to see if they were kept in proper order.
I have paid frequent attention to your wish that I should ascertain if all things appeared to be safe in your chambers, and I am happy in being able to report that the whole establishment carries an appearance of security, which is confirmed by the unceasing vigilance of your faithful and frigid Duenna [Mrs. Mule].
Every day I have been in expectation of receiving a copy of ‘Guy Mannering,’ of which the reports of a friend of mine, who has read the first two volumes, is such as to create the most extravagant expectations of an extraordinary combination of wit, humour and pathos. I am certain of one of the first copies, and this you may rely upon receiving with the utmost expedition.
I hear many interesting letters read to me from the Continent,
and one in particular from Mr. Fazakerly,
describing his interview of four hours with Bonaparte, was particularly good. He acknowledged at once to
the poisoning of the sick prisoners in Egypt; they had the plague, and would
have communicated it to the rest of his army if
| ANECDOTES OF NAPOLEON. | 351 |
He asked Lord Ebrington of which party he was, in Politics. “The Opposition.” “The Opposition? Then can your Lordship tell me the reason why the Opposition are so unpopular in England?” With something like presence of mind on so delicate a question, Lord Ebrington instantly replied: “Because, sir, we always insisted upon it, that you would be successful in Spain.”
Walter Scott sent you a copy of the ‘Lord of the Isles;’ but as it arrived at least a month after I had forwarded a ‘Mail Coach’ copy to you, I took that copy in exchange (there were no writings in it), and thus balanced my account. There are not two opinions about it being his worst poem.
I am delaying the publication of our edition in four volumes only until you find a leisure moment to strike off the dedication to your friend Mr. Hobhouse, who still thinks that it is not precisely the same thing to have music made to one’s poems, and to write poetry for music; and I advise you most conscientiously to abide by the determination of Mr. Hobhouse’s good sense.
Mrs. Wilmot’s tragedy is to be brought forward at Drury Lane immediately after Easter.
| 352 | MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY |
During the spring and summer of 1815 Byron was a frequent visitor at Albemarle Street, and in April, as has been already recorded, he first met Walter Scott in Murray’s drawing room.
In March, Lord and Lady Byron took up their residence at 13, Piccadilly Terrace. The following letter is undated, but was probably written in the autumn of 1815.
The enclosed note will explain the contents of the accompanying volume in sheets: which if returned to me, I will put into such dress as your taste shall direct. I picked up, the other day, some of Napoleon’s own writing paper, all the remainder of which has been burnt; it has his portrait and eagle, as you will perceive by holding a sheet to the light either of sun or candle: so I thought I would take a little for you, hoping that you will just write me a poem upon any twenty-four quires of it in return. I beg the favour of you to offer my thanks to Lady Byron for some game which came opportunely to fatten Southey, Sotheby, and Malcolm, with sundry other Poeticals and Historicals, who dined with me on Thursday. I am really more grieved than I can venture to say, that I so rarely have an opportunity of seeing you; but I trust that you are well.
By the autumn of 1815 Lord Byron found
himself involved in pecuniary embarrassments, which had, indeed, existed before his
marriage, but were now considerably increased and demanded immediate settlement. His first
thought was to part with his books, though they did not form a very valuable collection. He
mentioned the matter to a book collector, who conferred with other dealers on
| BYRON’S PECUNIARY EMBARRASSMENTS. | 353 |
Lord Byron could not fail to be affected by this generous offer, and whilst returning the cheque, he wrote:—
“Your present offer is a favour which I would accept from you, if I accepted such from any man . . . The circumstances which induce me to part with my books, though sufficiently, are not immediately, pressing. I have made up my mind to this, and there’s an end. Had I been disposed to trespass upon your kindness in this way, it would have been before now; but I am not sorry to have an opportunity of declining it, as it sets my opinion of you, and indeed of human nature, in a different light from that in which I have been accustomed to consider it.”
Meanwhile Lord Byron had completed his ‘Siege of Corinth’ and ‘Parisina,’ and sent the packet containing them to Mr. Murray. They had been copied in the legible hand of Lady Byron. On receiving the poems Mr. Murray wrote to Lord Byron as follows:—
I tore open the packet you sent me, and have found in it a
Pearl. It is very interesting, pathetic, beautiful—do you know, I would
almost say moral. I am really writing to you before the billows of the passions
you excited have subsided. I have been most agreeably disappointed (a word I
cannot associate with the poem) at the story, which—what you hinted to me
and wrote—had alarmed me; and I should not have read it aloud to my wife
if my eye
| 354 | MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY |
Mr. Murray enclosed to Lord Byron two notes, amounting to a thousand guineas, for the copyright of the poems, but Lord Byron refused the notes, declaring that the sum was too great.
“Your offer,” he answered (Jan. 3rd, 1816) “is liberal in the extreme, and much more than the poems can possibly be worth; but I cannot accept it, and will not. You are most welcome to them as additions to the collected volumes, without any demand or expectation on my part whatever. . . . I am very glad that the handwriting was a favourable omen of the morale of the piece; but you must not trust to that, as my copyist would write out anything I desired in all the ignorance of innocence—I hope, however, in this instance, with no great peril to either. . .. I have enclosed your draft torn, for fear of accident by the way—I wish you would not throw temptation in mine. It is not from a disdain of the universal idol, nor from a present superfluity of his treasures, I can assure you, that I refuse to worship him; but what is right is right, and must not yield to circumstances.”
The money, therefore, which Murray thought the copyright of the ‘Siege of Corinth’ and ‘Parisina’ was worth,
* ‘Parisina,’ Stanza xiv. |
| MURRAY’S REMONSTRANCE. | 355 |
I did not like to detain you this morning, but I confess to you that I came away impressed with a belief that you had already reconsidered this matter, as it refers to me. Your Lordship will pardon me if I cannot avoid looking upon it as a species of cruelty, after what has passed, to take from me so large a sum—offered with no reference to the marketable value of the poems, but out of personal friendship and gratitude alone,—to cast it away on the wanton and ungenerous interference of those who cannot enter into your Lordship’s feelings for me, upon persons who have so little claim upon you, and whom those who so interested themselves might more decently and honestly enrich from their own funds, than by endeavouring to be liberal at the cost of another, and by forcibly resuming from me a sum which you had generously and nobly resigned.
I am sure you will do me the justice to believe that I would strain every nerve in your service, but it is actually heartbreaking to throw away my earnings on others. I am no rich man, abounding, like Mr. Rogers, in superfluous thousands, but working hard for independence, and what would be the most grateful pleasure to me if likely to be useful to you personally, becomes merely painful if it causes me to work for others for whom I can have no such feelings.
This is a most painful subject for me to address you
| 356 | MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY |
This letter was submitted to Gifford before it was despatched, and he wrote:—
I have made a scratch or two, and the letter now expresses my genuine sentiments on the matter. But should you not see Rogers?
It is evident that Lord Byron is a little awkward about this matter, and his officious friends have got him into a most unlordly scrape, from which they can only relieve him by treading back their steps. The more I consider their conduct, the more I am astonished at their impudence. A downright robbery is honourable to it. If you see Rogers, do not be shy to speak: he trembles at report, and here is an evil one for him.
In the end Lord Byron was compelled by the increasing pressure of his debts to accept the sum offered by Murray and use it for his own purposes.
To revert to the poems themselves: Lord Byron, in sending the MSS. of the ‘Siege of Corinth’ and ‘Parisina’ to Murray, requested him to consult Gifford, and authorized the latter to strike out or alter any of the lines at his pleasure. The following is Murray’s letter to Lord Byron, after Gifford had read over the poem:—
“I assure you my conscience has not been without its
compunctions, at not calling or writing, although incessant
| ‘THE SIEGE OF CORINTH.’ | 357 |
The following is Mr. Gifford’s note about the ‘Siege of Corinth’:—
“It is a dreadful picture: Caravaggio outdone in his own way. I have hinted at the removal of one couplet: if its sense be wanted, it may be compressed into one of the other lines. Its powers are unquestionable; but can any human being deserve such a delineation? I keep my old opinion of Lord Byron. He may be what he will. Why will he not will to be the first of poets and of men. I
* This may have related to ‘Christabel’—a poem greatly admired by Byron, but never finished. |
| 358 | MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY |
Mr. D’Israeli was greatly affected by the ‘Siege of Corinth’; shortly after its perusal, he wrote to Mr. Murray.
I am anxious to tell you, that I find myself, this morning, so strangely affected by the perusal of the poem last night, that I feel that it is one which stands quite by itself. I know of nothing of the kind which is worthy of comparison with it. There is no scene, no incident, nothing so marvellous in pathos and terror in Homer, or any bard of antiquity. It impresses one with such a complete feeling of utter desolation, mental and scenical, that when Minotti touched that last spark which scattered its little world into air, he did not make it more desolate than the terrible and affecting energy of the poet’s imagination. But Homer had not such a sort of spirit as the mistress of Alp—he had wolves, and vultures, and dogs; but Homer has never conveyed his reader into a vast Golgotha, nor harrowed us with the vulture flapping the back of the gorged wolf, nor the dogs: the terror, the truth, and the loneliness of that spot will never be erased from my memory. Alp by the side of the besieged wall; that ghost-like manner of giving him a minute’s reflection by showing one of the phenomena of nature—that is a stroke of a spirit’s character never before imagined, and can never be surpassed. And after the most sublime incident that ever poet invented, still to have the power to agitate the mind, by that eagle who flies nearer the sun, mistaking the cloud of destruction for night; in a word, I could not abstain from assuring you, that I never read any poem that exceeded in power this, to me, most extraordinary production. I do not know where I am to find any which can excite the same degree of emotion.
| ‘PARISINA.’ | 359 |
The following correspondence relates to ‘Parisina’:—
Though I have not written to you, you have occupied my thoughts. Gifford declares to me that you never surpassed ‘Parisina.’ I enclose Ward’s note after reading the ‘Siege of Corinth.’ I lent him ‘Parisina’ also, and he called yesterday to express his mind at your hesitation about their merits. He was particularly struck with the “Son’s reply to Azo.” I lent Parisina to Mr. Hay (Mr. Wilmot’s friend) last night, and I enclose his note. I send the proof. If you are sure that you can improve it, do; otherwise, touch it not. I will send a revise of ‘Corinth’ to-night or to-morrow. Gifford thinks, if the narrative were put into the mouth of the Turk (if it didn’t choke him), would give it additional interest. I hope your Lordship is well.
I send the manuscript, of which Gifford says: “I read the manuscript, and with great
pleasure. It is indeed very good, and the plan is ingenious. The poetry is
in the best manner.” Nothing can be more ingeniously framed and
more interestingly told than this story. I liked it ten times better on the
third reading than on the first. I read it last night to D’Israeli and his family, and they were
perfectly overcome by it. The gradual madness of Parisina, the preparation and death of Hugo, and the subsequent description of Azo, by which, after all the story is over, you
recreate a new and most tender interest, are all most attractive and touching,
and in your best manner. In these matters I always liken myself to Molière’s “old woman”;
and when I am pleased I know our readers will be pleased. Where you can
strengthen expressions or lines, I entreat you to do so, but otherwise nothing
can be added or retrenched for its improvement, though it is a gem truly worth
polishing. These two tales form an invaluable contrast, and display the variety
of
| 360 | MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY |
It is not necessary here to touch upon the circumstances of Lord Byron’s separation from his wife; suffice it to say that early in 1816 he determined to leave England, and resolved, as he had before contemplated doing, to sell off his books and furniture. He committed the arrangements to Mr. Murray, through Mr. Hanson, his solicitor, in Bloomsbury Square. A few months before, when Lord Byron was in straits for money, Mr. Hanson communicated with Mr. Murray as follows:—
Mr. Hanson’s compliments to Mr. Murray. He has seen Lord Byron, and his Lordship has no objection to his Library being taken at a valuation. Mr. Hanson submits to Mr. Murray whether it would not be best to name one respectable bookseller to set a value on them. In the meantime, Mr. Hanson has written to Messrs. Crook and Armstrong, in whose hands the books now are, not to proceed further in the sale.
On the 28th of December, 1815, Mr. Murray received the following valuation:—
“Mr. Cochrane presents respectful compliments
to Mr. Murray, and begs to inform him that upon
carefully
| SALE OF LORD BYRON’S EFFECTS. | 361 |
Mr. Murray sent Lord Byron a bill of £500 for the books as a temporary accommodation. But the books were traced and attached by the sheriff. On the 6th of March, 1816, Lord Byron wrote to Murray:—
“I send to you to-day for this reason: the books you purchased are again seized, and, as matters stand, had much better be sold at once by public auction. I wish to see you to-morrow to return your bill for them, which, thank Heaven, is neither due nor paid. That part, so far as you are concerned, being settled (which it can be, and shall be, when I see you to-morrow), I have no further delicacy about the matter. This is about the tenth execution in as many months; so I am pretty well hardened; but it is fit I should pay the forfeit of my forefathers’ extravagance as well as my own; and whatever my faults may be, I suppose they will be pretty well expiated in time—or eternity.”
A letter was next received by Mr. Murray’s solicitor, Mr. Turner, from Mr. Gunn, to the following effect:—
Mr. Constable, the plaintiff’s attorney, has written to say he will indemnify the sheriff to sell the books under the execution; as such, we must decline taking your indemnity.
The result was, that Lord Byron, on the
22nd of March, paid to Crook and Armstrong
£231 15s., “being the amount of three levies, poundage,
and expenses,” and also £25 13s. 6d., the amount of Crook and
Armstrong’s account. Crook and
Armstrong settled with Levy, the Jew, who had
lent Byron money; and also with the officer, who had been in
possession twenty-three days, at 5s. a day. The books were
afterwards sold by Mr. Evans at his house,
| 362 | MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY |
Mr. Murray was present at the sale, and bought a selection of books for Mrs. Leigh, for Mr. Rogers, and for Mr. J. C. Hobhouse, as well as for himself. He bought the large screen, with the portraits of actors and pugilists, which is still at Albemarle Street. There was also a silver cup and cover, nearly thirty ounces in weight, elegantly chased. These articles realised £723 12s. 6d., and after charging the costs, commission, and Excise duty, against the sale of the books, the balance was handed over to Lord Byron.
The ‘Sketch from Private Life’ was one of the most bitter and satirical things Byron had ever written. In sending it to Mr. Murray (March 30th, 1816), he wrote: “I send you my last night’s dream, and request to have fifty copies struck off for private distribution. I wish Mr. Gifford to look at it; it is from life.” Afterwards, when Lord Byron called upon Mr. Murray, he said: “I could not get to sleep last night, but lay rolling and tossing about until this morning, when I got up and wrote that; and it is very odd, Murray, after doing that, I went to bed again, and never slept sounder in my life.”
Mr. Murray showed the verses to Rogers, Frere, and Stratford Canning. In communicating the result to Byron, he said:—
“They have all seen and admired the lines: they agree that you have produced nothing better; that satire is your forte; and so in each class as you choose to adopt it. Mr. F. suggests that in the last line weltering does not accord with hang on high, which precedes it. I have sent a copy to Mr. Gifford.”
| ‘A SKETCH FROM PRIVATE LIFE.’ | 363 |
Lord Byron answered:—
“I doubt about weltering. We say ‘weltering in blood,’ but do they not also say ‘weltering in the wind,’ ‘weltering on a gibbet’? I have no dictionary; so look. In the meantime, I have put ‘festering,’ which, perhaps, in any case is the best word of the two. Shakespeare has it often, and I do not think it is too strong for the figure in this thing. Quick! quick! quick! quick!”
The lines were printed and sent to Lord Byron. But before publishing them, Mr. Murray took advice of his special literary adviser and solicitor, Mr. Sharon Turner. His reply was as follows:—
There are some expressions in the Poem that I think are libellous, and the severe tenor of the whole would induce a jury to find them to be so. The question only remains, to whom it is applicable. It certainly does not itself name the person. But the legal pleadings charge that innuendo must mean such a person. How far evidence extrinsic to the work might be brought or received to show that the author meant a particular person, I will not pretend to affirm. Some cases have gone so far on this point that I should not think it safe to risk. And if a libel, it is a libel not only by the author, but by the printer, the publisher, and every circulator.
Mr. Murray did not publish the poems, but after
their appearance in the newspapers, they were announced by many booksellers as “Poems by Lord Byron on his Domestic
Circumstances.” Among others, Constable printed and published them, whereupon Blackwood, as Murray’s agent in Edinburgh, wrote
to him, requesting the suppression of the verses, and threatening proceedings.
| 364 | MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY |
“I have distributed copies of ‘Fare Thee Well’ and ‘A Sketch’ to Dr. Thomas Brown, Walter Scott, and Professor Playfair. One cannot read ‘Fare Thee Well’ without crying. The other is ‘vigorous hate,’ as you say. Its power is really terrible; one’s blood absolutely creeps while reading it.”
Byron left England in April, 1816 and during his travels he corresponded frequently with Mr. Murray, partly by means of the letters which are familiar to every reader of Moore’s ‘Life,’ partly by the hand of his secretary, Dr. Polidori:—
Your letter to me was received both by myself and Lord Byron with great pleasure. Yours of the day
following has not arrived, which is a pity, as in your last you talk of a
journal in it which, to Lord Byron—who hears nothing
but reports of Insurrection in the East, Rebellions in the West, and Murders
North and South—would be a great gratification. Lord Liverpool resigned, Lord
Wellington blown up, and half-a-dozen greatly lettered
names—with some pleasant accidents after them—is all we have to
keep us newspaperly alive. We are also quite ignorant of all literary news;
something of some poems by Coleridge,
Maturin’s play, ‘The Antiquary,’ and
‘Glenarvon’ have reached us. Since it has given you hopes of
entering well into the literary world next winter, that ‘Childe Harold’ has got
another canto of 118 stanzas, you will be more pleased to hear of another poem
of 400 lines called ‘The
| ‘CHILDE HAROLD,’ CANTO III. | 365 |
The MSS. of the third canto of ‘Childe Harold’ and ‘The Prisoner of Chillon’ duly reached the publisher. Mr. Murray acknowledged the MSS.:—
I have rarely addressed you with more pleasure than upon the present occasion. I was thrilled with delight yesterday by the announcement of Mr. Shelley with the MS. of ‘Childe Harold.’ I had no sooner got the quiet possession of it than, trembling with auspicious hope about it, I carried it direct to Mr. Gifford. He has been exceedingly ill with jaundice, and unable to write or do anything. He was much pleased by my attention. I called upon him to-day. He said he was unable to leave off last night, and that he had sat up until he had finished every line of the canto. It had actually agitated him into a fever, and he was much worse when I called. He had persisted this morning in finishing the volume, and he pronounced himself infinitely more delighted than when he first wrote to me. He says that what you have heretofore published is nothing to this effort. He says also, besides its being the most original and interesting, it is the most finished of your writings; and he has undertaken to correct the press for you.
Never, since my intimacy with Mr.
Gifford, did I see him so heartily pleased, or give one-fiftieth
part of the praise, with one-thousandth part of the warmth. He speaks in
ecstasy of the Dream—the
whole volume beams with genius. I am sure he loves you in his heart; and when
he called upon me some time ago, and I told
| 366 | MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY |
Respecting the ‘Monody,’ I extract from a letter which I received this morning from Sir James Mackintosh: “I presume that I have to thank you for a copy of the ‘Monody’ on Sheridan received this morning. I wish it had been accompanied by the additional favour of mentioning the name of the writer, at which I only guess: it is difficult to read the poem without desiring to know.”
Generally speaking it is not, I think, popular, and spoken of rather for fine passages than as a whole. How could you give so trite an image as in the last two lines? Gifford does not like it; Frere does. A-propos of Mr. Frere: he came to me while at breakfast this morning, and between some stanzas which he was repeating to me of a truly original poem of his own, he said carelessly, “By the way, about half-an-hour ago I was so silly (taking an immense pinch of snuff and priming his nostrils with it) as to get married!” Perfectly true. He set out for Hastings about an hour after he left me, and upon my conscience I verily believe that, if I had had your MS. to have put into his hands, as sure as fate he would have sat with me reading it* all the morning and totally forgotten his little engagement.
I saw Lord Holland to-day looking very well. I wish I could send you Gifford’s ‘Ben Jonson’; it is full of fun and interest, and allowed on all hands to be most ably done; would, I am sure, amuse you. I have very many new important and interesting works of all kinds in the press, which I should be happy to know any means of sending. My =Review is improving in sale beyond my most sanguine expectations. I now sell nearly 9000. Even Perry says the Edinburgh Review is going to the devil. I was with Mrs. Leigh to-day, who is very well; she leaves town on Saturday. Her eldest daughter, I fancy, is a most engaging girl; but yours, my Lord, is unspeakably interesting and promising, and I am happy to add that Lady B. is looking well. God bless you! my best wishes and feelings are always with you, and I sincerely wish that
* He had left his wife at the church so as to bring his poem to Murray. |
| PURCHASE OF ‘CHILDE HAROLD,’ CANTO III. | 367 |
The negotiations for the purchase of the third canto were left in the hands of Mr. Kinnaird, who demurred to Mr. Murray’s first offer of 1500 guineas, whereupon the publisher wrote to Lord Byron.
As soon as I had read the third canto of ‘Childe Harold’ myself, I had no hesitation in telling Mr. Kinnaird that I should make my offer fifteen hundred guineas; but he has called to-day to say that two thousand are expected by your friends. I told him that hitherto, I believed that no one had impugned my estimations; and that with regard to yourself I had no other feeling than a desire to give all that was possible, and on the present occasion I thought I had anticipated any notions, and that I suspected the demand to be based rather on my own data than on any independent estimate. The poem, however, is so much beyond anything in modern days that I may be out in my calculation: it requires an ethereal mind, like its author’s, to cope with it. He was so obliging as to ask for the additional £500 eventually; but I have preferred to settle it at once at the £2000—and now the Lord (not you) have mercy upon me! Remember I do stipulate for all the original MSS., copies or scraps.
I am thinking more seriously than ever of publishing a monthly literary journal and am promised the contributions of the greatest characters here. If I succeed, I will venture to solicit the favour of your powerful assistance in the shape of letters, essays, characters, facts, travels, epigrams, and other—to you—small shot, and to entreat the favour of your influence among your friends.
| 368 | MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY |
In his reply Lord Byron consented to receive the extra £500 conditionally on the sale of a certain number of copies to be fixed by the publisher.
After the departure of Lord Byron from England Mr. Murray had much correspondence respecting him, more particularly with the Hon. Augusta Leigh, his sister; Lady Byron, and Lady Caroline Lamb.
Pray have the goodness to give me a line, when you can spare one moment, to say whether you or anybody else of your acquaintance has heard from my brother since I saw you, because I have not, and his silence of five weeks being unusual, I am somewhat anxious. I shall be much obliged to you for a book which I see advertised, the ‘Journal of the Duchesse d’Angoulême.’ It sounds interesting, and Col. Leigh has a great wish to read it, or I could wait until I return to town. If you can tell me any remarks upon the Reviews, you know they can’t fail to be interesting.
P.S.—The post has brought me a letter from Byron—quite well; also one from Mr. Davies; so I need not trouble you with those queries. My brother writes to me about some trouble with one of his servants, Fletcher, and I believe it a matter of great difficulty.
I return you the letter, which I have shown this morning to
Mr. D[avies], who is going to town
to-morrow, and will call upon you and talk over the subject. He seems to treat it as you do, and as I am
much inclined to do, except when I think about what I’ve heard is said or thought, and really for
my brother’s sake, as well as my own and that of all belonging to me, it
afflicts me; at the same time that I know not how to act. I trust to you and
Mr. D. to discuss the point, and if any new thought should strike
| SALES OF BYRON’S POEMS. | 369 |
P.S.—I must tell you that the remark made to my friend was from one who is a most enthusiastic admirer of my brother. I should less have minded it from one in any degree prepossessed against him. Pray tell Mr. D. this; I omitted it.
Mr. Murray wrote to Lord Byron on the 13th of December, 1816, informing him that, at a dinner at the Albion Tavern, he had sold to the assembled booksellers 7000 of his third canto of ‘Childe Harold’ and 7000 of his ‘Prisoner of Chillon.’ He then proceeds:—
In literary affairs I have taken the field in great force—opening with the Third Canto, ‘Chillon,’ and, following up my blow, I have since published ‘Tales of my Landlord,’ another novel, I believe (but I really don’t know) by the author of ‘Waverley’; but much superior to what has already appeared, excepting the character of Meg Merrilies. Every one is in ecstasy about it, and I would give a finger if I could send it you, but this I will contrive. Conversations with your friend Buonaparte at St. Helena, amusing, but scarce worth sending. Lord Holland has just put forth a very improved edition of the ‘Life of Lope de Vega and Inez de Castro.’ Gifford’s ‘Ben Jonson’ has put to death all former editions, and is very much liked. The ‘Faro-Table’ of Tobin has
* This must have related to the third canto of ‘Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage,’ in which many stanzas were inserted which Mrs. Leigh thought might give pain to Lady Byron. |
| 370 | MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY |
I am continually harassed by shoals of MSS. poems—two, three, or four a day. I require a porter to carry, an author to read, and a secretary to answer them. Maturin has written two acts of a new tragedy, which I think they are spoiling by sending him criticisms. Sheil, another Irishman, the author of ‘Adelaide,’ exceedingly applauded in Dublin, but hastily damned in London, tells me that another work is in hand, which is to be produced at Covent Garden in a month, called the ‘Apostate.’ I am just about to publish a strange political rhapsody by Lord Erskine, entitled ‘Armata,’ describing our constitution under a foreign name. “Damn them,” says the author, “I’ll show the world that I am not in my dotage yet.” “What the devil’s this?” said Frere, on taking up some sheets of the said work. “Oh,” said Gifford, “something that Murray is publishing.” “Not upon his own account,” replied Frere. By the way, Frere, who always remembers you with honour (and I told you before what he wrote about the third canto), likes the ‘Armenian Grammar’* very much, though he would prefer the English part of it. He wishes me to send you Mitford on the ‘Harmony of Language,’ which I will do. He says that the type is not so large as it ought to be for a language which is not to be whipped into one, but coaxed in by the most enticing appearances. I will most willingly take fifty copies even upon my love of letters; so they may be sent as soon as completed. We are all much interested with
* Byron, to please his neighbours at Venice, the Armenian monks of San Lazaro, edited a grammar printed by them at their own press. |
| LITERARY GOSSIP. | 371 |
* Wedderburn Webster’s ‘Waterloo,’ reviewed by Mr. Croker in Q. R., No. 30. |
| 372 | MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY |
I had a letter from Mr. Ward, to whom, at Paris, I sent the poems, and he is delighted; and Mr. Canning, most particularly so with the third canto. I now this time print 10,000 of my Review, and you are in it. I have the translation of a Chinese comedy in the press, and some ‘Tales,’ by Antar, a hundred years previous to the conversion of the Arabians to Mahomedanism; the ‘Journal’ of Captain Tuckey, who commanded the unfortunate expedition to Africa by the Congo. He and his officers died of fatigue and over-exertion; but in all other respects nothing could have been better planned or executed, and the ‘Journal’ is very interesting. This I will contrive to send you, and though not quite à-propos, I may here say that I have procured the tooth powder. I think you should write me a note of thanks for Lord Holland. Your friend, Sir James [Bland] Burges, with whom I dined yesterday at Mr. Croker’s, often calls and talks to me about you. Walter Scott always mentions you with kindness in his letters, and he thinks nothing better than Canto III. Give me a poem—a good Venetian tale describing manners formerly from the story itself, and now from your own observations, and call it ‘Marianna.’
|
* The bones picked up on the battlefield of Morat, and now in Mr. Murray’s possession. (See ‘Childe Harold,’ Canto III., St. lxiii., note.) |
| CHATEAUBRIAND. | 373 |
The following letter from Mr. Sharon Turner to Mr. Murray, relates to the assignment of the copyright of both poems:—
I called to-day hoping to have the pleasure of seeing you, and to ask you how it is intended that the assignment of Lord Byron shall be executed. It must be either sent to him to be signed, or the power of attorney must be sent out to him to authorize some person here to sign for him. In either case, it will be necessary that the instrument should be witnessed by some English gentleman who resides usually in England, in case his evidence should ever be wanted. . . .
I thank you for Chateaubriand. He has many good things, and some bad ones. In
talking of the Divinity of Monarchy he hurts it, and provokes sneers. The safe
and solid ground of Royalty is its utility. While this continues, there is no
fear for it. Utility is the principle that will make the subject attached to
it, and the Monarch deserve the attachment. On Religion he says much that is
very good; but unfortunately he means by it, not that sort of intelligent
religion which a nation so enlightened as the French require, and can only be
affected by; but merely the old Papal System just as it was, and as no one now
respects. He is like a man who should try to force you to take revolting
physic, swearing at the same time that it is delicious food. But yet, with all
its faults, I should think it is a book that would do good to the French mind
by presenting some things to it that are well worth its consideration and
discussion. I am sorry it has been suppressed. It should have been circulated,
and answered where it is open to objection. The discussion would have done
benefit to France. The French mind wants the ventilation of free and temperate
discussion. But there can be no judgment and no political wisdom unless both
sides of a question are raised and deliberated upon. It is narrow conduct and
unsound policy to preclude temperate discussion. How little has it hurt, and
how much has it improved, happy England—England still happy though
| 374 | MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY |
The result of Mr. Turner’s advice was, that Lord Byron granted a power of attorney to the Hon. Douglas Kinnaird, his banker, who had been associated with him in the Drury Lane management, and Mr. Kinnaird thenceforward arranged with Mr. Murray for the copyrights of Lord Byron’s works.
At Mr. Murray’s earnest request, Scott had consented to review the third Canto of ‘Childe Harold’ in the Quarterly. In forwarding the MS. he wrote as follows:—
I have this day sent under Croker’s cover a review of Lord Byron’s last poems. You know how high I hold his poetical reputation, but besides, one is naturally forced upon so many points of delicate consideration, that really I have begun and left off several times, and after all send the article to you with full power to cancel it if you think any part of it has the least chance of hurting his feelings. You know him better than I do, and you also know the
* The writer of this acute letter had long been one of Mr. Murray’s most intimate friends. During his anxious and busy life as a solicitor, he found time to collect materials for his ‘History of the Anglo-Saxons,’ the first volume of which was published in 1799, and the third and last, in 1805. He was the first English author who took pains to investigate the valuable information left us in the Anglo-Saxon records. The result was a work of great value, though since superseded by more elaborate histories. He afterwards published his ‘History of the Norman Conquest to the Year 1509.’ The first volume was published in 1814, the second in 1815, and the third and last in 1823. He was the author of other works, and a contributor to the Quarterly almost from the beginning. |
| SCOTT’S OPINION OF BYRON. | 375 |
There are some things in the critique which are necessarily and unavoidably personal, and sure I am if he attends to it, which is unlikely, he will find advantage from doing so. I wish Mr. Gifford and you would consider every word carefully. If you think the general tenor is likely to make any impression on him, if you think it likely to hurt him either in his feelings or with the public, in God’s name fling the sheets in the fire and let them be as not written. But if it appears, I should wish him to get an early copy, and that you would at the same time say I am the author, at your importunity. No one can honour Lord Byron’s genius more than I do, and no one had so great a wish to love him personally, though personally we had not the means of becoming very intimate. In his family distress (deeply to be deprecated, and in which probably he can yet be excused) I still looked to some moment of reflection when bad advisers (and, except you were one, I have heard of few whom I should call good) were distant from the side of one who is so much the child of feeling and emotion. An opportunity was once afforded me of interfering, but things appeared to me to have gone too far; yet, even after all, I wish I had tried it, for Lord Byron always seemed to give me credit for wishing him sincerely well, and knew me to be superior to what Commodore Trunnion would call “the trash of literary envy and petty rivalry.”
I got your letter in the country, but was able to do nothing till I came to town, both because I was occupied all day in my agricultural improvements, and on account of certain curious cramps in the stomach which occupied three nights very ungraciously, and threatened to send me out of this excellent world upon very short warning.
I have pressed Erskine to undertake the novel* with all
* There is no clue to the work here referred to. |
| 376 | MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY |
Lord Byron’s opinion of the article forms so necessary a complement to Walter Scott’s sympathetic criticism of the man and the poet, that we make no excuse for reproducing it, as conveyed in a letter to Mr. Murray (March 3rd, 1817).
“In acknowledging the arrival of the article from the Quarterly, which I received two days ago, I cannot express myself better than in the words of my sister Augusta, who (speaking of it) says, that it is written in a spirit ‘of the most feeling and kind nature.’
“It is, however, something more. It seems to me (as far as the subject of it may be permitted to judge) to be very well written as a composition, and I think will do the journal no discredit, because even those who condemn its partiality, must praise its generosity. The temptations to take another and a less favourable view of the question have been so great and numerous, that, what with public opinion, politics, &c., he must be a gallant as well as a good man who has ventured in that place, and at this time, to write such an article, even anonymously. Such things, however, are their own reward; and I even flatter myself that the writer, whoever he may be (and I have no guess), will not regret that the perusal of this has given me as much gratification as any composition of that nature could give, and more than any has given—and I have had a good many in my time of one kind or the other. It is not the mere praise, but there is a tact and a delicacy throughout, not only with regard to me but to others, which, as it had not been observed elsewhere, I had till now doubted whether it could be observed anywhere.”
| SCOTT’S REVIEW OF ‘CHILDE HAROLD.’ | 377 |
“When I tell you,” he wrote to Moore a week later, “that Walter Scott is the author of the article in the Quarterly, you will agree with me that such an article is still more honourable to him than to myself.”
We conclude this episode with the following letter from Scott:—
I received both your letters and all the enclosures, together with your note, which is more than the service required by one half. When I can assist you I am always happy to do it, but it is only particular subjects on which I can be really useful, so that I have neither right nor wish to be considered as above a common labourer in the trenches.
I am truly happy Lord Byron’s article meets your ideas of what may make some impression on his mind. In genius, poetry has seldom had his equal, and if he has acted very wrong in some respects, he has been no worse than half the men of his rank in London who have done the same, and are not spoken of because not worth being railed against.
I am in the midst of plans and elevations for enlarging my cottage, which needed it, as you cannot but remember.
Lady Byron also wrote about the article:—
I leave London to-morrow, and should be obliged to you if you
would let me have Dugald Stewart’s
Dissertation prefixed to the ‘Encyclopædia’ to read on my journey. My father also
wishes to have Franklin’s
‘Letters’ and Spence’s ‘Anecdotes.’ May I trouble you
to send them to me before nine to-morrow morning. I am inclined to
| 378 | MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY |
Among other ladies who wrote on the subject of Lord Byron’s works was Lady Caroline Lamb, who had caricatured him (as he supposed) in her ‘Glenarvon.’ Her letter is dated Welwyn, franked by William Lamb:—
You cannot need my assuring you that if you will entrust me with the new poems, none of the things you fear shall occur, in proof of which I ask you to enquire with yourself, whether, if a person in constant correspondence and friendship with another, yet keeps a perfect silence on one subject, she cannot do so when at enmity and at a distance. Now, I never boasted of seeing the poems first, never even told my mother I had done so, never ventured an opinion concerning them but to you, and only once I remember, when Lord Byron said he had sent them to me (which I believe was not true), did I ever speak to him of them. In short, I have so little vanity about seeing things before others, that, if it were not some curiosity and lurking interest for the Childe’s works, you might not be requested so earnestly to send them; and, as it is, take your own way—I shall not murmur. How very well written and interesting Gifford’s ‘Life’ is! How free from all affectation, and how very just his few observations! I only wish he had written more. William Lamb writes more in that style than any one. I see another ‘Life’ is coming out of Sheridan. Believe me therefore sincerely thankful for what I am going to receive—as the young lady said to a duchess when she was desired by her parents to say “Grace.”
| LADY CAROLINE LAMB. | 379 |
This letter, to which no reply seems to have been sent, is followed by another, in which her ladyship says:—
“I wish to ask you one question: are you offended with me or my letter? If so, I am sorry, but depend upon it if after seven years’ acquaintance you choose to cut off what you ever termed your left hand, I have too much gratitude towards you to allow of it. Accept therefore every apology for every supposed fault. I always write eagerly and in haste. I never read over what I have written. If therefore I said anything I ought not, pardon it—it was not intended; and let me entreat you to remember a maxim I have found very useful to me, that there is nothing in this life worth quarrelling about, and that half the people we are offended with never intended to give us cause.
“Thank you for Holcroft’s ‘Life,’ which is extremely curious and interesting. I think you will relent and send me ‘Childe Harold’ before any one has it—this is the first time you have not done so—and the Quarterly Review; and pray also any other book that is curious, or, at all events, tell me of it, as we have much time and I like your judgment. How I detest Mr. Frere—will you tell me why? I send you a book; pray read it—‘Lady Calantha Limb.’ The authoress, actuated by a holy zeal, says in her preface that she is resolved to turn me into ridicule. She chooses an easy task—too easy, I fear—yet fails, and makes a most blundering business. Wit’s razor’s edge she has not, but a most unkind tongue to make up for it. I know that ‘Timon’ succeeds, and I am delighted, as it contains, I think, more beauties than any play. I am sorry Phrynia and Timandra do not appear. Mrs. Mardyn and Mrs. Osgood would have looked beautiful, and, without letting them speak those very pretty lines addressed to them, might have been inserted. Mrs. Wilmot* looks ill—like a fine ruin on which the setting sun is shining. I believe they never will forget your friendly and kind behaviour to them. Miss Wilmot spoke of you to me yesterday in a manner that could not fail to please you.
“My little chestnut horse is as well as ever. They say
* Afterwards Lady Dacre, her tragedy of ‘Ina’ was published by Mr. Murray. |
| 380 | MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY |
There was a time when you had not let so many days pass
without asking me for a letter of Lord
Byron’s: indeed the absent and the present—the right
hand and left—are both alike forgotten. I must tell you of my adventures
to-night. I set out stark mad in white satin, as Tilburina did, to see Don
Juan seized by the Italian; and scarce was my dear fatal name
pronounced, “Lady Caroline Lamb,” when some
jocose footman said, “Sooner Lady Caroline Wolf.” At this too just
criticism several warm defenders sallied forth amongst the same precious herd;
whilst they were all fighting, I was very soon kidnapped by two rack-chairmen,
who insisted on carrying me each into his respective chair, I being all the
time vainly desirous of getting in and not out of the Opera House. It so
chanced that I was very fine, having dined out in diamonds and feathers. When I
therefore got safe up with a crowd of plumed attendants, my unfortunate dog,
that long-cared-for dog, covered with mud like Lord Something’s rat,
appeared entering the vestibule. At this sight soldiers and servants shouted
forth “A fox!” and began hissing it down. Judge of my situation. I
was either obliged to give up this dear shabby cur, who had followed my
carriage and me, or own a friend in such disguise that few had dared do so. The
latter was however my choice, and being much too frightened and late, after all
these adventures, I turned back to find my carriage almost carried away by
Irish boys and drunken chairmen, one of whom, to the indignation of the rest,
constantly vociferated, “This is my lady.”—“Your lady,
d——n you.”—“Yes, my lady,”—and sure
| MRS. GRAHAM’S OPINION OF BYRON. | 381 |
In strong contrast with these effusions is the following letter from Mrs. Graham:—
A thousand thanks, my dear sir, for the loan of the Journal, which I have perused with the greatest interest.* A more superstitious age would certainly have believed him possessed of the art magic, so completely does he continue to force attention and sympathy wherever he pleases. He says, “I have lately repeopled my mind with Nature.” Oh why, when so alive to the charms of outward nature, will he not open his mind to the beauty which swells around us and within us, and need only to be desired to be manifest in brighter glory than ever adorned the fresh rising of the sun from the Eastern ocean. Why shut his heart to the tide of gentle affection, where, more clearly than on the waters of his favourite lake, the face of heaven is reflected. Then he provokes me with fancying himself hated. Good God! did he know how many have with breathless interest watched his steps, grieved for him, praised him, and where they could not, turned aside their eyes like the patriarch’s pious son, that they might not look upon his frailties, he would never return all this with misanthropy. Oh no, he would learn that many are all, nay more than all, they seem. But I always forget myself when I think of our greatest genius. Therefore I will hasten to thank you for the two dramas. The French one amuses me, the other does so for a different reason. A glorious triumph to the Laureate!
|
* Byron’s ‘Swiss Journal,’ published in Moore’s ‘Life.’ |
| 382 | MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY |
In sending home the MS. of the first act of ‘Manfred,’ Lord Byron wrote, giving but unsatisfactory accounts of his own health. Mr. Murray replied:—
I have to acknowledge your kind letter, dated the 3rd, received this hour; but I am sorry to say that it has occasioned me great anxiety about your health. You are not wont to cry before you are hurt; and I am apprehensive that you are worse even than you allow. Pray keep quiet and take care of yourself. My Review shows you that you are worth preserving and that the world yet loves you. If you become seriously worse, I entreat you to let me know it, and I will fly to you with a physician; an Italian one is only a preparation for the anatomist. I will not tell your sister of this, if you will tell me true. I had hopes that this letter would have confirmed my expectations of your speedy return, which has been stated by Mr. Kinnaird, and repeated to me by Mr. Davies, whom I saw yesterday, and who promises to write. We often indulge our recollections of you, and he allows me to believe that I am one of the few who really know you.
Gifford gave me yesterday the first act of ‘Manfred,’ with a delighted countenance, telling me it was wonderfully poetical, and desiring me to assure you that it well merits publication. I shall send proofs to you with his remarks, if he have any; it is a wild and delightful thing, and I like it myself hugely.
I had a letter from Mrs.
Leigh yesterday, enclosing one for your Lordship. Mrs.
Leigh promises me a visit by the end of the month. The public
very generally accord with your opinion of the critique in the Quarterly, and it has
actually, as your friend Heber said,
produced a sensation. It is equally honourable to Scott’s head and heart, and I rejoice much in my sagacity
in soliciting him to write it. Gifford
said to me, “Lord Byron is much
obliged to you.” Scott was much satisfied with it
himself, and still more by the praise which has followed it; and this will be
raised and confirmed by your approbation which, in substance, I
| MANUSCRIT VENU DE STE. HELENE. | 383 |
Mr. Gifford, who is at my elbow, and to whom I have just read your letter—at least that part of it referring to the Review and to the Procession—desires me to present his sincere regards to you, and to assure you how much he joins in my anxieties and regrets at your Lordship’s illness. However, I flatter myself with hoping that your next will tell us it has very materially abated.
I have just received, in a way perfectly unaccountable, a MS. from St. Helena—with not a word. I suppose it to be originally written by Buonaparte or his agents.—It is very curious his life, in which each event is given in almost a word—a battle described in a short sentence. I call it therefore simply Manuscrit venu de Ste. Hélène d’une manière inconnue.* Lord Holland has a motion on our treatment of Buonaparte at St. Helena for Wednesday next; and on Monday I shall publish. You will have seen Buonaparte’s Memorial on this subject, complaining bitterly of all; pungent but very injudicious, as it must offend all the other allied powers to be reminded of their former prostration.
I long to be admitted to a sight of the Miniature—how many have I seen? Wedderburn Webster is again at work; he is composing a pamphlet on the subject of the recent suspensions of the Habeas Corpus Act.
Our friend Southey has got into a confounded scrape. Some twenty years ago, when he knew no better and was a
| 384 | MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY |
A severe attack of low fever, compelled Lord Byron to break away from Venice and his companions there, in the spring of 1817. His first halting-place on the way to Rome was Ferrara, where he visited the Court in which, according to Gibbon, Hugo and Parisina were beheaded, and the Cell of Tasso, which elicited from him the “The Lament of Tasso,” forwarded to Mr. Murray a few days later from Florence.
Your favour of the 23rd arrived yesterday, and I instantly
sent the lines upon Tasso to
Mr. Gifford, who called with them
soon afterwards, and assured me that they were exceedingly good, and that there
was besides a difference in the style, which would, by being novel, prove
additionally interesting. Moore’s Poem is to appear on the 22nd inst., and I will try
to send it. Mr. Sheil, the author of
‘Adelaide,’ has had most extraordinary success on the stage with
his tragedy, called ‘The
Apostate,’ merely from forming a
| ‘CHILDE HAROLD,’ CANTO IV. | 385 |
The attractions of Venice proved too strong for Lord Byron; by the end of May he was there again, but not before his brief visit to Rome had inspired him to undertake the fourth canto of ‘Childe Harold.’ The summer was employed “in working up his impressions,” and on July 15th and 20th he wrote to Mr. Murray that the canto was completed, and only required to be “copied and polished,” but at the same time he began to “barter” for the price of the canto, so completely had his old scruples on this score disappeared. Mr. Murray acknowledged the two letters as follows:—
This day has brought me your letter of the 15th of July,
adding another to the many instances of your truly kind indulgences to my
unpardonable indolence. I am very sorry indeed to find that there is so little
chance of seeing you soon in England, and I fancy you will suffer equal grief
when you learn that next year you will certainly have a visit from me. In the
meantime, I will endeavour to send a regular journal of news, literary and
domestic. I perceive, by your reckoning by stanzas, that you are within
fourteen stanzas of completing your opus magnum, for
such I think it is your determination to make ‘Childe Harold.’ The first stanza
Mr. Gifford thinks very highly of,
as does Mr. Frere, and many more
| 386 | MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY |
By the way, Polidori has sent me his tragedy! Do me the kindness to send by return of post a delicate declension of it, which I engage faithfully to-copy. I am truly sorry that he will employ himself in a way so ill- suited to his genius; for he is not without literary talents.*
I sent you copies of ‘Manfred’ and of ‘Tasso,’ which are, I trust, printed correctly. They are both, but particularly the former, greatly admired by the best critics; but they soar above the Million. Mr. Frere, I think I told you, says that it and the third canto place you in a higher class of poets—that is the very highest. Amongst the books I intruded upon Mr. Kinnaird was ‘Coleridge’s Life and Opinions,’ which will I think interest you. You will pardon the occasional obscurities and, I fear, absurdities, for its power in most parts. I think you will like my ‘MSS. de St. Helene.’ Talma said, when he read it, that he conversed with Buonaparte. I sent him one splendidly bound, and he wrote me a letter expressing his delight at what reminded him of past glory.
You will have heard, not without regret, of the premature death of Madame de Staël, who, with all her faults, was an excellent person. I think she had a good heart; and I know that she was very kind to me.
She confessed her marriage, and acknowledged a child, a son, born when she was forty-nine.
Mr. Scrope Davies often does me the favour to call, and we discuss your letters and poetry. I saw Mrs. Leigh three days ago, in some trouble at the entrance of the whooping cough into her family, but otherwise well. Mr. Moore, I believe I told you, is gone to Paris with Mr. Rogers, who dedicates all his time to him. Whilst Mr. Kinnaird is with you, I trust you will do me the favour to confide any commissions—particularly of cutting off Mr. Hanson’s head—heart or bowels he hath not—and anything else. Your Armenian friends have this moment presented themselves with your letter. I will take all their grammars and do all otherwise to serve and assist them.
* Lord Byron at once acceded to this request by writing the well-known verses commencing—“Dear Doctor, I have read your play.” |
| ‘MANFRED.’ | 387 |
“By this time Mr. Kinnaird has, I hope, reached you in safety, and presented all my packets of poetry and tooth powder; and hereafter I hope to receive your comments on the one portion, and your thanks for the other. You will readily believe how much I am delighted to learn that the fourth canto of ‘Childe Harold’ is completed, and if you please to accept the exchange, I shall readily present fifteen hundred guineas for the copyright; but I entreat you to let me have the original MS.
“I have a letter from Mr. Whishaw, dated Paris, August 10th, in which he begs me to contradict the report of Madame de Staël having become Catholic, which he assures me, from good authority, was not the case.”
In order to save time, some corrections in the proofs of ‘Manfred’ made by Mr. Gifford, were, as on many previous occasions, adopted without consulting Lord Byron. This proceeding in the present instance irritated him, and drew down some severe censures on Murray, who replied:
Mr. Gifford, after consulting me,
omitted your close of the drama from no other motive than because he thought
that the words you allude to lessened the effect; and I was convinced of this
myself, and the omission to send a copy to you earlier was merely that, having
no direct opportunity, it did not before occur to me to send it by post; and,
upon my honour, the alteration was so trivial in my mind that I forgot the
importance which it might have in the eye of an author. I have written up this
day to have the page cancelled and your reading restored. In future I propose
to send you every proof by post, with any suggestions of Mr. G. upon them for
your approbation. The slight errors of the press which you point out in the
fifth volume have been corrected against a new edition. I
| 388 | MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY |
How I have omitted to tell you what I have heard of ‘Manfred,’ I cannot conceive, but so it appears to be. All the higher critics, such as Frere, are in ecstasy with it, averring that it places you far above all your former efforts; but it is not so popular with the general reader, because they go through it at once, expecting to find their pleasure in the intricacy and interest of the plot, and being therein disappointed, they do not recur to the beauties which they had hastily passed over; to conclude, it is less popular, but more praised. Mr. Crabbe did not think ‘Tasso’ equal to yourself; but, he added, who could have written it but Lord Byron?
By the way, I asked Gifford and some others how Scott would like to be called the Scottish Ariosto, and no one can tell why you should call him so, except, perhaps, on account of his adopting the same measure.
Mr. Hobhouse spent a considerable part of the year 1817 travelling about in Italy, whither he had gone principally to see Lord Byron. He wrote to Mr. Murray:—
As I find you have been good enough to remember me in sundry
letters to these parts of the world, and as it may be possible that my repeated
acknowledgments may have been, in the press of matter, put off, like Dr. Drowsy’s sermons, to a better
opportunity, I have discovered at last an excuse for writing to you, without
having anything to tell which can interest you, or to be of any other service
than the disburdening of my conscience by duly registering the above thanks for
your attentions. I verily believe
| MR. HOBHOUSE’S TOUR IN ITALY. | 389 |
If any one writes a book of travels without telling the truth about the masters and the subjects in this most unfortunate country, he deserves more than damnation and a dull sale, and I trust you will take care he has a niche—forgive the word—in your temple of infamy, the Quarterly. I heard that Champion Scott* was collecting five hundred pounds worth of news for Longman in these parts. If
* This was John Scott, author of ‘Sketches of Manners, Scenery, &c, in the French Provinces, Switzerland, and Italy,’ afterwards killed in a duel in consequence of a quarrel arising out of some articles in Blackwood’s Magazine. |
| 390 | MEMOIRS OF JOHN MURRAY |
I saw this the moment I crossed the Alps, and, in spite of bad and inveterate habit, shut my journal at once. There is a wide field of glory open for any and for all answering the above description; but it would perhaps be almost impossible to find the requisite variety of acquirement and talent in one individual. The work should be done, like a cyclopede dictionary, by departments. I don’t mean North and South, East and West, though that is no bad plan, but by subjects—literature, antiquities, manners, politics, &c. We have nothing, really nothing, except Mr. Forsyth’s sketch, which, so far as it goes, is a most extraordinary performance. I have tried it by the best test—that is, by putting it into the hands of one or two Italians, who owned, with a sigh, indeed, the unhappy resemblance.
A word or two on my own movements, because they interest you. I shall set out with your ‘Childe’ in about three weeks, from Venice, and shall proceed as fast as bad roads and surly postillions will allow, to Milan, Turin. Lyons, Paris, Calais, according to the post book, to London.
Your new acquisition is a very fine finish to the three cantos
already published, and, if I may trust to a taste vitiated—I say it
without affectation—by an exclusive attention and attachment to that
school of ancient and obsolete poetry of which your friend Mr. Gifford furnished us with the last
specimen in his ‘Baviad,” it is the best of all his lordship’s
productions. The world will not, to be sure, find that freshness and novelty
which is to be discovered only at the opening of a mine. The metal, whatever
may be its quantity or quality, must in some degree cease to surprise and
delight as it continues to be worked, and nothing more can be hoped than that
it should not become less valuable by being more plentiful. In spite of
similes, however, it is possible that all other readers may agree with my
simple self in liking this fourth
canto better than anything Lord B. has ever written. I must confess
I feel an affection for it more than ordinary, as part of it was begot, as it
were, under my own eyes; for some of the stanzas owe their birth to our morning
| THORWALDSEN’S BUST OF BYRON. | 391 |
“In vain would flattery steal a wreath from fame, And Rome’s best sculptor only half succeed, If England owned no share in Byron’s name Nor hailed the laurel she before decreed.” |
The fourth canto duly reached London in Mr. Hobhouse’s portmanteau, and was published in the spring of 1818.
|
* The bust was made for Mr. Hobhouse, at his expense. Lord Byron said, “I would not pay the price of a Thorwaldsen bust for any head and shoulders, except Napoleon’s, or my children’s, or some ‘absurd womankind’s,’ as Monkbarns calls them, or my sister’s.” |
| ≪ PREV | NEXT ≫ |
